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.
What a grossly hypocritical assertion. You are one of the most hateful writers on ATS against my values and perspective. Sweet.
Worse, when you write, it doesn't some across as "merely" against my values and perspective, it comes across as personally hateful and hostile. Yet you dare to pontificate as though you are the sanctimonious righteous one in terms of "hate" and "racism!"
Who defines "hate?" Who defines racism?
WeAreAWAKE
So...if the employee isn't specifically told in writing that they must follow such-and-such a rule, they have a good chance of winning a law suit against the employer if fired for that offence.
Debate and have fun.
jimmyx
you people on the right do realize that there are many states in this country, where you can legally get fired from your job if you are gay? it's actually held up in state courts....you people on the right do realize that there are gays still being beat up, and sometimes killed because they are gay?....how about if we did that to all rednecks?..."hey, JB, did you know we have a redneck working here, and he is disrupting and bothering the rest of us while we work" ?... JB answers "well, if it is bothering my workers, I'll fire him"
and you people wonder why GLAAD is like that?
maus80
This is argument based on assumption, which I dislike. I never said he should be punished. I do believe Termination Rights in legal contracts are just. I also believe you should be allowed to fire someone because you don't like their new haircut, if that's what you want. If anything I am for MORE freedom than law currently allows.
daskakik
reply to post by beezzer
I'm not moving goal posts. I'm reminding you that T&C are common in private contracts and that this creates a grey area where you claim one doesn't exist.
OpinionatedB
I agree with you, freedom of speech is a scarey road, especially like you said, when it can mean your job because of something you tweeted or said on facebook!edit on 22-12-2013 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)
beezzer
maus80
beezzer
reply to post by maus80
So do don't believe in free speech. You just believe in speech that coincides with your ideology?
I believe in free speech, as protected by the constitution. Meaning I believe nobody should be prosecuted by government for what they say. What private content owners do and do not allow is totally up to them though, as is what they do with that content - I believe equally that these rights should be protected.
Yet you feel that Phil Robertson should be punished by expressing his free speech.
Logarock
jimmyx
you people on the right do realize that there are many states in this country, where you can legally get fired from your job if you are gay? it's actually held up in state courts....you people on the right do realize that there are gays still being beat up, and sometimes killed because they are gay?....how about if we did that to all rednecks?..."hey, JB, did you know we have a redneck working here, and he is disrupting and bothering the rest of us while we work" ?... JB answers "well, if it is bothering my workers, I'll fire him"
and you people wonder why GLAAD is like that?
Are you saying that all folks that really don't care for the gay lifestyle are "peckerwoods".
Hay but some back woods white guy is the perfect face for the new PC homophobe and race thingy! Even though it was moneid white educated and business men that created the southern slave culture. No wonder "peckerwoods" are the way they are.
How would gays like it if the poster boy for gay, say like....fill in your own blank.... were replaced with some tattooed man raping convict from cell block "C"? Someone called "Daddy Packer" or "Mr. Tuff Love"?
BO XIAN
reply to post by buster2010
You are one of the most hateful writers on ATS against my values and perspective.
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.[69]
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[69]