It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

University of Tampa fires teacher whose tweet blamed Harvey on Texas GOP vote

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 04:44 PM
link   
SOURCE


TAMPA — A tweet suggesting that the devastation of Hurricane Harvey was "instant karma" for the red state of Texas has cost a University of Tampa professor his job — making him just the latest academic fired for off-duty speech. The University first distanced itself from sociology professor Kenneth L. Storey on Monday. But a tide of online outrage continued. A #FireKenStorey hashtag spread far beyond the university. Angry Facebook comments piled up. "Don't think this is a school we will be looking at for my daughter anymore," one commenter said. An alumnus wrote, "Good thing I already paid you, because I'll never send the school another dime again." On Tuesday morning, the university fired him. "We condemn the comments and the sentiment behind them, and understand the pain this irresponsible act has caused," spokesman Eric Cardenas said in a statement.




Not a very bright professor considering Houston is a democrat city.

edit on 30-8-2017 by Outlier13 because: (no reason given)


 

Mod Note:
Important information about how to post work written by others.
edit on 8/30/2017 by Blaine91555 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

Well he has the appearance of a physically lazy, tv watching douche...but i try not to be bigoted...it doesnt seem like he does.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Outlier13

Give liberals enough rope and they will hang themselves.

What a tool.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Good. His comments were hateful and way off the mark. Houston's Harris County voted for Hillary and its mayor is a democrat!

What an idiot.
edit on 30-8-2017 by texasgirl because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   
The story was reported here already.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Outlier13

Give liberals enough rope and they will hang themselves.

What a tool.


Give anyone with radical or ignorant views enough rope and they will hang themselves.

Political ideology has nothing to do with the fact some people are stupid and ignorant.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Firing people for tweets is just the beginning. I suspect eventually people will be fired for thoughts.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Firing people for tweets is just the beginning. I suspect eventually people will be fired for thoughts.


They fired him because their bottom line was at jeopardy from angry alumni and boosters. This was a business decision, which is their right.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




They fired him because their bottom line was at jeopardy from angry alumni and boosters. This was a business decision, which is their right.


It is their right. But they spit on freedom of speech.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Firing people for tweets is just the beginning. I suspect eventually people will be fired for thoughts.


Have they invented the technology to read people's thoughts yet?

Not sure if you are more up-to-date on current technology, or if you are being hyperbolic.
edit on 30-8-2017 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: burdman30ott6




They fired him because their bottom line was at jeopardy from angry alumni and boosters. This was a business decision, which is their right.


It is their right. But they spit on freedom of speech.



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.


University of Tampa isn't Congress, nor is it a public university, so the freedom of speech argument here is entirely misplaced.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




University of Tampa isn't Congress, nor is it a public university, so the freedom of speech argument here is entirely misplaced.


Freedom of speech isn't the first amendment. Freedom of speech is a principle; the first amendment protects the principle. This is how you end up arguing in a circle.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

www.foxnews.com...



Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University say they are one step closer to reading people’s thoughts. Their computer program was able to successfully decipher sentences participants read in their minds.


Unfortunately, I don't think we're too far off from the technology being a reality.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




Have they invested the technology to read people's thoughts yet?

Not sure if you are more up-to-date on current technology, or if you are being hyperbolic.


I am being hyperbolic, yes. But a tweet is essentially a passing thought, expressed through that particular medium.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The amendment protects the principle from very specific attack... outside of that, the principle is on it's own.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: introvert

www.foxnews.com...



Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University say they are one step closer to reading people’s thoughts. Their computer program was able to successfully decipher sentences participants read in their minds.


Unfortunately, I don't think we're too far off from the technology being a reality.


That's interesting.

Scary, but interesting.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

What Les is trying to say is that there should be no consequences whatsoever for what people say...


In an ideal world that'd be true...

But sorry (not sorry) if someone speaks out of turn with someone I love they're gonna get a slap.

Same way business' should be free to fire jerk offs like the one in the OP...
I don't think it spits in the face of anything to be brutally honest.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




The amendment protects the principle from very specific attack... outside of that, the principle is on it's own.


Either you defend it from all attacks, or you don't. You either believe in the principle; or you don't.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408




But sorry (not sorry) if someone speaks out of turn with someone I love they're gonna get a slap.


Just like when someone mocks the prophet, they're going to be murdered.



posted on Aug, 30 2017 @ 05:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert




Have they invested the technology to read people's thoughts yet?

Not sure if you are more up-to-date on current technology, or if you are being hyperbolic.


I am being hyperbolic, yes. But a tweet is essentially a passing thought, expressed through that particular medium.


Speech and thought are two very separate things. One is private and personal. The other is vocalized through a variety of mediums that is made public through their own volition.

There may be consequences for one, but never consequences for the other.



new topics




 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join