+5

You should not be forced to make a public apology or lose your job just because you say something that offends another group of people. Amirite?

65%Yeah You Are35%No Way
freespeechfreelancers avatar Politics
Share
1 55
The voters have decided that freespeechfreelancer is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

There shouldn't be anything protecting your job, though. Businesses reserve the right to fire you on whatever grounds they wish. It's good business to fire people who offend groups of people, because you may lose that group's interest for keeping them hired.

On the other hand, we shouldn't be able to force companies to fire people if they say something offensive.

@Mike_Hawk There shouldn't be anything protecting your job, though. Businesses reserve the right to fire you on whatever...

Do you feel the political correctness has done and is guilty of doing the latter of your comments?

@freespeechfreelancer Do you feel the political correctness has done and is guilty of doing the latter of your comments?

It may have increased the pressure of a company to fire a person, but I really couldn't say if it allowed people to bring legal action against a company to fire their employees. If you know of any examples of this, please let me know.

@Mike_Hawk It may have increased the pressure of a company to fire a person, but I really couldn't say if it allowed people to...

One that quickly comes to mind was this story. Here was a sportscaster not even trying to be offensive but his phrase "chink in the armor" of an uprising basketball player, got him fired!
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/...nts-fit-crimes

Part of having free speech is dealing with any consequences which arise as a result of people not liking what we say.

@freespeechfreelancer And why should there be consequences? That would imply not actually having free speech!

Because not everyone's going to agree with you. Free speech doesn't mean that there will be no negative reactions to your words. It was said above, but it is not in a business's best interest to reduce its number if consumers, which is why it's so shocking when companies take a stance on controversial topics (like Chik-Fil-A did).

@Wunderscore Because not everyone's going to agree with you. Free speech doesn't mean that there will be no negative reactions...

They don't HAVE to agree with something for it to be allowed to be expressed. It is valid and worth saying IF someone chooses to do so. And the Chik thing went hugely in their favor, even though I guess it was supposed to backfire.

@freespeechfreelancer They don't HAVE to agree with something for it to be allowed to be expressed. It is valid and worth saying IF...

Hmm. I'll try to explain my views a little clearer, bucause I tend to be a really bad explain-er.

In a purely social situation, you cannot be forced to retract a spoken thought. However, once you enter a workplace, a school, it is your responsibility to uphold the reputation of said place. If, for example, I worked at Store, and I went around spouting off that such-and-such is stupid, people who like such-and-such aren't going to want to purchase anything from Store any longer, because they do not support the message(s) which Store employees are spreading. Because Store could lose a fair amount of profit because of the number of people who no longer shop there (because I spread my views), Store has a valid reason to fire me, no?

@Wunderscore Hmm. I'll try to explain my views a little clearer, bucause I tend to be a really bad explain-er. In a purely...

Sure they do, but if you really felt that way about said store, more than likely you would not want to be there anyway and would have quit first! We tend to link up with and surround ourselves by those we agree with or that agree with us. All of society is made up of multiple "cliques" - and each little clique seeks to link up with bigger cliques. We hang with like minded (generally speaking) and seek the constant affirmations from our group. It is safe that way.
But the box does not control or contain us. Sharing an opposing view or opinion IS what freedom is all about - regardless of locale. I am not a gay person, but isn't that what they are fighting for in essence?

@freespeechfreelancer Sure they do, but if you really felt that way about said store, more than likely you would not want to be there...

I meant that if I said some controversial thing which was not about the store.

Again, in a purely social setting, you can say whatever you want. People may disagree with you, but that's okay. That's how we grow. However a company will likely not express views on controversial topics like gay rights, abortion, etc., because they want to keep the business of both the pro- and the anti- groups. Expressing one view, like Chik-Fil-A did, will turn the people holding the opposite view off, causing the company to lose a pool of customers.

@Wunderscore I meant that if I said some controversial thing which was not about the store. Again, in a purely social...

So you don't think or believe bosses, officials, mayors, cops, judges, etc. SAY things in their work places each and every day that those below or beneath them DON'T agree with? So, because they are in a position of POWER or authority they have more rights than you or me? That is my over-riding point. The double standard and hypocrisy is simply outrageous and needs to be confronted. If we never speak up and continue sitting in our quiet little corners, do you think it will change or fix itself? NO - it always and only gets WORSE.

@freespeechfreelancer So you don't think or believe bosses, officials, mayors, cops, judges, etc. SAY things in their work places each...

I'm not sure that we're talking about the same thing and I don't know how to clarify my point further.

@Wunderscore I'm not sure that we're talking about the same thing and I don't know how to clarify my point further.

That's cool. We are from different generations so I am sure that is part of the problem.

@freespeechfreelancer That's cool. We are from different generations so I am sure that is part of the problem.

I don't really see how that would be part of the problem, but maybe I'm just proving your point further.

@Wunderscore I don't really see how that would be part of the problem, but maybe I'm just proving your point further.

I am trying to make this easier, not more difficult! You have heard of the "generation gap" right? It does not mean I am any better or different than you - but the WAY people communicate is different from generation to generation. You are growing up in pretty much a different culture than I did. How we relate to things, express things, etc. is all largely based on our generation. That is ALL I am saying. It is not a put down or slight towards you. I like and appreciate your input, and enjoy the conversation.

@Wunderscore Because not everyone's going to agree with you. Free speech doesn't mean that there will be no negative reactions...

our society follows double standards on this topic.

For example, criticise the muslim terrorists and you'll be labelled as an anti-secular person.

Criticise Hinduism, Christianity and other religions and you'll get no negative reactions.

@fuzala that's not true you're just being biased again with no proof to back your claim

your comment came to me - what is biased about saying corruption affects all people in all countries?

@freespeechfreelancer your comment came to me - what is biased about saying corruption affects all people in all countries?

oh no
I'm not talking to you Amir

I'm talking to Anand and how he said that attacking one religion gets a negative reaction
but attacking Hinduism or Christianity doesn't get a negative reaction

that simply is not true

people will react negatively when their belief system is attacked regardless of their religion

don't you agree?

@fuzala oh no I'm not talking to you Amir I'm talking to Anand and how he said that attacking one religion gets a negative...

100% And I will go a step further - any time you ATTACK anyone for anything they believe or hold dear, they will DEFEND it even more, regardless of it being right or wrong.

@fuzala oh no I'm not talking to you Amir I'm talking to Anand and how he said that attacking one religion gets a negative...

everyone will feel offended if their beliefs are questioned... no one can deny that.

my point was that MEDIA is biased.

I have observed that media criticises those who comment about muslims (in india) and if someone comments about hindus or other religions , media doesn't respond negatively..

I am sorry for the misunderstanding here.
I have a bad habit of leaving my statements INCOMPLETE..

that causes trouble... lol

MEDIA PLAYS A POWERFUL ROLE IN DETERMINING THE RESPONSE OF PEOPLE TO ANY MAJOR/MINOR EVENT

AMIRITE???

@gaurav24anand why are you stalking me ?? am i ur enemy ???

I'm not stalking you

I'm not interested in you like that

I was merely refuting what you said

@freespeechfreelancer why am I getting your reply notices to gaurav?

that's because this is your post

anytime someone makes a comment on your posts
you will get a notification as well

@fuzala I'm not stalking you I'm not interested in you like that I was merely refuting what you said

if you can't see double standards prevalent in our society, i am not responsible for that

and most people agree with me (on this topic). rememeber that..

@gaurav24anand if you can't see double standards prevalent in our society, i am not responsible for that and most people agree...

nope
most don't agree

Amir just said he agreed 100%

if I insulted your belief
you would not be happy

no one is happy about getting their beliefs insulted

I doubt many disagree with this

again
you're biased because of the experiences around you in that specific area in India

@fuzala nope most don't agree Amir just said he agreed 100% if I insulted your belief you would not be happy no one is...

You guys are talking or disagreeing about 2 different issues. Re-read what you are arguing

@freespeechfreelancer You guys are talking or disagreeing about 2 different issues. Re-read what you are arguing

oh we're not arguing about the post

I was arguing the first blanket statement Anand made

one that can easily be seen as false in that there is a negative reaction from all groups of people

it's only natural

@freespeechfreelancer Gaurav is talking about double standards and you are talking about religious belief

I'm not talking about the double standard part

I'm talking about the last third of his comment that says:

"Criticise Hinduism, Christianity and other religions and you'll get no negative reactions."

Do so
and you will definitely get negative reactions from Hindus and Christians

@gaurav24anand our society follows double standards on this topic. For example, criticise the muslim terrorists and you'll be...

I missed this comment. Now I see where I was in the dark. I agreed with you in earlier conversation about double standards existing from people in power and their corruption. I do not agree with this statement. If you criticise or attack any person's belief or value system, they will be offended and respond.

@freespeechfreelancer I missed this comment. Now I see where I was in the dark. I agreed with you in earlier conversation about double...

everyone will feel offended if their beliefs are questioned... no one can deny that.

my point was that MEDIA is biased.

I have observed that media criticises those who comment about muslims (in india) and if someone comments about hindus or other religions , media doesn't respond negatively..

I am sorry for the misunderstanding here.
I have a bad habit of leaving my statements INCOMPLETE..

that causes trouble... lol

In the present scenario, if you "offend" persons of a particular religion, race or some other social group, you might lose your job. You may need to apologise publicly and you might even get in legal troubles. This also happens if you say something that "offends" women.

However, there seems to be no "punishment" for offending men & boys. Nowadays, we hear many stereotypes against men and boys and several types of offensive remarks.

But no action is taken against those who offend men. It is rather being ENCOURAGED. A company used to sell shirts with "Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them" printed on the front. And that company sold thousands of those rubbish garments.

Similar stuff intended to offend men are often found at other places too.

WHAT A SHAME??? WHY IS THERE NO OPPOSITION AGAINST THIS???

by the way, if you're trying to offend someone, offend men. They don't complain..... :'(

I don't know why???

@gaurav24anand In the present scenario, if you "offend" persons of a particular religion, race or some other social group, you...

Some good points. From my point of view, it seems like you can offend a Christian, a white person, a Tea Party member, a Republican, a law abiding gun owner, a hard working middle class person, a legal citizen - and get by with it with no questions asked or consequences. On the other hand, if you say anything about or against blacks, Hispanics, illegal aliens, gays, Muslim terrorists, Liberals, or Democrats - all hell breaks loose and every special interest group on the planet turns out in full force to demand an apology and a resignation.
I just get sick of seeing the hypocrisy in this country and the blame game that goes on continuously. But telling people they can or can't say certain things is ludicrous. I, for one, would like to see it stopped.

@freespeechfreelancer Some good points. From my point of view, it seems like you can offend a Christian, a white person, a Tea Party...

you're right.

but hypocrisy is present everywhere.

In India, we think India is the world's worst country.

Here, If I say something about "muslim terrorism", I will be called a muslim-hater and I might be arrested for trying to encourage people for riots.

However, even if someone says anything very offensive against hindus, no action is taken.

If I say there should be no reservations, I might be labelled as a "constitution-hater" or something like that and jailed for years.

I can understand how you feel...

@gaurav24anand you're right. but hypocrisy is present everywhere. In India, we think India is the world's worst country. Here...

One of the core rights to American citizens is FREE SPEECH - the right to say what you want without retaliation or consequence. What is truly amazing is what certain groups get by with saying. A big example that comes to mind is the rap artists. I have nothing against them, their music, or what they say - BUT they are allowed to call each other the "N" word, call women bitches and hoes, swear every other word, praise ghetto and gang life, and openly express their gun views. As far as I know, no special interest group is attacking or going after them for such. If I, being a middle aged white man, got up in a public place or as a news anchor and did those exact same things, my life would be ruined over night. This is clearly a DOUBLE STANDARD and should not be allowed.

@freespeechfreelancer One of the core rights to American citizens is FREE SPEECH - the right to say what you want without retaliation or...

yeah, i agree with you. Innocent people are the only ones who get penalised.

We have FREEDOM OF SPEECH in India as well, but only for those who insult men, hindus, "General Category People", honest people etc. (Sounds weird, doesn't it)

Those who despise wrongdoers are criticised heavily.

Here:

If you're a corrupt person, you have everything in your favour. You have money- you can buy the judges. You can be declared innocent even if everyone knows you're a murderer, a rapist, a politically fraud person...
No one cares how much "black money" you have.

If you're innocent, all the laws of the constitution will be used to check your character and your "history". If it turns out that your bank balance has "a single penny" more than it should have, you'll be labelled as corrupt

Discussions of fraud and hypocrisy can never last.... :'(

Thanks for raising this OPINION..

@gaurav24anand yeah, i agree with you. Innocent people are the only ones who get penalised. We have FREEDOM OF SPEECH in India as...

OK, now I get why you did the MEN post. I was trying to understand what you were talking about because I was not aware of that here in America. This is actually pretty awesome that people from other countries can be on this site and give their views.
What would you call a "wrong doer" there? Give me an example of such. And what you describe is pretty much what it has become HERE! Money talks and buys favors. Those in charge (our leaders) are liars and double speakers. They say what the people want to hear, but they do just the opposite.

@freespeechfreelancer OK, now I get why you did the MEN post. I was trying to understand what you were talking about because I was not...

wrong doers are of various types:-

1. a woman who alleges a man falsely of rape/domestic violence/attempt to do either of these/other allegations

2. a corrupt politician who tries to eliminate all those who raise a voice against him/her.

3. a person who tries to misuse the "benefits" provided to him/her on the basis of religion/gender/age etc.

4. a person who commits a serious crime and still claims to be innocent.

i think 'wrong doer' is an ambiguous term. there is no accurate definition of this term.

in short, any person who does what he/she should not do is a wrong doer. That's all I currently think of...

@gaurav24anand wrong doers are of various types:- 1. a woman who alleges a man falsely of rape/domestic violence/attempt to do...

How would corrupt people determine "wrong?" That is funny, but exactly what is happening here right now. The politicians, judges, city leaders, police, etc. are very corrupt, but they expect citizens to abide by all the laws. I have decided it is really all about money only. Everything is designed to take more and more of our money. They sit in high places and think up every way they can to pass a law or restriction that will make common every day law abiding citizens appear to be "bad guys." Then they can charge you with crimes and fees will follow. It is a vicious ugly cycle.

I believe we have the right to say whatever we want, so initially I was thinking 'no'. However, I think it depends on the offense and the job. If you're a radio or news personality, for instance, and you call a group of basketball players "nappy-headed hos", you have to expect consequences.

@PhilboydStudge I believe we have the right to say whatever we want, so initially I was thinking 'no'. However, I think it depends...

Hmmm.............but if you are a Democrat or our President and call Republicans "jihadists," "terrorists," "strapping on suicide vests," "arsonists," "extortionists," "anarchists," - it is perfectly fine, and all done without recourse or consequence. Every one of them are scum bag hacks, and hopefully the American people will remember all of this in the days ahead. The president should be fired immediately.
http://redalertpolitics.com/201...ment-shutdown/

@freespeechfreelancer Hmmm.............but if you are a Democrat or our President and call Republicans "jihadists," "terrorists,"...

Whoa... both sides have lowered themselves to name calling over the years. Sadly those tactics tend to work on an uninformed (and even misinformed) electorate. How about what's been suggested about President Obama? A "foreigner" (with no legal right to the presidency), a "racist", "socialist", "Marxist", "dictator".

@PhilboydStudge Whoa... both sides have lowered themselves to name calling over the years. Sadly those tactics tend to work on an...

And many in professional fields who have tried those names have suffered for it. I call him all of those names all the time - and will continue doing so. So far, I have had no recourse. I figure if he can pander and call names, as well as take sides on social issues that fit his personal agenda, then he is fair game as well.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.