Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Saying he can't say them is infringing on the right to free speech.

Saying people can't say they are offended by the idiocy is infringing on theirs.

Nobody said they can't be offended.

We're saying you can't discriminate based on what someone says with their right to free speech.

Ugh. Some you of you all seem quite capable calling me racist for I do not some of the actions Obama has taking. I watch at time s Duck Dynasty for some of the stupid things they do, like blowing up a beaver damn on the Judge property. Some of their discussion is off the wall on work ethics. I was "force" to attend Christian services so espouse some views of the Christian faith. Step mom did not like me being Buddhist but the ole "God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit HATES same sex couples". Far as I know. God forgives and quite a lot of same sex couples are *GASP* Christian

-I have OIF and OEF sticker on my car but to some I show I support war 110%
-I do not have a Obama/Biden sticker on my POV and work for the government but I must be a complete racist since I do not have that sticker.
-I am known that I do not like Obama, Holder, Jesse Jackson, at times Rangel
-I like West (at times), Colin Powell, Condeezza Rice, and Goody Jr. so I guess I discriminate against certain blacks
-I have a fake grenade on my desk with a tag on the pin that has "1" stamped on it and plate under it says "Complaint Department. Take Number" so I guess I'm telling everyone I am violent.
-In process of my jobs I do not call out names but I identify class of individuals by numbers assigned so i guess I am inhumane towards them.
-I do know that working for the Government you are not reprimanded for whatever you do with your personnel property.

Some mighty tall soup boxes in here

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Look, we already established that you don't think fact are really facts if you don't care about them.

How do you figure?

So I'm pretty sure that there is zero reason to even point out to you that the first sentence in that picture has absolutely nothing to do with the second picture.

For an organization who demands tolerance, are EXTREMELY intolerant of folks different opinions. That's the meme.

So you want people to be accepting of of intolerance?

I want someone to not have to risk being fired for carrying a belief that goes against the grain. "You can have your first amendment rights as long as you don't say anything bad"

But should we be accepting of, racists, sexists, homophones, nazis, ect.?

Yes. We have laws that are in place to go after them if they take certain actions related to their beliefs, but someone just having that belief is no reason to take action against them.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Saying he can't say them is infringing on the right to free speech.

Saying people can't say they are offended by the idiocy is infringing on theirs.

Nobody said they can't be offended.

We're saying you can't discriminate based on what someone says with their right to free speech.

You have the right to free speech, not the right consequence-free speech

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:
@d-usa and @thread...

Honestly answer me this question: When did we, as a society, get so vindictive towards others that holds the "non-favored opinions"?

I don't care if you think blacks were better off before civil rights or that gays are as bad as sheepfethers.

But if my manager makes it clear that he supports those statements and promotes that viewpoint at his job, while also managing blacks and gays, then there is an issue.

D... here's the first paragraph of this OP story:
A union representing federal employees at Eglin Air Force base in Florida is demanding that two senior management officials be removed from their posts because they put decals on their personal trucks supporting Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson.

Stickers...

On...

Personal...

Trucks...

Personal...

Trucks...

Parked...

On...

Government...

Property...

Where....

Their...

Employees...

Can...

See...

Them...

If I put a sticker that says "I hate veterans because they kill babies" next to my "Gays are as bad as sheep fethers" and park that car at my job at the veterans hospital then it really doesn't matter that it's my personal car.

If you would have read the second paragraph of the article you quoted then you would also realize that your statement is very incomplete.:

Alan Cooper, the executive vice president of the local chapter of the American Federation of Government Employees, said one of the officials also displayed the “I Support Phil” decals in his office last month and offered them to subordinates.

Nothing there stated that these reps promoted "that viewpoint".

Except "I support Phil".

 d-usa wrote:

If an employee has a problem with a manager saying "I support the guy who thinks you are as bad as a sheep fether" then he has a right to complain about that as well.

Yes, and the only correct response from his manager is "So what?"

 Grey Templar wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

If an employee has a problem with a manager saying "I support the guy who thinks you are as bad as a sheep fether" then he has a right to complain about that as well.

Yes, and the only correct response from his manager is "So what?"

You are adorable.

 Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Saying he can't say them is infringing on the right to free speech.

Saying people can't say they are offended by the idiocy is infringing on theirs.

Nobody said they can't be offended.

We're saying you can't discriminate based on what someone says with their right to free speech.

You have the right to free speech, not the right consequence-free speech

That's not quite right either... not everything is a protected class (ie, race, gender, etc...). I remember there was a hot dental assisstance who was fired because she was, get this... too hot.

Remember that there was a protest called “Everyone Draw Mohammed Day”??? Stemming from threats to that Norweigian writer (I think)???

That sparked a very visceral reaction to many of us here in the states. The reason for this was because we saw a threat to freedom of speech... not from the government, but from private individuals who said that if you dared to depict Mohammed, they would execute you.

They even specifically threatened the creators of the show South Park because of this... remember that?

It is a belief that freedom of expression and inquiry needs to be defended from all opponents, private or governmental, that the only thing that should influence the "marketplace of ideas" is the persuasiveness of the argument.

That's why taking actions to purposely punish someone because they hold the "non-favor views" is so anathema to me...

 Grey Templar wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

If an employee has a problem with a manager saying "I support the guy who thinks you are as bad as a sheep fether" then he has a right to complain about that as well.

Yes, and the only correct response from his manager is "So what?"

yup... both people in the article are welcome to their own opinion, thinking/saying/having stickers that say gay sex is awesome is just fine, thinking/saying/havinging stickers that say its gross is also just fine.

I think the underlying issue is that by this person displaying (and offering) bumperstickers:

1) in his office
2) while on the job

He *could* be construed as "speaking" as a government representative....when the government is supposed to be neutral in this matter (states marriage rights and all).

In my opinion, the government is supposed to hold a viewpoint that is neutral in most matters....but in some circumstances, when the rights of others are "injured" then they are able to step in and use their governmental muscle.

Think of it in this context: the Supreme Court supported the vile voice of the Westboro Baptist Church to protest at veterans funerals, because if they forced the WBC to be "silent" then it would be impeding their right to speech.

I therefore don't believe that the problem is so much that these people hold views that may seem homophobic....it's that they are displaying their support *in a government office* and *on government property*.....therefore, it may be construed by *some* that the government is vicariously supporting a viewpoint that (in my opinion) tramples on the rights of others about who they should love, marry, and raise children with.

Again...it's not their view/opinion that is being challenged, it's how/where/when their view/opinion is being expressed that is at issue.

So nobody who works for the govt can have bumper stickers on the vehicle they drive to work?

 Grey Templar wrote:
So nobody who works for the govt can have bumper stickers on the vehicle they drive to work?

And take the bumper stickers into their office to display

And try and spruik them to subordinates

etc.

Nobody had to accept them. And Offices are personal space.

Offices are not personal space.

Try and take your pants off to relax in your cubicle at work and see how far your argument of "its personal space" gets you before you are hauled down to HR (or escorted to the curb).

Shall I assume you don't have much real world office/work experience?

You may be allowed some personal items at work...provided they aren't found to be offensive by anyone.

And if they are....the employer can have you remove them....or even have you removed.

It is --their-- space. Their office. They pay the building rent. Thwy pay you to be there.

There truly is nothing 'personal' at an office.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Nobody had to accept them. And Offices are personal space.

Offices are most definitely not personal space. The owners can definitely tell you what you can and cannot do or have in them.

I had to "sterile" my assault pack being I had "ISAF" and "Infidel" velcro on it. One has to be "neutral" in the work area. Your vehicle is your private property even if it parked on government property though you are warned that property destruction might occur due to someone taking offense to what's "advertise"

Why am I not surprised you had an Infidel patch?

Because Non Muslims are Infidels.
I'm an Infidel
Your an Infidel

If Iraq and Afghanistan was Christian base I would have gone with "Heretic"

Dark Humor

Being deliberately antagonistic is always the best policy.

Or maybe I do not care what you think of me?

Indeed, the best policy.

Back on track:

I always found Star Wars to be very racist.

 WarOne wrote:
Back on track:

I always found Star Wars to be very racist.

The black guy is the main antagonist, what do you expect.

Example be the Wookies

And so nationalistic, why do all the baddies have to be British?

 Jihadin wrote:
Example be the Wookies

Actually, Star Wars supports incomprehensible left leaning liberal hippies.

I thought the inability of storm troopers to hit anything was a social commentary about how white guys can't play basketball and are unable to hit the basket?

No, plot armour and they were supposed to let them escape in the first movie.

*complete resistance to joke*

 d-usa wrote:
I thought the inability of storm troopers to hit anything was a social commentary about how white guys can't play basketball and are unable to hit the basket?

Or that it meant that gun control for Caucasians was ineffectual because we couldn't hit the broad side of a Wookie either way.

Truly Star Wars has alot to teach us about social commentary.

"...these blast points, too accurate for sand people. Only imperial storm troopers are so precise"