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.

 

Tasteless jokes are now a crime?

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
The city worker that posted a controversial joke on his Facebook page has been fired, and may face prosecution for a "bias crime".

The firing I can somewhat see, as he did identify himself as a city worker on the page with the jokes. But a bias crime? Since when are sick or tasteless jokes ILLEGAL??? He did not threaten the life of the president he made fun of the president in a politically incorrect way.

Have the rules changed? Can we no longer make fun of the president without risking prosecution?

The thought police are coming...


Petronzio posted a greeting on Monday, Martin Luther King Day, saying, "Chris would like to wish everyone a happy James Earl Ray day." Ray is the man who assassinated King.

The page also included a Kentucky Fried Chicken ad superimposed on a picture of the White House and a racist slur referring to Obama.

Borough Administrator Anthony Iacono says the Bergen County Prosecutor's Office and Paramus police are investigating whether the posting could be considered a bias crime.


abclocal.go.com.../local&id=6616838
abclocal.go.com.../local&id=6616838




posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:01 PM
link   
The Thought Police are Coming!

About flipping time!

When Freedom of Speech becomes an excuse to be a bigoted ass - I have to step back and think about the greater good of the Nation as a whole.

Glad they opened up a position for someone who isn't a complete embarassment to the workforce and job title.


*edit to thought police myself.

[edit on 1/22/09 by GENERAL EYES]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Borough Administrator Anthony Iacono says the Bergen County Prosecutor's Office and Paramus police are investigating whether the posting could be considered a bias crime.


I'll save them some time.


Amendment I
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.

www.billofrights.com...



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Tuning Spork
 



I don't think Congress and the Federal Courts are the ones investigating this issue.

Might want to think a bit more about that tidbit.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:10 PM
link   
The guy will get his job back or an out of court settlement. Voicing political views is not a criminal offense.

The prosecutors should go back to grade school and trash their law degrees and learn about the Bill of Rights.


Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
reply to post by Tuning Spork
 



I don't think Congress and the Federal Courts are the ones investigating this issue.

Might want to think a bit more about that tidbit.


Doesnt matter, the Bill of Rights apply to everyone in any city or state. And states and cities cannot have laws that are against the guaranteed rights of the people of the country.

The city was in the wrong right off the bat. Unless this guy used city owned webspace or servers, the city will loose in a court case.



Cheers!!!!

[edit on 22-1-2009 by RFBurns]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
[edit on 22-1-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
The Thought Police are Coming!

About flipping time!

When Freedom of Speech becomes an excuse to be a bigoted ass - I have to step back and think about the greater good of the Nation as a whole.

Glad they opened up a position for someone who isn't a complete embarassment to the workforce and job title.


*edit to thought police myself.

[edit on 1/22/09 by GENERAL EYES]


That sounds like the words I would expect from a socialist dictator. Surpressing freedom of speech is not thinking of the nation as a whole, it is thinking of the select few.

I think it is you who needs to back up and re-think about that tidbit.



Cheers!!!!

[edit on 22-1-2009 by RFBurns]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 



If the Bill of Rights is the end all be all of Justice in this country - please help explain the need for all those thousands of lawbooks and lawyers.

Obama has rights as well, and I don't think for a moment that being portrayed in that light and manner was given of his consent.

Ever heard about Defamation of Character? Libel? Does anything pertaining to laws and CIVIL liberties factor into your conclusions or are you fixated on the Bill to the point of blindness?

There was nothing "civil" about what that guy posted. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns
That sounds like the words I would expect from a socialist dictator. Surpressing freedom of speech is not thinking of the nation as a whole, it is thinking of the select few.


I'm flattered. Thank you for noticing my stance with such clarity.

But here's the deal - "thinking of the select few"???

So what you're saying is that this Nation is better off under the rule of bigoted, rude, sensationalistic and trashy people than it is under people who conduct their greivences with a higher degree of class, tact and social conscience?

My gods man, do you really understand what you're advocating here?


*edit : spelling

[edit on 1/22/09 by GENERAL EYES]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
I don't think Congress and the Federal Courts are the ones investigating this issue.


The 14th Amendement makes it clear that no state can take away rights guaranteed by the federal Constitution.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
The man posted his opinions and views and he is entitle to do just that.

So he will walk with probably a settlement after he sue its employer.

Plain and simple.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES

If the Bill of Rights is the end all be all of Justice in this country - please help explain the need for all those thousands of lawbooks and lawyers.


The reason for lawyers and lawbooks is so that they can represent clients over REAL legal issues. In this case, the guy could press charges on the city and the lawyers stupid enough to try to take him to trial for violation of civil rights. Im sure you have hard of civil rights havent you?


Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
Obama has rights as well, and I don't think for a moment that being portrayed in that light and manner was given of his consent.


Oh so from your prospective, everyone needs permission to believe what they wish, think what they wish, and say what they wish? This isnt a socialist state btw, its still the United States of America.

Now unless they abolish the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Decleration of Independance...that man has the right to say what he thinks and what he feels. He did not do it in a violent manner, he did not cause any physical harm, nor did he bring society to a screeching hault.

It is within his constitutional rights to express his opinion, just as it is right here your right to express yours, and the right for any of us to express our opinions too.


Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
Ever heard about Defamation of Character? Libel? Does anything pertaining to laws and CIVIL liberties factor into your conclusions or are you fixated on the Bill to the point of blindness?

There was nothing "civil" about what that guy posted. Sorry.


The guy did not defame Obama's character any more than the political cartoons published in every news paper in this country. And heaven forbid that anyone steps all over YOUR civil rights while you gladly try to say others do not have any civil rights to speak their mind. Are you blinded by your lack of understanding to what individual rights means?

Define your version of civil for us please. Lets see how many follow your narrow view on civil liberties and rights.



Cheers!!!!

[edit on 22-1-2009 by RFBurns]



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns
The guy will get his job back or an out of court settlement. Voicing political views is not a criminal offense.

The prosecutors should go back to grade school and trash their law degrees and learn about the Bill of Rights.


Cheers!!!!


I think they are dealing with two different issues. The city may not be able to prosecute the guy for his beliefs or even his demonstration of how he felt but they do have the right to consider him unfit for employment by the city.

If they have rules in place that address behavior and if his behavior is an embarrassment or a liability for the city then they have the right to terminate his employment. IMHO



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES

My gods man, do you really understand what you're advocating here?


*edit : spelling

[edit on 1/22/09 by GENERAL EYES]


Absolutely, and I will stand toe to toe with anyone till the world comes to an end about individual rights and guarantees by this country's founding documents.

Care to dance?...I got plenty of time.


Cheers!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightSkyeB4Dawn

If they have rules in place that address behavior and if his behavior is an embarrassment or a liability for the city then they have the right to terminate his employment. IMHO


So if your job says that at no time, on or off the clock, you cannot practice your rights as an American or you will be fired will settle with you and you would have no problem with that?

Its one thing to be an idiot while on the clock, but when your off the clock, that is YOUR time and the city, no matter what their law or rules might be, does not apply on your free time.


Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Funny.

Everyone wants the "rights" but no one wants the "responsibilities for their actions".

No wonder this country has gone to hell in a handbasket.



No one SUPPRESSED this guys RIGHT to post what he did, they're simply REACTING to his "freedom of speech".



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
I'm not sure what taking his job and prosecuting his thoughts is going to prove to him or anyone else except that they are not free to think for themselves. It isn't likely to alter his perception of humanity, unless it's for the worse. But that might be good in some people's eyes. That way next year when he decides to "celebrate" his freedom from being able to hold gainful employment under his ever deepening resentment for others with "fireworks" in a public place all the people who wanted him fired can pat themselves on the back and tell everyone else how right they were about this guy.

The Bill of Rights isn't about about our freedoms as Americans, it's about our freedoms as human beings.

While I may hold this man in contempt for his thoughts, I see no right by anyone to deny him his basic needs for being ignorant and bigoted. If that were the law, the unemployment rate would be exploding faster than it already is. And perhaps the first to go should be anyone who not only propagates hate by their speech, but by their actions which they proclaim are to "deny hate" but in fact only reinforce hateful values.



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
Funny.

Everyone wants the "rights" but no one wants the "responsibilities for their actions".

No wonder this country has gone to hell in a handbasket.



What was irresponsible about this fella putting up some picture and a quote about having a happy James Earl Ray day? Its only a picture, and a few words.

It sounds to me like it is more of a personal nerve issue than any legal issue.

Im sure there are plenty of defense attourneys that will gladly take up this no-brainer, for sure win case.


Originally posted by GENERAL EYES
No one SUPPRESSED this guys RIGHT to post what he did, they're simply REACTING to his "freedom of speech".



And I am sure the counter reaction will be just as swift too. I seriously doubt there would be any judge out there that would even consider hearing this case. It will get settled out of court.

As the song goes...."Fight For Your Rights"..and I am sure this fella will.



Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2009 @ 08:43 PM
link   
I figure if the Phelps clan can say what they do, this fellow should be fine.

Also, just to add a a different twist to it.

From the article.


Rather, he said, the borough is retaliating against him because he is an active member of a union that is suing the borough for unfair labor practices.

He said he also has complained to the U.S. Labor Department that the borough is failing to pay workers for overtime.


Could be more to this than just the facebook posting.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join