If I don't subscribe to your ideology, and can force ATS to ban you, is that right?

Logarock

Many haven't caught it but Phil has made comments to the effect that He feels his life may be in danger here. Well be sure at this rate the day will come soon for public opposes of certain ideas. Like a head on a platter.

INDEED.

In the early years on ATS, I doubt there was a week that went by that I didn't feel and think that at least a handful up to a dozen or so of my respondents would have been happy to have killed me and would have felt smugly self-righteous that they'd relieved the world of "a dangerous idiot religionist Christian."

. . . . so much so that sometimes I was actually concerned that some were going to start trying to actively ferret out my identity and location and stalking me just for such deeds.

And I don't think that danger is THAT far removed, still.


I wonder if that attitude is part of what Beezer is exploring with the OP.

reply to post by beezzer

So I'm watching the "tolerant" crowd fling insults.

Speaking of tolerance :-)

“Free speech” hypocrites: Dixie Chicks, “Duck Dynasty” and America’s pointless shell arguments

In March of 2003, the drumbeat for war in Iraq had reached a fevered pitch. Despite massive protests throughout the world, over 70 percent of Americans supported the invasion. In that month, presidential approval also shot over 70 percent, the highest it would be for the remainder of George W. Bush’s tenure in office. Despite these currents, Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks spoke out during a London show on the eve of the war, saying “Just so you know, we’re on the good side with y’all. We do not want this war, this violence, and we’re ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas.”

When media reports about the concert got back to the United States, all hell broke loose. Their record sales plummeted, they fell down the Billboard charts and a full scale boycott swept through their largely right-wing country music fan base. Country radio stations across the U.S. pulled them from circulation, with radio network giant Cumulus banning the Dixie Chicks from its more than 250 local stations. Former fans gathered to burn previously-purchased CDs and even, in one media spectacle, crush them with a giant farm tractor.

Unsurprisingly, conservatives welcomed this effort to economically discipline political speech. President Bush himself said of the debacle: “The Dixie Chicks are free to speak their mind. They can say what they want to say … they shouldn’t have their feelings hurt just because some people don’t want to buy their records when they speak out. … Freedom is a two-way street. ” For Bush and other conservative cheerleaders of the war, you can speak your mind all you want, but you should be subject to private economic disciplining if you say something unpopular. That’s just the dialectic of freedom working itself out.

This is all well and good except conservatives don’t actually believe this. Their support for economically coercing the speech of popular entertainers is curiously contingent upon the content of the speech in question.

I know this doesn't mean you beezzer - you no doubt fully supported the Dixie Chicks back then

But, it's an interesting piece - worth a read. It shows there's nothing new under the sun - certainly not this duck thing - it's all been done

Also interesting and relevant:

Justine Sacco Fired After 'AIDS' Tweet Controversy

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A public relations executive for the prominent New York-based Internet media company IAC lost her job on Saturday after she posted a message joking about AIDS in Africa and race on her Twitter account, sparking an online furor.

"Going to Africa. Hope I don't get AIDS. Just kidding. I'm white!" Justine Sacco, who was IAC's corporate communications director, wrote in a message on Twitter on Friday, shortly before taking a flight.

The company distanced itself from the message.

"The offensive comment does not reflect the views and values of IAC," the company said in a statement on Saturday. "We take this issue very seriously, and we have parted ways with the employee in question."

Do you think they were wrong to fire her?

Spiramirabilis


Also interesting and relevant:

Justine Sacco Fired After 'AIDS' Tweet Controversy

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A public relations executive for the prominent New York-based Internet media company IAC lost her job on Saturday after she posted a message joking about AIDS in Africa and race on her Twitter account, sparking an online furor.

"Going to Africa. Hope I don't get AIDS. Just kidding. I'm white!" Justine Sacco, who was IAC's corporate communications director, wrote in a message on Twitter on Friday, shortly before taking a flight.

The company distanced itself from the message.

"The offensive comment does not reflect the views and values of IAC," the company said in a statement on Saturday. "We take this issue very seriously, and we have parted ways with the employee in question."

Do you think they were wrong to fire her?

Interesting. I'm familiar with the issue. Basically, she tweeted that, got on a 12 hour flight and was fired before she got off the plane.

I guess it's okay to fire someone for being insensitive.
I guess it's okay to fire someone for making a judgment error.

No. She should not have been fired. She said something stupid. If we fired someone for saying something stupid, we'd have 100% unemployment.

Has our society become so thin-skinned, that even the merest slight gets severe punishment?

I turn a deaf ear to racial issues for the most part. My father is not white. Neither am I, I suppose. There isn't anything I haven't heard before. One more slight will not damage my fragile self-esteem.

People need to get over themselves.

This victim thought process has infected our society faster than mono during the prom.

Just my humble opinion.

Agree. Disagree. As you wish.

And Merry Christmas. I hope you and yours have a great time and a very Happy New Year.

reply to post by beezzer


You've set a very high bar there - for yourself most of all I think

:-)

Thank you beezzer - and Merry Christmas to you and yours too

And I wish you a very happy new year as well

It's Christmas Eve - it really is time to step away from the computer and call it a night

Have a lovely evening

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


I'd rather set a bar too high and fail occasionally, than set it too low and never grow.

Have a pleasant evening my friend.

ltinycdancerg
reply to post by beezzer

 

lol oh you

actually its a leotard and tutu, not a dress- and that is a real photo of me- it complies with ATS's rules (the pic I originally wanted to use was denied b/c it was "too revealing") so I've had first hand experience with this particular issue.

OKay, hold the presses, who cares about this thread anymore? Sorry Beezer this thread has taken off in a more interesting direction!..
I wanna see the picture of YOU they wouldn't let you use!!!!!

reply to post by beezzer





If you own something free speech does not matter it is not a public right. ATS and A&E are not public owned. Is this really so hard to understand people.



Should anyone be able to come inside your house? Why not? Because it is not a public place.

reply to post by beezzer


There used to be a 'divide' between the private and the public. That 'divide' was erroded in the sixtes largely by the woman's movement making "the personal public and political". I understand and agree with the points but our society is still learning how to handle this unity of public and private life.

That said, he had the right to say what he did, the network had the right to fire an employee, yadda, yadda, yadda. It's not a matter of right or wrong but of decretion.

I would have fired him for being stupid enough "say what he really thought" in a public forum.

You have the right to say what you want and to do what you want (The American Civil Liberties Union works day and night to preserve that right) if - and this is where decretion comes into play - you are willing to accept the consequences. And if you can't control your 'impulses' enough to consider the consequences of your actions, then you really, really shouldn't be in the public eye.

Everybody say's stupid stuff sometimes and regrets it (I'm sure President Obama is regreting his 'promise' and he is paying) but to have to be willing to 'man-up' to the blow-back.

reply to post by Kali74


Except that there is evidence that Shepherd was beaten to death in a drug deal gone wrong, not for being homosexual. That still makes him a victim of crime, but not a martyr.

reply to post by beezzer


just curious, if a muslim was talking about blowing up buildings and killing jews in the name of allah would you support his freedom of speech the way you support phil robertsons freedom of speech?

reply to post by ketsuko


Of course that's what you were told...

Police arrested Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson shortly after the attack, finding the bloody gun and Shepard's shoes and wallet in their truck.[20] Henderson and McKinney later tried to persuade their girlfriends to provide alibis for them.[21]
At trial, McKinney offered various rationales to justify his actions. He originally pleaded the gay panic defense, arguing that he and Henderson were driven to temporary insanity by alleged sexual advances by Shepard. At another point, McKinney's lawyer stated that they had wanted to rob Shepard but never intended to kill him.[20]
The prosecutor in the case alleged that McKinney and Henderson pretended to be gay in order to gain Shepard's trust.[22] During the trial, Kristen Price, girlfriend of McKinney, testified that Henderson and McKinney had "pretended they were gay to get [Shepard] in the truck and rob him".[23][24] McKinney and Henderson went to the Fireside Lounge and selected Shepard after he arrived. McKinney alleged that Shepard asked them for a ride home.[23]
After befriending him, they took him to a remote area outside of Laramie where they robbed him, assaulted him severely, and tied him to a fence with a rope from McKinney's truck while Shepard pleaded for his life. Media reports often contained the graphic account of the pistol whipping and his fractured skull. It was reported that Shepard was beaten so brutally that his face was completely covered in blood, except where it had been partially washed clean by his tears.[25][26] Both girlfriends also testified that neither McKinney nor Henderson were under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time.[27][28]
Henderson pleaded guilty on April 5, 1999 and agreed to testify against McKinney to avoid the death penalty; he received two consecutive life sentences. The jury in McKinney's trial found him guilty of felony murder. As they began to deliberate on the death penalty, Shepard's parents brokered a deal, resulting in McKinney receiving two consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole.[29]
Henderson and McKinney were incarcerated in the Wyoming State Penitentiary in Rawlins, later being transferred to other prisons because of overcrowding.

wikipedia