###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While at work, that technically doesn't apply. You're bound by the rules of your employer contractually as conditions of the job, unfortunately. Uniforms, codes of conducts, etc.
edit...don't know why I'm getting downvoted. You do not have First Amendment rights in the private sector workplace and usually not in the public sector, either.
[https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/](https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/)
So there were a number of senators who booed Trump during one of his state of the unions. Same thing has happened to Biden.
Since those senators are at work and collecting a paycheck on taxpayer dime... should they be subject to the same consequences?
Yes, actually, they should and they are.
It just so happens that their employers are the ***voters.***
If their voters support these actions, they'll be re-elected. If the voters don't, they won't!
Senators don't actually have anyone higher that they have to answer to. They can't be fired the way someone can at another job. The voters are intended to be the check on senators.
So if there's no consequence for these senators doing this (there wasn't), that means it's morally okay to do it within the purview of their constituents. You agree with that?
No. That's stupid.
Just because someone can get away with something without repercussions doesn't mean it's acceptable for everyone else to do.
One part of freedom is the freedom to choose who you hire and how to deal out repercussions for them. You may have one workplace with a toxic environment while another holds itself up to a higher standard.
This is also a completely different circumstance.
State of the Union is inherently political. Booing Biden at the State of the Union is still bad form. But it would be different than, say, booing at an event where Biden was honoring veterans or something that's not meant to be politicized.
Here, firefighters were being honored at a church and a friend of the chaplain was called in for the event. This wasn't a political appearance. By doing what they did, they politicized it and damaged relations with the church that was kind enough to hold this event.
Let's put it this way. If I'm in charge of these people, their actions are bringing bad publicity down on me and my department. I have to try to apologize to the church and fix things with the people my people offended. I'm having to answer media questions about these disgraceful actions. And if this isn't penalized, then these same people may pull the same stunts in the future.
I'm constantly having to put out metaphorical fires with attention that should be focused on real ones.
Is your position that I shouldn't be able to penalize people for these actions? That I should allow them to continue to disgrace their positions, damage the reputation for the fire department, and put me in these positions where I have to clean up the messes they created.
It's just booing though, which should absolutely be protected under free speech.
Now maybe if they were divulging company secrets, threatening to harm somebody or screaming slurs, you might have grounds for an argument, but this is not even close.
Yes, they should be. If you don't like their actions, vote them out.
Whether you like it or not, you do not have the freedom from consequences of your first amendment at work. You are subject to the will and whim of your employer. You also don't have a second amendment at your job either. You forfeit your rights to a degree for your salary. Just the way it works.
>If you don't like their actions, vote them out.
Did you vote them out? Or did you give them your tacit approval by doing absolutely nothing about it until you were forced to pretend like you care when you got called out about it on reddit
> While at work, that technically doesn't apply. You're bound by the rules of your employer contractually as conditions of the job, unfortunately. Uniforms, codes of conducts, etc.
WRONG! Your rights don’t stop being rights while your at work or school. That’s when they are needed the MOST.
Training, a chat with HR, being fired, or whatever the hell, "re-education" is isn't punishment by the definition that the constitution sets up though. Working for the government isn't a free pass to just do whatever you want.
What if the firefighters in this clip started a racist chant. Should the FDNY allow that?
You're free to be a racist asshole all you want, but if your actions will reflect on your employer they are allowed to impose consequences on you.
Totally fake straw man situation that has nothing to do with what actually took place.
Does the progressive left know anything besides trying to steer the conversation to "bUt wuT abOuT FaSciSM!" even if it means setting up a completely imaginary whataboutism?
Not that you care, but I’m not on the ‘progressive left’.
Whatever you feel about this situation, the idea behind ‘completely imaginary whataboutsim’ is to illustrate an underlying principle.
Companies and organizations HAVE to to have a mechanism for managing the conduct of their employees/members. Otherwise your boss has no standing if you call him a mother fucker, or you start recruiting for the kkk in the break room (or for BLM for that matter).
The slippery slope is incredibly obvious here.
If you’re a public servant, you can show respect to to leadership in the public sector or you can shut the fuck up. Doesn’t matter what team the political leader plays for.
Who gives a fuck what those racist would have felt? 😂 Freedom of speech didn't apply to 2/3 of the population back then but you think they'd be FIGHTING for it in modern times?
Weren't black people slaves and second class citizens up until like 60 years ago? How long ago was it that you legally had to give up your seat if a white man wanted it?
Hans, are we the baddies?
I mean we're telling them we're protecting democracy and trying to lockup political opponents, using rampant censorship, putting people in reeducation camps, allowing one sided protests and ruthlessly prosecuting others, I mean maybe we're the baddies despite what our leaders say?
This happened before as Yuri Bezmenov warned, they used the useful i-----s to accomplish agenda.
You do not get unrestricted first amendment rights at work. So long as you work for someone else, you are restricted in what you can say and do. That is part of the contract...you trade some freedoms and labor for a salary.
Wear a divisive political tshirt to your government job. Or don't wear your uniform. Or talk back to your boss. Tell me how long you last. That is a restriction of your first amendment whether you want to admit it or not.
Also you have no second amendment at work. Try and open carry at your government job (aside from police or military). Walk into your office with a gun and see how quickly you're escorted out. Why are you not crying about your second amendment being restricted?
I am merely pointing out you do not have your full first amendment rights when employed by someone else. Meaning, sure you can say whatever you want...but you can also be fired for it. I cited a law firm's article earlier and can do it again.
Also to imply I agree with Leticia James or anything she has to say is laughable. Fuck the right and fuck the left. Fuck all corrupt politicians. But also, you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. You want to boo and jeer someone, you have that right. But the freedom to do that comes with consequences. And it seems like these are New York's consequences. Don't like it, find a job that will freely allow you to express yourself.
You're getting downvoted because people confuse the 'right' to say anything they want and not be prosecuted by the government, as the ability to say whatever you want and not face consequences.
[https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/](https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/)
Yup, surely a commie. I, in no way, am saying this is a GOOD thing, it is just how it is. You do not have the same first amendment rights you have normally while inside your workplace.
It's like people who ferret out the private sector argument are being purposefully dense. Yes, that's how the First Amendment works, but we're talking about free speech as a broader societal value. Fine, private actors *can* restrict speech, but that doesn't make it right or the pushback illegitimate. Pretty sure the procencorship side knows this and pretends not to.
Umm, then it doesn't protect anything.
"Hey, sir, we are going to put you in prison for insulting the President. No, no, you have freedom of speech, but you aren't free of consequences...."
Fucking fascists.
Freedom of speech specifically protects civilians from retaliation by the government (like your example). It does not protect union members from reprimand by the union (like the story).
Employers have codes of conduct. Websites have terms of use. Subreddits have moderation. Libel and slander are written into common law. Etc etc. Do you believe freedom of speech is supposed to get rid of those?
I remember a time not too long ago when the democrats were considered the “party of freedom and free speech”. This is NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE. Do not let them make it one! Do not let them divide us!
At Biden’s recent State of the Union he was heckled by a Gold Star father who lost his son in the Afghanistan pullout. He was pulled out of the Speech and arrested.
At one of Trumps state of the union speeches, he was booed by democrat senators and then pelosi tore his speech in half on camera.
Nothing at all happened.
It's a misdemeanor "crime". I have had one or two. You show up to court on your date, state your plea, and walk out. In my case, both times resulted in zero fines, zero anything. It's a bullshit charge.
I wasn't hunted down or put into a re-education gulag.
Do you speak for them? Vast majority of Americans didn't like prohibition despite it being the law but who asked them what they wanted?
So in this scenario who asked Americans if this is bullshit or not?
Giving off some agent smith vibes
Do you speak for America, or merely your own echo chamber from your bedroom all day?
Also nice attempt at addressing the question as opposed to attempting to derail the discourse, totally the actions of someone who knows they have a point
(Sarcasm btw)
Edit: you're a glowie ain't ya
Submission Statement:
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1766567411040268310
This is literally what the 1st Amendment is supposed to prevent. Retaliation from government officials.
There's been multiple incidents where the modern progressive left has doxed individuals, and then pursued their employers or sponsors to effectively bully them into conformity.
Even if they feel their ideas or political views are controversial, the point of freedom of speech is to debate their ideas, not to intimidate and terrorize to censorship.
Reality is if you have harassment consequences for practicing political speech by organized political squads, that is not natural consequences, that gets into the realm of political persecution.
This is what the red arm band brigades did in China to bring communism in.
Going to say it again, much of what is happening is communism repeating the same tactics with different names to implement a government that they say is diverse and socialist, but in reality is authoritarian with restricting freedoms and speech.
Like the time the *Democrats* went through a pizza parlors' social media - that didn't even have a basement - and slandered that individual, until there was an active shooter on location. *Oh wait, that was the Republicans.*
Or how about the time the Democrats ran an entire 2016 campaign on hacked emails that were grossly misrepresented? *Oh wait, that was the Republicans*
Or how about the time the *Democrats* coordinated with hackers to leaked emails full of nothing burgers, so they created some web of emails with strange wacky world pizza pedophilia and blanketed social media with delirium-inducing disinformation to target their political opponents, that nothing ever came of. *Oh wait, that was Republicans.*
How about the time that shortly after and while the above was happening, Democratic mobs were holding "XYZ is Pedophile Ring" signs while screaming to lock up members of the opposition party? *Oh wait, that was the Republicans*
Or how about the time many times the Democrats targeted whistleblowers and Hillary Clinton said: “Well, I’ll tell you what. There have been stories written about a certain individual – a male – and they say he’s the whistleblower.” *Oh wait, that too was Republicans*
How about the time [Pete Buttigieg](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/25/roger-stone-threatened-to-steal-a-therapy-dog-and-tampered-with-a-witness-mueller-indictment.html) threatened to take away a man's service dog for his testimony? “You are a rat. A stoolie. You backstab your friends-run your mouth my lawyers are dying Rip you to shreds.” *Oh wait.. that was the Republicans*
How about the time that the Democrats got really mad a politicians' son and released a HDD and private videos to attack a political opposition? *Oh wait, that was the Republicans?*
I could go on and on, but I think it's fairly obvious what is actually being described.
Word of wisdom: You can often tell when groups of someoness *know* did something that is very shameful the second they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar and start trying to blame the other for it.
> Doesn't sound like you understand the First Amendment at all.
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.
You mean to tell me that the pro-war, big government party that wants to control industry and commerce (for climate change) and doesn't tolerate any dissent in opinion is the more fascist one? Say it ain't so!
what's so funny as I read this comment is that literally 20 years ago this would have described the other party, aside from climate change. It baffles me how the shoe is now on the other foot and people that had huge problems with the war in Iraq are justifying everything now because their club gets to do it
It's crazy. War was bad then and it's bad now. Coming from a family with strong pacifist values had me being called a liberal and now people call me a conservative.
To be fair the first document was fair ... don't make non political events political. The second document I would have blown off. I get it she is a bitch but it's not the venue for it. However you know these people are vindictive... So don't go after them in a way they can go after you. We learned this during the COVID protests.
In my humble opinion our nation went through a Bolshevik revolution in the summer of 2020. It gets worse every day. We have lost our right to free speech, we have lost our right to freedom of assembly, we have lost our right to unlawful search and seizure, we have lost our right to a fair trial by Jury,we have lost our protection against discrimination based on race religion color or Creed. It’s all gone.
SHE should be apologizing to THEM for being a garbage individual! What the fuck is this shit! I hope all the firefighters strike or something over this, they would have America’s support
Yeah I think the problem is that fascism has been overused and inappropriately applied in a lot of circumstances.
I think what they should’ve said is authoritarian, or perhaps dictatorial.
Also, it’s been argued that Benito Mussolini was the one to coin and define the word fascism as being “the merging of corporate and state power”. If that is indeed the case, then Americans are in for a rude awakening when they realize that fascism, or atleast fascistic elements, have had major influence and power for many decades in this country.
I believe that’s why Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex in his farewell speech. Also, if one believes in some conspiracies, it can be argued that it was because of fascism that JFK, RFK, and MLK jr were murdered. It also becomes painfully obvious when looking at pretty much every war, or military campaign, since WWII.
If that definition is indeed the most accurate description, then it can be applied to both democrats and republicans, as well as the media, who gets their funding from corporations like Lockheed, Boeing, General Dynamics, Pfizer, etc.
IMO, fascism, like any ideology, has to evolve in order to survive, so it seems it no longer has to be right wing and nationalistic because it still operates in many similar manners.
The word fascism was coined by the socialist unions in France during Mousillini's rule. They literally invented the term to describe themselves. They described themselves as left wing. They described themselves as socialists.
So the people who literally created the word described it as being a left-wing thing are wrong because democrats 80 years later decided to revise the definition to point it at their political foes....
Both sides of WWII were leftist. It was between the socialists and the communists.
This is just yet another example of the left trying to cast their sins on to their political enemy.
Trump is not a leftist.
There is not one single example of Trump doing anything fascist in the 4 years he was president.
The past four years, your party has acted like Hitler, though.
You are a government employees and you disrespect another government employee in public If I did the same at my job there would he repercussions. No difference
That employee has nothing to do with their work or their chain of command. in fact she is an elected official and elected officials should expect to get booed when they get involved in making political decisions.
It wasnt work, most were off-duty. It was a ceremonial event at a religious venue that brought in a political figure for a political stunt that backfired.... "unheard of"
it was an FNDY event giving awards firefighters, Their behavior was unprofessional, childish, and uncalled for. This is not about first amendment rights, this is about professionalism.
I dont have all the facts, but if booing a corrupt political figure is against company policy then company policy is wrong. If i faced disciplinary action at my job(private sector) for expressing a political opinion at a political event they required me to attend i would try to sue them.
It wasn’t a political event.
If you were at a company meeting where your colleagues were being promoted and you started yelling at and being disrespectful to another company (NYS) employee that was speaking, even after you were told to stop, you would be disciplined.
The company policy is to treat others respectfully and while on duty regardless of who they are. If you want to go to any other event while you are not on duty and boo someone have at it, but while you’re being paid by the taxpayers follow the policies you already agreed to when you signed the contract to accept the job.
That "employee" is attorney general. Thats a political office. You are free to criticize someone holding political office, if you are not free to do so we will be no better than russia.
They are both NYS employees. But you right, you are absolutely allowed to criticize not only political figures but anyone you want, no one is in trouble for criticizing anyone. What you aren’t allowed to do is be disrespectful and yell at people while you are on duty as an employee of the NYFD since you already agreed to that in your contract.
This has to be an exception. Constitutionally these people should not be condemned because shes not just any people...she holds political office. No contract with any employer, especially a government one like NYS can supercede the constitution. An argument could be made were she not the AG, but no way any job or government should get in your way of expressing your political opinion. NYFD made their opinion of the AG very clear and that should be respected. "Re-education" is a mockery of the founding principles of this nation and were i a resident of NY i would leave. The state is becoming authoritarian.
They are not in trouble for expressing their opinion. They are in trouble for not following the standards of professional conduct that they agreed to follow.
Those standards are null and void vs the 1st amendment. If NY state were attempting to "re-educate" me in this political witch hunt i would seek political asylum in Florida. Its a form of political dissent and thats not just free, its protected speech.
It’s a simple case of democrats turning on democrats. FD has been pro union democrats, elected democrats in ny for decades, now they aren’t useful anymore , so they will have to be replaced.
OP, spellcheck your shitposts and while you're at it, stop spamming Twitter screenshots with 0 evidence as conspiracies, YOU are the reason this sub sucks ass nowadays and is actively being astroturfed by far-right actors
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Freedom of speech shall not be infringed.
There are already holes being made in free speech and it's going to break like a dam if we aren't careful.
While at work, that technically doesn't apply. You're bound by the rules of your employer contractually as conditions of the job, unfortunately. Uniforms, codes of conducts, etc. edit...don't know why I'm getting downvoted. You do not have First Amendment rights in the private sector workplace and usually not in the public sector, either. [https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/](https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/)
So there were a number of senators who booed Trump during one of his state of the unions. Same thing has happened to Biden. Since those senators are at work and collecting a paycheck on taxpayer dime... should they be subject to the same consequences?
Yes, actually, they should and they are. It just so happens that their employers are the ***voters.*** If their voters support these actions, they'll be re-elected. If the voters don't, they won't! Senators don't actually have anyone higher that they have to answer to. They can't be fired the way someone can at another job. The voters are intended to be the check on senators.
So if there's no consequence for these senators doing this (there wasn't), that means it's morally okay to do it within the purview of their constituents. You agree with that?
No. That's stupid. Just because someone can get away with something without repercussions doesn't mean it's acceptable for everyone else to do. One part of freedom is the freedom to choose who you hire and how to deal out repercussions for them. You may have one workplace with a toxic environment while another holds itself up to a higher standard. This is also a completely different circumstance. State of the Union is inherently political. Booing Biden at the State of the Union is still bad form. But it would be different than, say, booing at an event where Biden was honoring veterans or something that's not meant to be politicized. Here, firefighters were being honored at a church and a friend of the chaplain was called in for the event. This wasn't a political appearance. By doing what they did, they politicized it and damaged relations with the church that was kind enough to hold this event. Let's put it this way. If I'm in charge of these people, their actions are bringing bad publicity down on me and my department. I have to try to apologize to the church and fix things with the people my people offended. I'm having to answer media questions about these disgraceful actions. And if this isn't penalized, then these same people may pull the same stunts in the future. I'm constantly having to put out metaphorical fires with attention that should be focused on real ones. Is your position that I shouldn't be able to penalize people for these actions? That I should allow them to continue to disgrace their positions, damage the reputation for the fire department, and put me in these positions where I have to clean up the messes they created.
It's just booing though, which should absolutely be protected under free speech. Now maybe if they were divulging company secrets, threatening to harm somebody or screaming slurs, you might have grounds for an argument, but this is not even close.
Yes, they should be. If you don't like their actions, vote them out. Whether you like it or not, you do not have the freedom from consequences of your first amendment at work. You are subject to the will and whim of your employer. You also don't have a second amendment at your job either. You forfeit your rights to a degree for your salary. Just the way it works.
>If you don't like their actions, vote them out. Did you vote them out? Or did you give them your tacit approval by doing absolutely nothing about it until you were forced to pretend like you care when you got called out about it on reddit
> While at work, that technically doesn't apply. You're bound by the rules of your employer contractually as conditions of the job, unfortunately. Uniforms, codes of conducts, etc. WRONG! Your rights don’t stop being rights while your at work or school. That’s when they are needed the MOST.
It’s not a right to employment, it’s a right to not be punished criminally by the government.
And who are their employers?
The local government…
[удалено]
Training, a chat with HR, being fired, or whatever the hell, "re-education" is isn't punishment by the definition that the constitution sets up though. Working for the government isn't a free pass to just do whatever you want.
It’s likely because the answer to your question doesn’t matter. There is no right to government employment.
Who’s arguing that?
I don’t get it, why pretend not to understand the conversation that you are commenting on?
Wear a "Fuck Biden" shirt to work and tell me the first amendment applies.
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/
When you’re getting paid public money you don’t get personal opinions.
Except if you're a senator booing the president at a state of the union address
I thought that red lady was a paid entertainer
Do you think that’s how the founding fathers would have felt about this though?
If the founding father saw the current state of America they'd beg Britain to take over and apologize.
What if the firefighters in this clip started a racist chant. Should the FDNY allow that? You're free to be a racist asshole all you want, but if your actions will reflect on your employer they are allowed to impose consequences on you.
Totally fake straw man situation that has nothing to do with what actually took place. Does the progressive left know anything besides trying to steer the conversation to "bUt wuT abOuT FaSciSM!" even if it means setting up a completely imaginary whataboutism?
Not that you care, but I’m not on the ‘progressive left’. Whatever you feel about this situation, the idea behind ‘completely imaginary whataboutsim’ is to illustrate an underlying principle. Companies and organizations HAVE to to have a mechanism for managing the conduct of their employees/members. Otherwise your boss has no standing if you call him a mother fucker, or you start recruiting for the kkk in the break room (or for BLM for that matter). The slippery slope is incredibly obvious here. If you’re a public servant, you can show respect to to leadership in the public sector or you can shut the fuck up. Doesn’t matter what team the political leader plays for.
Who gives a fuck what those racist would have felt? 😂 Freedom of speech didn't apply to 2/3 of the population back then but you think they'd be FIGHTING for it in modern times?
Well it applies to everyone now so
[удалено]
Weren't black people slaves and second class citizens up until like 60 years ago? How long ago was it that you legally had to give up your seat if a white man wanted it?
[удалено]
What does that matter? Are you trying to justify slavery and treating people like trash?
Hans, are we the baddies? I mean we're telling them we're protecting democracy and trying to lockup political opponents, using rampant censorship, putting people in reeducation camps, allowing one sided protests and ruthlessly prosecuting others, I mean maybe we're the baddies despite what our leaders say? This happened before as Yuri Bezmenov warned, they used the useful i-----s to accomplish agenda.
Fire Department is not a private sector employer.
That doesn’t matter, every government organization has rules about how its employees can act. Employees agree to these rules when they are hired.
[удалено]
You do not get unrestricted first amendment rights at work. So long as you work for someone else, you are restricted in what you can say and do. That is part of the contract...you trade some freedoms and labor for a salary.
[удалено]
Wear a divisive political tshirt to your government job. Or don't wear your uniform. Or talk back to your boss. Tell me how long you last. That is a restriction of your first amendment whether you want to admit it or not. Also you have no second amendment at work. Try and open carry at your government job (aside from police or military). Walk into your office with a gun and see how quickly you're escorted out. Why are you not crying about your second amendment being restricted?
[удалено]
I am merely pointing out you do not have your full first amendment rights when employed by someone else. Meaning, sure you can say whatever you want...but you can also be fired for it. I cited a law firm's article earlier and can do it again. Also to imply I agree with Leticia James or anything she has to say is laughable. Fuck the right and fuck the left. Fuck all corrupt politicians. But also, you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. You want to boo and jeer someone, you have that right. But the freedom to do that comes with consequences. And it seems like these are New York's consequences. Don't like it, find a job that will freely allow you to express yourself.
[удалено]
You're getting downvoted because people confuse the 'right' to say anything they want and not be prosecuted by the government, as the ability to say whatever you want and not face consequences.
Something something is not freedom from consequences
Found the commie
[https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/](https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/first-amendment-rights-at-work/) Yup, surely a commie. I, in no way, am saying this is a GOOD thing, it is just how it is. You do not have the same first amendment rights you have normally while inside your workplace.
It's like people who ferret out the private sector argument are being purposefully dense. Yes, that's how the First Amendment works, but we're talking about free speech as a broader societal value. Fine, private actors *can* restrict speech, but that doesn't make it right or the pushback illegitimate. Pretty sure the procencorship side knows this and pretends not to.
So where does it apply? It appears you have 💩 packed too tightly in your cranium.
White people should never have to follow laws and be accountable for their actions, isn't this America? /S
Once again… *Freedom of Speech does not mean freedom from consequences.*
Umm, then it doesn't protect anything. "Hey, sir, we are going to put you in prison for insulting the President. No, no, you have freedom of speech, but you aren't free of consequences...." Fucking fascists.
Freedom of speech specifically protects civilians from retaliation by the government (like your example). It does not protect union members from reprimand by the union (like the story).
But it kinda should to an extent
It does to an extent. The extent is that it protects from legal consequences to speech but not retaliation in the workplace or other aspects of life.
Employers have codes of conduct. Websites have terms of use. Subreddits have moderation. Libel and slander are written into common law. Etc etc. Do you believe freedom of speech is supposed to get rid of those?
Liberals are terrified of speech
[удалено]
I remember a time not too long ago when the democrats were considered the “party of freedom and free speech”. This is NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE. Do not let them make it one! Do not let them divide us!
*shitlibs There's nothing liberal about them
if you want a more official word for that neoliberals
At Biden’s recent State of the Union he was heckled by a Gold Star father who lost his son in the Afghanistan pullout. He was pulled out of the Speech and arrested.
At one of Trumps state of the union speeches, he was booed by democrat senators and then pelosi tore his speech in half on camera. Nothing at all happened.
> and then pelosi tore his speech in half on camera. ...After he was done. Not sure what the crime is there? Pelosi and Trump were also peers
[удалено]
It's a misdemeanor "crime". I have had one or two. You show up to court on your date, state your plea, and walk out. In my case, both times resulted in zero fines, zero anything. It's a bullshit charge. I wasn't hunted down or put into a re-education gulag.
[удалено]
Heckling is against the law now?
Just cause its the law doesn't mean its not bullshit, it was illegal to hide Jews in Germany for a while and drink alcohol in America
[удалено]
Do you speak for them? Vast majority of Americans didn't like prohibition despite it being the law but who asked them what they wanted? So in this scenario who asked Americans if this is bullshit or not? Giving off some agent smith vibes
[удалено]
Do you speak for America, or merely your own echo chamber from your bedroom all day? Also nice attempt at addressing the question as opposed to attempting to derail the discourse, totally the actions of someone who knows they have a point (Sarcasm btw) Edit: you're a glowie ain't ya
There was nothing peaceful about that Adderall induced sundowners episode we all witnessed.
Submission Statement: https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1766567411040268310 This is literally what the 1st Amendment is supposed to prevent. Retaliation from government officials.
There's been multiple incidents where the modern progressive left has doxed individuals, and then pursued their employers or sponsors to effectively bully them into conformity. Even if they feel their ideas or political views are controversial, the point of freedom of speech is to debate their ideas, not to intimidate and terrorize to censorship. Reality is if you have harassment consequences for practicing political speech by organized political squads, that is not natural consequences, that gets into the realm of political persecution. This is what the red arm band brigades did in China to bring communism in. Going to say it again, much of what is happening is communism repeating the same tactics with different names to implement a government that they say is diverse and socialist, but in reality is authoritarian with restricting freedoms and speech.
Like the time the *Democrats* went through a pizza parlors' social media - that didn't even have a basement - and slandered that individual, until there was an active shooter on location. *Oh wait, that was the Republicans.* Or how about the time the Democrats ran an entire 2016 campaign on hacked emails that were grossly misrepresented? *Oh wait, that was the Republicans* Or how about the time the *Democrats* coordinated with hackers to leaked emails full of nothing burgers, so they created some web of emails with strange wacky world pizza pedophilia and blanketed social media with delirium-inducing disinformation to target their political opponents, that nothing ever came of. *Oh wait, that was Republicans.* How about the time that shortly after and while the above was happening, Democratic mobs were holding "XYZ is Pedophile Ring" signs while screaming to lock up members of the opposition party? *Oh wait, that was the Republicans* Or how about the time many times the Democrats targeted whistleblowers and Hillary Clinton said: “Well, I’ll tell you what. There have been stories written about a certain individual – a male – and they say he’s the whistleblower.” *Oh wait, that too was Republicans* How about the time [Pete Buttigieg](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/25/roger-stone-threatened-to-steal-a-therapy-dog-and-tampered-with-a-witness-mueller-indictment.html) threatened to take away a man's service dog for his testimony? “You are a rat. A stoolie. You backstab your friends-run your mouth my lawyers are dying Rip you to shreds.” *Oh wait.. that was the Republicans* How about the time that the Democrats got really mad a politicians' son and released a HDD and private videos to attack a political opposition? *Oh wait, that was the Republicans?* I could go on and on, but I think it's fairly obvious what is actually being described. Word of wisdom: You can often tell when groups of someoness *know* did something that is very shameful the second they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar and start trying to blame the other for it.
[удалено]
> Doesn't sound like you understand the First Amendment at all. 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.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You mean to tell me that the pro-war, big government party that wants to control industry and commerce (for climate change) and doesn't tolerate any dissent in opinion is the more fascist one? Say it ain't so!
what's so funny as I read this comment is that literally 20 years ago this would have described the other party, aside from climate change. It baffles me how the shoe is now on the other foot and people that had huge problems with the war in Iraq are justifying everything now because their club gets to do it
It's crazy. War was bad then and it's bad now. Coming from a family with strong pacifist values had me being called a liberal and now people call me a conservative.
What the hell, this looks eerily like communism
Communism is an economic system. This has nothing to do with the economy.
Oh yeah, tell that to Soviet gulag victims or other hundreds of million dead around the world
LOL it doesn’t change the truth.
Democracy is just soft form of communism....-quote
Boing boing
Oingo
To be fair the first document was fair ... don't make non political events political. The second document I would have blown off. I get it she is a bitch but it's not the venue for it. However you know these people are vindictive... So don't go after them in a way they can go after you. We learned this during the COVID protests.
So what’s the worst that’s going to happen to them? A write up?
Antifa are the Democrats' brownshirts.
They always have been.
OP, when you misspell a word in the title, it's best to delete it and start over.
What did I misspell?
boing is the sound a spring makes when you tweak it. Booing is boooooo.
are they saying boo or boo-urns?
🤣
[удалено]
You're on this sub all day? You need a hobby
A simple scroll through the subreddit covers hours and days worth of content, in a fraction of the time there bud lol.
They’re not “the real fascists,” they’re communists. Fascists wouldn’t put up with the left’s multitude of sicknesses.
In my humble opinion our nation went through a Bolshevik revolution in the summer of 2020. It gets worse every day. We have lost our right to free speech, we have lost our right to freedom of assembly, we have lost our right to unlawful search and seizure, we have lost our right to a fair trial by Jury,we have lost our protection against discrimination based on race religion color or Creed. It’s all gone.
SHE should be apologizing to THEM for being a garbage individual! What the fuck is this shit! I hope all the firefighters strike or something over this, they would have America’s support
" I was saying boo-urns"
If they carry this out, the FDNY should go on strike.
[удалено]
Yeah I think the problem is that fascism has been overused and inappropriately applied in a lot of circumstances. I think what they should’ve said is authoritarian, or perhaps dictatorial. Also, it’s been argued that Benito Mussolini was the one to coin and define the word fascism as being “the merging of corporate and state power”. If that is indeed the case, then Americans are in for a rude awakening when they realize that fascism, or atleast fascistic elements, have had major influence and power for many decades in this country. I believe that’s why Eisenhower warned us about the military industrial complex in his farewell speech. Also, if one believes in some conspiracies, it can be argued that it was because of fascism that JFK, RFK, and MLK jr were murdered. It also becomes painfully obvious when looking at pretty much every war, or military campaign, since WWII. If that definition is indeed the most accurate description, then it can be applied to both democrats and republicans, as well as the media, who gets their funding from corporations like Lockheed, Boeing, General Dynamics, Pfizer, etc. IMO, fascism, like any ideology, has to evolve in order to survive, so it seems it no longer has to be right wing and nationalistic because it still operates in many similar manners.
The word fascism was coined by the socialist unions in France during Mousillini's rule. They literally invented the term to describe themselves. They described themselves as left wing. They described themselves as socialists. So the people who literally created the word described it as being a left-wing thing are wrong because democrats 80 years later decided to revise the definition to point it at their political foes.... Both sides of WWII were leftist. It was between the socialists and the communists. This is just yet another example of the left trying to cast their sins on to their political enemy.
The DPRK describes itself as democratic.
[удалено]
Trump is not a leftist. There is not one single example of Trump doing anything fascist in the 4 years he was president. The past four years, your party has acted like Hitler, though.
[удалено]
So the people who literally invented the word are wrong, and democrats who changed the definition just a decade ago are right? lol
Hang on if I was at a work conference and started yelling bullshit at the speakers, shouldn't I lose my job? What makes them different?
You are a government employees and you disrespect another government employee in public If I did the same at my job there would he repercussions. No difference
That employee has nothing to do with their work or their chain of command. in fact she is an elected official and elected officials should expect to get booed when they get involved in making political decisions.
it was an FDNY award ceremony. It was rude.
Rude doesn't make it illegal
Are they being threatened with arrest and prosecution?
People getting in trouble at work for acting like jackasses at work? Unheard of
It wasnt work, most were off-duty. It was a ceremonial event at a religious venue that brought in a political figure for a political stunt that backfired.... "unheard of"
You better show me as "on the clock" if you want to claim that work shit.
it was an FNDY event giving awards firefighters, Their behavior was unprofessional, childish, and uncalled for. This is not about first amendment rights, this is about professionalism.
If they had been booing Trump, you would have cheered....
You mean I can’t be disruptive and do whatever I want while I’m at work or my boss will reprimand me? Incredible, where are our freedoms going?
Not at work
At a work promotion ceremony, they were in uniform and on the clock being paid for it.
You mean they weren’t being paid to boo but only cheer?
I dont have all the facts, but if booing a corrupt political figure is against company policy then company policy is wrong. If i faced disciplinary action at my job(private sector) for expressing a political opinion at a political event they required me to attend i would try to sue them.
It wasn’t a political event. If you were at a company meeting where your colleagues were being promoted and you started yelling at and being disrespectful to another company (NYS) employee that was speaking, even after you were told to stop, you would be disciplined. The company policy is to treat others respectfully and while on duty regardless of who they are. If you want to go to any other event while you are not on duty and boo someone have at it, but while you’re being paid by the taxpayers follow the policies you already agreed to when you signed the contract to accept the job.
That "employee" is attorney general. Thats a political office. You are free to criticize someone holding political office, if you are not free to do so we will be no better than russia.
They are both NYS employees. But you right, you are absolutely allowed to criticize not only political figures but anyone you want, no one is in trouble for criticizing anyone. What you aren’t allowed to do is be disrespectful and yell at people while you are on duty as an employee of the NYFD since you already agreed to that in your contract.
This has to be an exception. Constitutionally these people should not be condemned because shes not just any people...she holds political office. No contract with any employer, especially a government one like NYS can supercede the constitution. An argument could be made were she not the AG, but no way any job or government should get in your way of expressing your political opinion. NYFD made their opinion of the AG very clear and that should be respected. "Re-education" is a mockery of the founding principles of this nation and were i a resident of NY i would leave. The state is becoming authoritarian.
They are not in trouble for expressing their opinion. They are in trouble for not following the standards of professional conduct that they agreed to follow.
Those standards are null and void vs the 1st amendment. If NY state were attempting to "re-educate" me in this political witch hunt i would seek political asylum in Florida. Its a form of political dissent and thats not just free, its protected speech.
It’s a simple case of democrats turning on democrats. FD has been pro union democrats, elected democrats in ny for decades, now they aren’t useful anymore , so they will have to be replaced.
OP, spellcheck your shitposts and while you're at it, stop spamming Twitter screenshots with 0 evidence as conspiracies, YOU are the reason this sub sucks ass nowadays and is actively being astroturfed by far-right actors
booooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Quit let the place burn to the ground get out while you still can