The_Patriot21 Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 27 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,715 Content Per Day: 2.45 Reputation: 8,535 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Hey guys, calling the other persons views child-like won't convince them of your view, it is in essence, devoid of all intelligent argument whatsoever. How about we put the bickering aside and debate the topic and not the person please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I don't need court cases. The fact is that no one is taken to court for speaking their mind unless they are calling for someone to come to harm or death, or unless they are guilty of slander/libel or some other form of unprotected speech.  You can't give someone a freedom and then penalize them with consequences for exercising that freedom.  "Freedom of speech" means that I can express a legitimate opinion without fear of reprisal from anyone, not just the government.  The same goes for the freedom to address the government with a list of grievances or the freedom of religion, or freedom of the press.   Should someone be penalized for exercising their freedom to adhere to their religion?  Should their be consequences placed on the American press for printing a story the government didn't like??  If simply voicing your opinion about an issue is enough to get you fired or otherwise punished, then freedom of speech is nonexistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 599 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,262 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,989 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted June 14, 2015 You have a child like view of free speech, there really is no other way to describe it. Feel free to provide the court cases overturning actions such as this. Until such time I am correct. that not only is tacky, but also rather presumptuous of you to think you can set the rules of conversation here.....    how many posts do you have here???? 25.....  When did the court system start strictly following the constitution?  Just because they don't follow the constitution all the time doesn't make you correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 599 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,262 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,989 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted June 14, 2015  You can't give someone a freedom and then penalize them with consequences for exercising that freedom.  "Freedom of speech" means that I can express a legitimate opinion without fear of reprisal from anyone, not just the government.  I would disagree with that Shiloh for your free speech can't infrenge on my personal freedom of taking care of my business....  especially when it's written into the contracts of people I employ.  Also as I said that includes people within our education system.....       When you sign the contracts to do certain works, you waive your constitutional right to make us look bad to the general public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I have never signed a contract with an employer or ever seen a contract that ever governed my personal views or set a limit on my right to express my political views on my own time, away from the work place on my own personal Facebook account or any other medium of expression.   You might sign a contract that prohibits you from using company computers for personal use on Facebook. You might sign a contract that says that you will not attempt to engage in political discussions in the workplace and on the company dime.  You may sign a contract that says you will not, while you are representing your company in public, make any comments that reflect poorly on your employer.   But that is not what we are talking about here.  Again, Other one, you are not really reflecting what has happened in regard to this principal.  He was not representing the school district or anyone else in the school.  His comments were not derogatory or in anyway harmful to the school.  He was speaking a free, private American citizen who has the freedom to speak his mind on his own personal facebook account on a current event.  No company can draw up a contract that says that they can control everything you say so long as you are an employee of that company.  They do not own you off clock.  They can't control their employee's political speech or opinions when they are speaking on their own time and as representing themselves and no other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 599 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,262 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,989 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted June 14, 2015 Considering my experience with the television industry, Xerox and our local schools, I would just say that in theory you might be right but in reality it's just not so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncertain Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 239 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 226 Days Won: 2 Joined: 06/02/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/20/1959 Share Posted June 14, 2015 You have a child like view of free speech, there really is no other way to describe it. Feel free to provide the court cases overturning actions such as this. Until such time I am correct. that not only is tacky, but also rather presumptuous of you to think you can set the rules of conversation here.....    how many posts do you have here???? 25.....  When did the court system start strictly following the constitution?  Just because they don't follow the constitution all the time doesn't make you correct. I am a very confident person, as such when I am told arbitrarily that I am wrong two things happen. The first is my defenses go on high alert and at times I will counterattack. At the same time my confidence wants to be correct so I will ask for some sort of evidence to examine and have no problem admitting I was wrong and changing my views. If there is nothing offered to support the charge that I am wrong, then he is just starting his opinion, and as they say opinions are like armpits, everyone has them and most stink. Returning to the topic of free speech, I will address the comments by Shiloh357. If a newspaper publishes an article the government does not like and the government punished them, that would be a violation of free speech. If based upon the same story the government did nothing and advertisers no longer advertised with that paper because they didn't like the story, there is no infringement upon free speech. Early in my career I lost a client because of a bumper sticker on my personal car supporting a candidate for governor. After a meeting at a restaurant we walked out to our cars and went our separate ways. The next day he called me and said that pulling out of the parking lot he saw my sticker and would no longer be employing my services. He was 100% in his right to do so and it was not an infringement on my free speech. I will say it again, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 21 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,009 Content Per Day: 0.29 Reputation: 100 Days Won: 3 Joined: 09/20/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted June 14, 2015 Uncertain is in the right here. Â The 1st Amendment means you have the right to say whatever you want, take photos of whatever you want, publish anything you want, record whatever you want... Unless you are breaking some kind of law by doing so. Examples would be threatening someone, or taking photos or video where specifically prohibited by law (which is very very few cases) or publishing something that breaks the law in some way, again, very rare instances. Â Now, your right to freedom of speech STOPS where anothers rights begin. Employment, for example, is generally not a right. If you work for a school, then proceed to say that segregation was a good idea, the employer also has rights. Namely, to fire you. If I worked for a phone company, then proceeded to go post videos saying I worked for that phone company, and how awful they were... I have every right to post those videos. I can say whatever I want. Unless they physically prevent me from engaging in freedom of expression, there is no violation of the First Amendment. They, however, can fire me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 No BE, you are wrong (like you always are) and so is uncertain.  Neither one of you know what you're talking about.   My right to freedom may end where someone begins, but that does not apply here. This principal's comments didn't infringe on anyone's else's freedom.  This man's statement was a personal opinion about an issue that had nothing to do with his place of employment.  His statement was not hurtful or damaging to his employer or any fellow employees.  He made the statement off of the school premise. It was on his own personal time and he was not in an official position representing the company at the time he made those comments.  These comments had no reflection on anyone but himself and his employer had no right to fire him on that basis.  Freedom of speech is not defined as, 'not restraining a person from speaking.'    Freedom of speech is the right to speak your mind (within reason) without fear of reprisal. It is the right for you to say what you think is right without the fear of losing your job, your property or the fear of being put in prison. All this man said was that he felt the policemen was in the right.  Nothing in what he said constitutes a fire-able offense.  He made no threats, no racial slurs, no slander/libel, nothing.  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncertain Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 239 Content Per Day: 0.07 Reputation: 226 Days Won: 2 Joined: 06/02/2015 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/20/1959 Share Posted June 14, 2015 If I am so wrong provide some sort evidence to show that I am wrong. Your opinion does not make me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts