Guest shiloh357 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 The burden of proof doesn't lie with me. YOU are the one who has prove that free speech has consequences. You are the one who has to show that free speech means that you can be punished for voicing your opinion. I am defending the status quo. You cant' correctly define free speech. "Free speech" isn't "the freedom to speak." It is the freedom to voice your opinion without fear of being punished for doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted June 14, 2015 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.09 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted June 14, 2015 The burden of proof doesn't lie with me. YOU are the one who has prove that free speech has consequences. You are the one who has to show that free speech means that you can be punished for voicing your opinion. I am defending the status quo. You cant' correctly define free speech. "Free speech" isn't "the freedom to speak." It is the freedom to voice your opinion without fear of being punished for doing so. It turns out you are probably correct, Shiloh. I poked around and found the following concerning the ability of school boards to fire employees over speech they don't approve of....this principal may be able to sue. It might depend on Florida state law but I've a feeling they HAVE violated this mans 1st Amendment rights. From http://thewordout.net By John W. Whitehead Speech and Expression Outside the Schoolhouse Gate The extent of a teacher’s First Amendment freedoms depends largely upon the content of the expression and the context in which the teacher chooses to exercise those freedoms. The Supreme Court has spoken clearly in defense of the First Amendment rights of public school teachers in their capacities as private citizens.11 In Pickering v. Board of Education, a teacher was fired because he sent a local newspaper a letter he had written criticizing the Board of Education concerning past efforts to raise revenue for schools. The Supreme Court held that “a teacher’s exercise of his right to speak on issues of public importance may not furnish the basis for his dismissal from public employment.”12 The Court reasoned that because the letter concerned “a matter of public interest” and there was no evidence that it interfered with (1) his ability to perform classroom duties or (2) the regular operation of the school, the teacher’s rights were no different than those of any other member of the general public. Thus, the teacher could not be dismissed for the exercise of his freedom of speech.13 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 The burden of proof doesn't lie with me. YOU are the one who has prove that free speech has consequences. You are the one who has to show that free speech means that you can be punished for voicing your opinion. I am defending the status quo. You cant' correctly define free speech. "Free speech" isn't "the freedom to speak." It is the freedom to voice your opinion without fear of being punished for doing so. The proof is in this story and hundreds like it. A quick search turns up more stories than you can count just like this one. The proof is also in your inability to show such cases being overturned. When this case is overturned then you will have a legitimate point, till such time this case proves my point nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Post a few of these cases for review. You need to show from the Constitution that freedom of speech is something that can be prosecuted. You need to show that a person simply speaking his opinion on a political issue or current event not related to his place of employment can be prosecuted or fired simply for speaking his mind as a free American. So present some of these cases for us to look at. Show me that free speech is punishable. 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 This is the text directly from the Constitution: 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 to peacefully assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. That is what the Constitution says on the matter, which of those words stop a person from being fired for what they say? Which of those words from the constitution say there can be no consequences for the words you say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 All of that prohibits anyone from firing a person for saying something that is within the boundaries of protected speech. The entire portion of the Constitution you quoted means that a person is free to speak their mind without fear of retribution. Free speech makes no sense if someone can be punished for exercising that freedom. You said there are literally hundreds of cases where people were justly and legally punished for expressing a point of view within the boundaries of free speech. If there are hundreds of examples, you should not have any trouble presenting a few of them for review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Translation: "I only told you that there were hundreds of cases to hopefully intimidate you into silence. I lied, there are no cases and I really don't have an argument." Sorry Uncertain, but quoting the Constitution doesn't qualify as one of the "hundreds" of cases you claimed to exist. This I just a lame attempt to deflect from your misinformation. You have nothing to support your interpretation of the Constitution and you never will. Your position is irrational. Freedoms that you can be punished for exercising are not freedoms at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncertain Posted June 15, 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 15, 2015 How can you say there are no cases when we have spent the day talking about one. My final post on this is to say that if this case is overturned I will be back to admit I was wrong, till then I will continue to be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I didn't say there were no cases. I said that you can't pull up any of the "hundreds" of cases just like this one. Since you know of "hundreds" just like it, it suggests that this is something you are very knowledgeable about and should have no problem pulling them up. The fact is that you made a claim that was not true, since you obviously cant' really produce anything. The fact is, you have nothing to support your claims. Nor can you defend the logic of punishing a Constitutional freedom for a protected activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning_Ember Posted June 15, 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 15, 2015 The principal in this case was not fired, but reassigned to lesser administrative duties. http://www.mtv.com/news/2184336/alberto-iber-principal-fired/ In the private sector, with few excfeptions depending on the state, no real first amendment protections apply. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/04/02/businesses-first-amendment-rights-dont-extend-to-their-employees/ Even in the public sector, it is not universal. http://www.workplacefairness.org/retaliation-public-employees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts