|
Replies: 37
| visibility 705
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [9174]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 14648
Joined: 2/5/02
|
This thread will be a fun read tomorrow
Dec 18, 2018, 9:40 PM
|
|
-Doc
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6709
Joined: 8/3/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9174]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 14648
Joined: 2/5/02
|
Do you actually think you are breaking news?
Dec 18, 2018, 10:26 PM
|
|
Clearly, I have pissedyouoff so bad that you have obsessed yourself with me. I ownyourass.
-Doc
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6709
Joined: 8/3/09
|
Nah
Dec 18, 2018, 10:42 PM
|
|
Just puzzled why you picked a namesake that is the total opposite of the ideology you hold that also happens to be someone I admire.
As far as owning me, I doubt you own anything outside the cot and cardboard desk in your mamma’s basement.
I’m just drinking beer and tweaking your nose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30804]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22858
Joined: 11/1/03
|
Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 18, 2018, 10:46 PM
|
|
it isn't the government that's threatening to take it away, it's the people that are willing to give it up. Liberals and social justice warriors are willing to give away any freedoms that aren't relevant to them no matter who it impacts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 18, 2018, 11:23 PM
|
|
Examples?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30804]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22858
Joined: 11/1/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 7:29 AM
|
|
That has nothing to do with freedom of speech. That's just the teachers job. If the teacher was arrested you would have a freedom of speech issue. That's just nutty PC on the job stuff, but not a freedom of speech issue. I don't think enough people in this country understand what freedom of speech means. You can say what you want without restraint from the government generally. Your job is another thing. That teacher was a victim of a PC job workplace. That person can find another place to work and is still free to say what he/she wants. The teacher may get fired again, but the government won't restrain the teacher. Freedom of speech and employment have nothing to do with each other. It's just like how people get fired here and there for racial comments. They can say what they want, but they may get fired.
"Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Here are some categories of unprotected speech.
Obscenity.
Fighting words.
Defamation (including libel and slander)
Child pornography.
Perjury.
Blackmail.
Incitement to imminent lawless action.
True threats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93608]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I agree.
Dec 19, 2018, 7:46 AM
|
|
We'll see if he gets his job back. If he doesn't then we may have a problem with freedom of speech. Plenty on the left would make PC laws. I can't guess if it will ever happen but if they get their way our culture will change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30804]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22858
Joined: 11/1/03
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 7:53 AM
[ in reply to Re: Much like our freedom of speech ] |
|
I never said the government was taking freedom of speech away. I was saying how “the people” are starting to willingly give up their freedoms and trying to take those freedoms away from others. It might not be by sending people to jail, but definitely by ruining their quality of life. I should have the freedom to call someone by their biological gender and refuse to play pretend as an adult and not have to worry about my career being ruined.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 8:39 AM
|
|
There is no freedom being given up. Your employer could always fire you for saying the "wrong" words. You have the same freedom of speech you have always had. When you're on the job you have to follow the rules of your job or you have to find another job. Sometimes we don't agree with the rules. Freedom of speech has nothing to do with your employer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93608]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Does that apply to taking a knee for the NFL?
Dec 19, 2018, 8:51 AM
|
|
I was never against the NFL taking a knee but I can see the selective application of freedom of speech coming from both sides of the isle. Imo this is some petty bullchit and not worth a conversation. Objectivity?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: Does that apply to taking a knee for the NFL?
Dec 19, 2018, 9:00 AM
|
|
It really came down to the NFL owners not wanting to fire/cut the player. The owners spoke. They did what was in their best interest in their minds. In the end CK couldn't ever find another job. It's exactly the same really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1907]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 3154
Joined: 11/11/17
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 23, 2018, 11:12 AM
[ in reply to Re: Much like our freedom of speech ] |
|
Sure they can but it is also great to be in a position to tell them to pound sand too. I do not need my job, my job is for an activity. I once was requested to apologize to a sad little PC/SJW with HR present- I told him " I am sorry you are stupid!" turned to the HR guy and told him that is as good as it will get. Balls in your court but my lawyer is on speed dial.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 9:22 AM
[ in reply to Re: Much like our freedom of speech ] |
|
Thats your problem. You think "Free Speech" means only "protected speech". There is no such thing as "protected speech" and "unprotected speech". ALL speech in this country is free. There are no restrictions on the freedom of speech.
Obscenity.
- Incorrect. There are no penalties for obscene language
Fighting words.
- Again, wrong. You cannot be arrested for aggressive language. If someone assaults you because of what you said, they are at fault for assaulting you. What are "fighting words" anyway?
Defamation (including libel and slander)
- Incorrect. You can be SUED for defamation, but you cannot be imprisoned for defamation. If your words impact someone's reputation in a way that interferes with their income, they can pursue you for financial damages in civil court. Defamation is a Tort, not a crime.
Child pornography.
- This is an action, being the production or possession of an illegal product, not a form of speech.
Perjury.
- Perjury is also an action. It is not the expression of thought, or ideas, or the practice of discourse or protesting. Perjury is the action of lying to authorities, law enforcement, or a court of law.
Blackmail.
- Again, this is an action of extortion. It is not an expression of thought, or ideas, or the practice of discourse or protesting.
Incitement to imminent lawless action.
- Wrong. Its not illegal for me to pick up a megaphone and start shouting "Burn down all the churches!". If "incitement of imminent lawless action" were illegal, than there should be a LOT more Democrats in prison for their 2016 election protests where they carried signs and screamed chants calling for violence against Republicans.
True threats.
- A threat is an expression of your intent to do harm. It is not the expression of thought, or ideas, or the practice of discourse or protesting. It is not the free expression of ideas, but a statement of intent to break the law. Its a preemptive action informing a victim and authorities that it is imminent that you are about to or currently engaging in an illegal activity to do harm to someone.
This is why you are fundamentally and morally flawed. Because you truly think "free speech" means there is a caveat. You truly believe speech can and should be regulated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 9:34 AM
|
|
Obscenity.
- Incorrect. There are no penalties for obscene language
Incorrect. Miller v. California, 1973, lays out pretty clear regulations on obscenity, and by obscenity, they mean things like unsolicited pornography and certain language broadcast to the public. People can still acquire these things, of course, but this is why you don't have certain words said on the radio (they are fined) or basic TV stations getting away with nudity (remember CBS getting hammered for Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction?). The consumer has to go through the proper channels to acquire this type of speech.
Sorry, I'm not sure how you thought there were no penalties at all for this.
Fighting words.
- Again, wrong. You cannot be arrested for aggressive language. If someone assaults you because of what you said, they are at fault for assaulting you. What are "fighting words" anyway?
Chaplinksy v. New Hampshire, 1942. Words that "by their very utterance, inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."
So the SCOTUS has clearly stated these are not protected words.
Defamation (including libel and slander)
- Incorrect. You can be SUED for defamation, but you cannot be imprisoned for defamation. If your words impact someone's reputation in a way that interferes with their income, they can pursue you for financial damages in civil court. Defamation is a Tort, not a crime.
This still involves free speech. New York Times v. Sullivan, 1970, is the benchmark, and it involves more than just financial loss. It's still the government punishing you in a court of law for unprotected speech. Also, some states still have criminal libel laws in place, including SC, but they aren't really used anymore thanks to the above case.
Incitement to imminent lawless action.
- Wrong. Its not illegal for me to pick up a megaphone and start shouting "Burn down all the churches!". If "incitement of imminent lawless action" were illegal, than there should be a LOT more Democrats in prison for their 2016 election protests where they carried signs and screamed chants calling for violence against Republicans.
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 1969. Yeah, it's a thing. Yeah, it's illegal.
True threats.
- A threat is an expression of your intent to do harm. It is not the expression of thought, or ideas, or the practice of discourse or protesting. It is not the free expression of ideas, but a statement of intent to break the law. Its a preemptive action informing a victim and authorities that it is imminent that you are about to or currently engaging in an illegal activity to do harm to someone.
This refers back to the "fighting words" case.
This is why you are fundamentally and morally flawed. Because you truly think "free speech" means there is a caveat. You truly believe speech can and should be regulated.
Your post is extremely puzzling. Might I recommend researching the laws first before making such bold assumptions? Most of these are covered in SCOTUS decisions, and yes, there are in fact limits free speech where the government can punish you for violating them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 20, 2018, 3:59 PM
|
|
You are completely misinterpreting the entire point of those rulings.
Not one ruling said that any of those forms of speech are unprotected. What they did rules was the consequences of actions that stem from the words you utter can be held against you.
If I yell "bomb" in an airport, no one is going to arrest me for yelling that. Ever.
However, if yelling that causes a stampede of terrified people, and someone gets injured from that stampede, then I would be prosecuted for the consequences of my actions.
You cannot be imprisoned for merely speaking words, outside of stating a credible threat to someone. Even so, it is not the action of speaking or your words that are being criminalized, but the intent and consequences of your actions.
If I wear a gay pride flag with a swastika on it, no one can prosecute me or imprison me for doing so.
That is the point I, and the SCOTUS, are making.
Criminalizing the consequences of incitement speech, and criminalizing speech are 2 very distinctly different things entirely, and just like a typical liberal, you think it is totally acceptable and moral to criminalize speech, when that is not how our system works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2340]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2597
Joined: 9/5/05
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 20, 2018, 5:02 PM
|
|
Maybe we should set up an experiment; next time you're in an airport or on a plane try yelling "bomb" and see if you get arrested. I understand your point about the effect of one's speech being the bigger issue, but yelling bomb will get you arrested regardless of the manner in which people respond.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 8:49 AM
[ in reply to Re: Much like our freedom of speech ] |
|
Here's a pretty simple explanation of that case.
Boss: You have to start calling that student by male pronouns due to a legal name change. Let's not get us sued.
Teacher: I'm not gonna do it.
Boss: I'm tellin' ya, you have to do it. It's gonna get us sued.
Teacher: I'm not gonna do it.
Boss: I am ordering you as your boss to do it.
Teacher: I'm not gonna do it.
Boss: Okay, you're fired for insubordination.
Put yourself in the principal's shoes and ask what you would do. You siding with taking the lawsuit or getting rid of the employee who refuses to comply?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93608]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
He refused to say "Him."
Dec 19, 2018, 8:55 AM
|
|
I heard the guy's interview. He didn't refer to the child in gender terms but used the 'new name,' which was masculine. Imo, that is positive enough. He said using the term 'He,' was just too much a stretch. I agree.
Don't make chit up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
What, exactly, am I making up?
Dec 19, 2018, 9:01 AM
|
|
I said that above and that's exactly what was discussed in the hearing. He was ordered to use the pronoun and he flat-out refused to obey. He told his employers he would not comply.
It would have put the school at risk of a lawsuit.
Now, we can debate all day whether or not it's silly, but at the end of the day, the principal was avoiding litigation and told the teacher what to do, and that teacher refused. That will get you fired anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: What, exactly, am I making up?
Dec 19, 2018, 9:06 AM
|
|
In that scenario, he deserved to be canned. He obviously didn't value his job anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15730]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17365
Joined: 2/1/99
|
I like Cata’s take on this. A few thoughts...
Dec 19, 2018, 12:57 PM
[ in reply to What, exactly, am I making up? ] |
|
I don’t equate this to the NFL, at least not in the beginning of that circus. It is in my opinion unAmerican to force someone to stand for our national anthem. Once they provided players the option to stay in the locker room, however, all bets are off. I’d support cutting any player who kneels.
I think Cata is right. It’s about protecting the school. The absurdity of calling a girl by male pronouns aside, the administration must protect the school.
The irony, of course, is that now this girl has caused an apparently popular teacher to be fired, leading to student protests. I’m sure she’s “singled out” way more now than if the teacher was allowed to refer to her as “Steve” instead of “him.”
I’m glad I’m old enough that I’m not involved in this foolishness but young enough to see if we are culturally mature enough to some day realize how stupid this movement is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: I like Cata’s take on this. A few thoughts...
Dec 19, 2018, 1:18 PM
|
|
I couldn't agree more. The problem with the far-left and the far-right is that they want the government to impose their beliefs on others. Canada has been in a turmoil since far-left advocates wanted it actually illegal NOT to call a transgender person by their chosen pronoun.
That is a very good example of co-opting government for purely ideological goals. It's wrong for the left and it's wrong for the right.
American has and hopefully will always live in the middle. I'm all for people believing whatever they want to believe, but I'm dead set against them trying to force everyone else to believe it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: He refused to say "Him."
Dec 19, 2018, 9:02 AM
[ in reply to He refused to say "Him." ] |
|
I find it odd like he does, but he deserved to be canned if he couldn't follow he rules of his employer. Some rules suck, but when you're not the boss, you don't make the rules. That's life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46312
Joined: 4/23/00
|
It's the being forced to play make-believe that's the
Dec 19, 2018, 10:41 AM
[ in reply to He refused to say "Him." ] |
|
problem. Sure, everybody should be nice and respectful, but honesty and reality should not be trampled upon in the process. Somebody needs to tell these people the truth and then help them deal with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4747]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 6973
Joined: 1/24/07
|
Re: It's the being forced to play make-believe that's the
Dec 19, 2018, 9:32 PM
|
|
We've been trying. People like you refuse to accept that gender is a construct, in spite of all the evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58376]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46312
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Male = boy/man/he/him/his. Female = girl/woman/she/
Dec 20, 2018, 12:01 PM
|
|
her/hers. That's the reality; everything else is not only nonsense, it's a big lie. Now, there's nothing in the world wrong with playing make-believe, and people have every right to do it; they just don't have the right to force me to play too. For what it's worth, I have a great deal of compassion for people who suffer with gender identity issues; it's a very sad, tough problem. On an individual basis, I am kind and respectful with regards as to how they want to be treated. That still doesn't change the reality, which they should be encouraged and helped to deal with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4747]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 6973
Joined: 1/24/07
|
Re: Male = boy/man/he/him/his. Female = girl/woman/she/
Dec 20, 2018, 9:35 PM
|
|
I mean, you're entitled to continue being a bigoted wank, but don't be offended when we call you one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 9:33 AM
[ in reply to Re: Much like our freedom of speech ] |
|
You really have a very poor understanding of "freedom of speech".
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42021]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38173
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Ok. Time out. I think I see what's happening here.
Dec 19, 2018, 9:37 AM
|
|
Tokillagamecock, you need to do this: Before you reply to any of my posts again or Carlsbad's, stop to make sure you are replying to the correct person.
This has to be what's happening. You're getting us mixed up. I see now why you thought I supported democratic socialism. I'm pretty sure I remember Carlsbad supporting that.
I know both our usernames start with a Ca-, but c'mon, man, this isn't hard.
My post is simply pointing out what happened in the teacher case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Ok. Time out. I think I see what's happening here.
Dec 20, 2018, 4:02 PM
|
|
I responded directly to your original comment in this string of replies.
Also, you do support democratic socialism.
And yes, I was replying to your comment about the teacher case. You still have almost no understanding of how the 1st Amendment works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1878]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1864
Joined: 1/22/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18413
Joined: 12/10/14
|
Re: Much like our freedom of speech
Dec 19, 2018, 10:54 AM
[ in reply to Much like our freedom of speech ] |
|
it isn't the government that's threatening to take it away, it's the people that are willing to give it up. Liberals and social justice warriors are willing to give away any freedoms that aren't relevant to them no matter who it impacts.
Really? Name me one liberal that you are certain is willing to give up any specific constitutional freedom?
You know, like the conservative's embrace of the Patriot Act allowing the govt. to spy on virtually anyone they choose? That 'liberal' cause?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93608]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
None of us will live to see all firearms banned.
Dec 19, 2018, 8:59 AM
|
|
The public has no stomach for banning guns. I'm surprised the SCOTUS hasn't overturn city ordinances which ban guns. A couple more Trump SCOTUS nominations might change that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83000]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80122
Joined: 11/29/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 37
| visibility 705
|
|
|
50
