Kapaernick

[dismal]

Fucking asshole engaging in free expression at a memorial for someone who died in order to allow people to engage in free expression. Why the hell isn't he conforming to the dictates demanded of him by those in authority?

You must really like those Westboro baptist church guys. They are big on exercising their right to free expression at the funerals of guys who died for their right to free expression.

Or, maybe you haven't given enough consideration to the notion that the right to free expression doesn't mean people must like what you say.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

link

"I have so many friends that are owners and they're in a box," Trump told Fox News. "I mean, I've spoken to a couple of them, and they say, 'We are in a situation where we need to do something.' I think they're afraid of their players, if you want to know the truth, and I think it's disgraceful."

Trump is once again making shit up. Using himself as a bogus source for inside information.

We haven't had a President this full of shit since Yur Ectum was the leader of the nation.

 

[dismal]

link

"I have so many friends that are owners and they're in a box," Trump told Fox News. "I mean, I've spoken to a couple of them, and they say, 'We are in a situation where we need to do something.' I think they're afraid of their players, if you want to know the truth, and I think it's disgraceful."

Trump is once again making shit up. Using himself as a bogus source for inside information.

We haven't had a President this full of shit since Yur Ectum was the leader of the nation.

See, Higgins gets it. "Free speech" doesn't mean you have to like what people say.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

link

Trump is once again making shit up. Using himself as a bogus source for inside information.

We haven't had a President this full of shit since Yur Ectum was the leader of the nation.

See, Higgins gets it. "Free speech" doesn't mean you have to like what people say.

I don't like what you have to say because it's misleading.

 

[sharon45]

Fucking asshole engaging in free expression at a memorial for someone who died in order to allow people to engage in free expression. Why the hell isn't he conforming to the dictates demanded of him by those in authority?

You must really like those Westboro baptist church guys. They are big on exercising their right to free expression at the funerals of guys who died for their right to free expression.

That group is stating what Christians would normally say if they weren't so afraid of being not PC. Akin to the NFL, except here the trouble is a shaking tightrope of both being PC and extreme money.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

You must really like those Westboro baptist church guys. They are big on exercising their right to free expression at the funerals of guys who died for their right to free expression.

That group is stating what Christians would normally say if they weren't so afraid of being not PC. Akin to the NFL, except here the trouble is a shaking tightrope of both being PC and extreme money.

How clueless does one have to be to put all Christians in one basket?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Fucking asshole engaging in free expression at a memorial for someone who died in order to allow people to engage in free expression. Why the hell isn't he conforming to the dictates demanded of him by those in authority?

You must really like those Westboro baptist church guys. They are big on exercising their right to free expression at the funerals of guys who died for their right to free expression.

Or, maybe you haven't given enough consideration to the notion that the right to free expression doesn't mean people must like what you say.

I'm not following. When have I ever said that the Westboro Baptist people shouldn't have the right to free expression?

I can feel free to mock and deride them for the way in which they've chosen to exercise their free expression, the same way that anyone should feel free to mock and deride those who choose to kneel during the national anthem. Where it goes over the line is when people suggest they should face penalties for exercising their free expression, particularly when those people happen to be heads of state.

 

[dismal]

You must really like those Westboro baptist church guys. They are big on exercising their right to free expression at the funerals of guys who died for their right to free expression.

Or, maybe you haven't given enough consideration to the notion that the right to free expression doesn't mean people must like what you say.

I'm not following. When have I ever said that the Westboro Baptist people shouldn't have the right to free expression?

I can feel free to mock and deride them for the way in which they've chosen to exercise their free expression, the same way that anyone should feel free to mock and deride those who choose to kneel during the national anthem. Where it goes over the line is when people suggest they should face penalties for exercising their free expression, particularly when those people happen to be heads of state.

You mean people shouldn't face government imposed penalties right? As a firm believer in the 1st Amendment I agree with you there. Though I'm not sure what it has to do with this thread.

 

[Elixir]

You must really like those Westboro baptist church guys. They are big on exercising their right to free expression at the funerals of guys who died for their right to free expression.

Or, maybe you haven't given enough consideration to the notion that the right to free expression doesn't mean people must like what you say.

I'm not following. When have I ever said that the Westboro Baptist people shouldn't have the right to free expression?

IME, every time anyone mentions repercussions for irresponsible or reprehensible speech, dismal will infer that you want the government to step in and shut them up.

 

[dismal]

I'm not following. When have I ever said that the Westboro Baptist people shouldn't have the right to free expression?

IME, every time anyone mentions repercussions for irresponsible or reprehensible speech, dismal will infer that you want the government to step in and shut them up.

No, I'm pretty consistent in not invoking the 1st Amendment unless someone calls for the government to do something to stop someone's speech.

As opposed to say...many people in this thread.

 

[Elixir]

I'm pretty consistent in not invoking the 1st Amendment unless someone calls for the government to do something

.

Pfft. Just like this:

Or, maybe you haven't given enough consideration to the notion that the right to free expression doesn't mean people must like what you say.

Where did he mention government intercession, or even imply that "people must like what [he says]"?
(Hint: He didn't)

 

[Tom Sawyer]

You mean people shouldn't face government imposed penalties right? As a firm believer in the 1st Amendment I agree with you there. Though I'm not sure what it has to do with this thread.

No, they should be protected against their employers taking action against them as well. Just like you can't fire someone for being a Christian and praying in the lunchroom, you shouldn't be able to fire someone for expressing their political opinions in a manner which doesn't impact their job performance.

 

[dismal]

.

Pfft. Just like this:

Or, maybe you haven't given enough consideration to the notion that the right to free expression doesn't mean people must like what you say.

Where did he mention government intercession?
(Hint: He didn't)

Not following your logic here. The statement "free expression doesn't mean people must like what you say" is not even slightly inconsistent with my view that the first amendment means the government can't punish you for speech.

 

[Elixir]

You mean people shouldn't face government imposed penalties right? As a firm believer in the 1st Amendment I agree with you there. Though I'm not sure what it has to do with this thread.

No, they should be protected against their employers taking action against them as well. Just like you can't fire someone for being a Christian and praying in the lunchroom, you shouldn't be able to fire someone for expressing their political opinioWell, there's thisns in a manner which doesn't impact their job performance.

Well, there's this... if someone in my office takes a call from a law enforcement officer, and tells them that they think law enforcement officers are all "pigs", I can fire them. Not for their free speech, but for the damage they are doing to my business.
Now, at this time Trump is doing everything in his power to try to parlay kneeling players into damage against the NFL and its team owners. He has been pretty successful at it to date, so in the (unlikely IMO) event that some team owner should order his players to stand during the anthem and they don't comply and get fired for it, the owner can argue that the player was damaging their business, and that' why they were fired.
Scurrilous behavior by El Cheato for sure, but not illegal.

 

[dismal]

You mean people shouldn't face government imposed penalties right? As a firm believer in the 1st Amendment I agree with you there. Though I'm not sure what it has to do with this thread.

No, they should be protected against their employers taking action against them as well. Just like you can't fire someone for being a Christian and praying in the lunchroom, you shouldn't be able to fire someone for expressing their political opinions in a manner which doesn't impact their job performance.

Nope sorry. You fail. The first amendment has nothing to do with your relationship between you from your employer. It's a restriction on the government. It even says shit like "congress shall make no law...".

 

[Tom Sawyer]

No, they should be protected against their employers taking action against them as well. Just like you can't fire someone for being a Christian and praying in the lunchroom, you shouldn't be able to fire someone for expressing their political opinions in a manner which doesn't impact their job performance.

Nope sorry. You fail. The first amendment has nothing to do with your relationship between you from your employer. It's a restriction on the government. It even says shit like "congress shall make no law...".

Correct. Employers should be barred from doing this due to protections from other laws regulating their behaviour which mimic the protections which people have from the government because of your first amendment, not from the employees first amendment protections.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Nope sorry. You fail. The first amendment has nothing to do with your relationship between you from your employer. It's a restriction on the government. It even says shit like "congress shall make no law...".

Correct. Employers should be barred from doing this due to protections from other laws regulating their behaviour which mimic the protections which people have from the government because of your first amendment, not from the employees first amendment protections.

so employers can't ask that you work in a way that helps them do business? If you work for McDonalds and you tell your customers that McDonalds sucks they have to keep you on board? Can I tell my boss to F himself with no reprocussions?

 

[Elixir]

Correct. Employers should be barred from doing this due to protections from other laws regulating their behaviour which mimic the protections which people have from the government because of your first amendment, not from the employees first amendment protections.

so employers can't ask that you work in a way that helps them do business? If you work for McDonalds and you tell your customers that McDonalds sucks they have to keep you on board? Can I tell my boss to F himself with no reprocussions?

... if someone in my office takes a call from a law enforcement officer, and tells them that they think law enforcement officers are all "pigs", I can fire them. Not for their free speech, but for the damage they are doing to my business.
Now, at this time Trump is doing everything in his power to try to parlay kneeling players into damage against the NFL and its team owners. He has been pretty successful at it to date, so in the (unlikely IMO) event that some team owner should order his players to stand during the anthem and they don't comply and get fired for it, the owner can argue that the player was damaging their business, and that' why they were fired.
Scurrilous behavior by El Cheato for sure, but [probably] not illegal.

Added "probably", since if anyone else were doing it they'd be sued, and quite possibly successfully.

 

[coloradoatheist]

so employers can't ask that you work in a way that helps them do business? If you work for McDonalds and you tell your customers that McDonalds sucks they have to keep you on board? Can I tell my boss to F himself with no reprocussions?

... if someone in my office takes a call from a law enforcement officer, and tells them that they think law enforcement officers are all "pigs", I can fire them. Not for their free speech, but for the damage they are doing to my business.
Now, at this time Trump is doing everything in his power to try to parlay kneeling players into damage against the NFL and its team owners. He has been pretty successful at it to date, so in the (unlikely IMO) event that some team owner should order his players to stand during the anthem and they don't comply and get fired for it, the owner can argue that the player was damaging their business, and that' why they were fired.
Scurrilous behavior by El Cheato for sure, but [probably] not illegal.

Added "probably", since if anyone else were doing it they'd be sued, and quite possibly successfully.

Can the owners sue Kapernick for the decline in revenue since his kneeling during the anthem?

 

[dismal]

Nope sorry. You fail. The first amendment has nothing to do with your relationship between you from your employer. It's a restriction on the government. It even says shit like "congress shall make no law...".

Correct. Employers should be barred from doing this due to protections from other laws regulating their behaviour which mimic the protections which people have from the government because of your first amendment, not from the employees first amendment protections.

Unless we are talking about some Google engineer, volunteer firefighter or CEO that said something lefitsts didn't like, of course.