.
"I disapprove of what you say,
But will defend to the death your right to say it."
The above was at one time a popular motto in America, the land of the free; but somehow, somewhere; print media, broadcast media, social media, employers, bar associations, business managers, and even educators lost their way and became intolerant.
Thus far in America, we have managed to obtain laws prohibiting discrimination based upon gender, age, race, and religion; but none to regulate political bias. I think it's high time that our legislators begin addressing this issue.
_
The New Discrimination
Moderator: Moderators
- WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
- WebersHome
- Guru
- Posts: 1789
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
- Location: Oregon
- Been thanked: 24 times
Re: The New Discrimination
Post #2.
My primary concern is livelihood. People have been losing their jobs, as well as threatened to lose their licenses to practice law and real estate etc, and suffering boycotts and losing distributors for their manufactured goods simply because of differing political opinions.
Another weapon in the arsenal of the anti free speech movement is a tort action called a SLAPP suit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)
The end game of a SLAPP suit isn't compensation, no, it's all about intimidation, i.e. extortion. The suit's purpose is to obtain a non disclosure agreement wherein the plaintiff will drop its case if the defendant agrees to stop speaking out against the plaintiff's behavior and/or its products and services.
In other words; a SLAPP suit's purpose is to shut you up; and if you don't shut up, they will proceed to hound you in court for however long it takes till mounting legal expenses totally ruin you.
_
My primary concern is livelihood. People have been losing their jobs, as well as threatened to lose their licenses to practice law and real estate etc, and suffering boycotts and losing distributors for their manufactured goods simply because of differing political opinions.
Another weapon in the arsenal of the anti free speech movement is a tort action called a SLAPP suit (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)
The end game of a SLAPP suit isn't compensation, no, it's all about intimidation, i.e. extortion. The suit's purpose is to obtain a non disclosure agreement wherein the plaintiff will drop its case if the defendant agrees to stop speaking out against the plaintiff's behavior and/or its products and services.
In other words; a SLAPP suit's purpose is to shut you up; and if you don't shut up, they will proceed to hound you in court for however long it takes till mounting legal expenses totally ruin you.
_
- Miles
- Savant
- Posts: 5179
- Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
- Has thanked: 434 times
- Been thanked: 1614 times
Re: The New Discrimination
Post #3Exactly what discrimination against political bias do you see? Personally, I see justification in laws against discrimination due to gender, age, race, all characteristics we don't choose, but not religion or political preferences; chosen positions; although, I am open to argument for their inclusion.WebersHome wrote: ↑Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:36 pm .
"I disapprove of what you say,
But will defend to the death your right to say it."
The above was at one time a popular motto in America, the land of the free; but somehow, somewhere; print media, broadcast media, social media, employers, bar associations, business managers, and even educators lost their way and became intolerant.
Thus far in America, we have managed to obtain laws prohibiting discrimination based upon gender, age, race, and religion; but none to regulate political bias. I think it's high time that our legislators begin addressing this issue.
_
.
- Purple Knight
- Prodigy
- Posts: 3543
- Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
- Has thanked: 1144 times
- Been thanked: 735 times
Re: The New Discrimination
Post #4But we should discriminate against what people say. Why should we be obligated to defend people who are wrong?
This is not to say they should be punished by government for saying distasteful things, but they absolutely will have fewer people willing to hang out with them, talk with them, and do business with them.
What's the alternative? For the government to mandate that I sell my cow to him? Mandate that I be his friend? No. I don't want to.
People do have the right to say distasteful things.
But they're going to have to face the natural consequences.
This is not to say they should be punished by government for saying distasteful things, but they absolutely will have fewer people willing to hang out with them, talk with them, and do business with them.
What's the alternative? For the government to mandate that I sell my cow to him? Mandate that I be his friend? No. I don't want to.
People do have the right to say distasteful things.
But they're going to have to face the natural consequences.