|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 3:50 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| ontheway wrote: |
Freedom of Speech is absolute. Rosie and all the others mentioned have the right to say anything they want. She should not be fired for her racially insensitive remarks or other offensive comments.
|
Where is freedom of speech absolute? I'm not aware of too many companies where I have the right of free speech on the job. If a private company wants to set a limit on speech, that's its absolute right too. No? You don't have to work for CBS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gdimension
Joined: 05 Jul 2005
Location: Jeju
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
Freedom of Speech is absolute. Rosie and all the others mentioned have the right to say anything they want. She should not be fired for her racially insensitive remarks or other offensive comments.
|
Where is freedom of speech absolute? I'm not aware of too many companies where I have the right of free speech on the job. If a private company wants to set a limit on speech, that's its absolute right too. No? You don't have to work for CBS. |
Exactly.
This is not a freedom of speech issue - nobody has been denied their constitutional rights. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't like Rosie O'Donnel either, but I definately think Steve should be given the heave ho, because he makes so many people sick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ontheway wrote:
| Quote: |
| The same also goes for many of the CE threads and posters. Ranting, posturing and insults obliterate meaningful commentary, discussion and sharing of opinions. You've got the right to say it, but who wants to hear it? |
Aloha, bruddah. I agree with you. In the beginning I tried to negotiate a space on this board but have often succumbed to the temptation to give as good as I get. I would much prefer reasoned debate. But with some of the posters that isn't possible, evidently. (See below for a case in point).
MilwaukieDave whined:
I
| Quote: |
| don't like Rosie O'Donnel either, but I definately think Steve should be given the heave ho, because he makes so many people sick. |
Your avatar is most fitting given your constant tone. This sounds like something a fat brat would say. Try to rise to the level of discourse sometime, Dave. The air's rare there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| Free speech has never covered speech intended to hurt others. |
You might want to review the literature on this matter. I don't get offended by much, but as a libertarian, the above makes me cringe. The USA has long allowed exceedingly controversial opinions to be aired under the idea of freedom of expression. |
I didn't say anything about stating an opinion. I spoke of verbal assault. For example, if you say, "I'm going to kill you!" and a prosecutor, judge and jury believe you meant it, you will surely end up in jail. You also do not have a right to libel, slander or defame. How is calling someone a *beep* on a national radio program not two of the above? He not only should be fired, he ought to be prosecuted - at least, if the women hadn't accepted his apology. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="mindmetoo"]You're a ho... A court would quickly recognize that it's just a silly statement.
| Quote: |
And simply because certain laws are on the books does not imply they're constitutional.
Different issue. We're speaking of should he be fired or not. Well, prosecuted is possible, depending where it happened... |
Ho? *beep*? Well, I'm thinking there are enough racists - especially listening to his show - that would believe it was more than an epithet. Would I prosecute were I holding that office? No. But I might encourage the women to sue.
| Quote: |
| But her recent 9/11 comments just paints her as a total idiot. |
Yes, because being in the majority opinion is so offensive.  Or, rather, having an opinion other than your's is bad? Or, looking at the evidence and coming to a rational conclusion is foolish?
(No, I haven't looked at her stand on that issue, but regardless, I wouldn't paint her as stupid on that issue: there are huge numbers of anomalies. MOST Americans think there is something hinky about 9/11. How's it feel to be the wingnut??  )
Last edited by EFLtrainer on Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
ontheway wrote:
| Quote: |
| The same also goes for many of the CE threads and posters. Ranting, posturing and insults obliterate meaningful commentary, discussion and sharing of opinions. You've got the right to say it, but who wants to hear it? |
Aloha, bruddah. I agree with you. In the beginning I tried to negotiate a space on this board |
Hmmm... something to investigate. Given you insult with virtually every post, it would be interesting to see you walk the talk.
I sincerely believe many of you grew up in a time of such poor public discourse, particularly from our "leaders", that you actually believe the soundbite insults you toss around are not in any way impolite.
They are. To wit:
| Quote: |
| MilwaukieDave whined: |
This is what we call hypocrisy. Saying someone is whining is an insult. It is meant to insinuate weakness, etc. It is an ad hominem statement and essentially a lie. He did not whine. He made a statement. Impolite, perhaps. But certainly not a whine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
ontheway wrote:
| Quote: |
| The same also goes for many of the CE threads and posters. Ranting, posturing and insults obliterate meaningful commentary, discussion and sharing of opinions. You've got the right to say it, but who wants to hear it? |
Aloha, bruddah. I agree with you. In the beginning I tried to negotiate a space on this board |
Hmmm... something to investigate. Given you insult with virtually every post, it would be interesting to see you walk the talk.
I sincerely believe many of you grew up in a time of such poor public discourse, particularly from our "leaders", that you actually believe the soundbite insults you toss around are not in any way impolite.
They are. To wit:
| Quote: |
| MilwaukieDave whined: |
This is what we call hypocrisy. Saying someone is whining is an insult. It is meant to insinuate weakness, etc. It is an ad hominem statement and essentially a lie. He did not whine. He made a statement. Impolite, perhaps. But certainly not a whine. |
Steve doesn't understand the word hypocrisy....he only understands the sound of his big fat voice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| Free speech has never covered speech intended to hurt others. |
You might want to review the literature on this matter. I don't get offended by much, but as a libertarian, the above makes me cringe. The USA has long allowed exceedingly controversial opinions to be aired under the idea of freedom of expression. |
I didn't say anything about stating an opinion. I spoke of verbal assault. For example, if you say, "I'm going to kill you!" and a prosecutor, judge and jury believe you meant it, you will surely end up in jail. You also do not have a right to libel, slander or defame. How is calling someone a *beep* on a national radio program not two of the above? He not only should be fired, he ought to be prosecuted - at least, if the women hadn't accepted his apology. |
Ummm...
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/hatespeech.htm
You might want to review some of those cases before you claim calling public figures racist names is akin to a threat of violence.
| Quote: |
American Booksellers involved a First Amendment challenge to an Indianapolis civil rights ordinance that made it a crime to distribute materials that depicted women as "sexual objects for domination, conquest, or use." The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated the ordinance calling it "thought control." The Court ruled that the First Amendment gives government no power to establish "approved views" of various subgroups of the population.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemcgarrett
Joined: 24 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
EFLTrainer:
You sound like PewaukeeDave's older teenage brother.
Ooh, I said "whined." Yes, that's an egregious transgression: a thousand lashes at the post.
I
| Quote: |
| sincerely believe many of you grew up in a time of such poor public discourse, particularly from our "leaders", that you actually believe the soundbite insults you toss around are not in any way impolite. |
Well, we try to maintain your level of decorum but some of us simply can't reach that high. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| You might want to review some of those cases before you claim calling public figures racist names is akin to a threat of violence. |
You might want to read my post again because you completely misunderstood it.
| Quote: |
American Booksellers involved a First Amendment challenge to an Indianapolis civil rights ordinance that made it a crime to distribute materials that depicted women as "sexual objects for domination, conquest, or use." The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated the ordinance calling it "thought control." The Court ruled that the First Amendment gives government no power to establish "approved views" of various subgroups of the population.
|
Umm... irrelevant. The above would not be specifically stated to be a group of specific women.
I'm really not interested in the fine points of the law. It's not the point of this thread. His comments were racist and were not free speech because he spoke them at work. Case closed. Whether he "should" be dismissed is solely between him, his employer and their fan base. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
EFLTrainer:
You sound like PewaukeeDave's older teenage brother.
Ooh, I said "whined." Yes, that's an egregious transgression: a thousand lashes at the post.
I
| Quote: |
| sincerely believe many of you grew up in a time of such poor public discourse, particularly from our "leaders", that you actually believe the soundbite insults you toss around are not in any way impolite. |
Well, we try to maintain your level of decorum but some of us simply can't reach that high. |
Congrats working so hard on your insulting speech habits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| You might want to review some of those cases before you claim calling public figures racist names is akin to a threat of violence. |
You might want to read my post again because you completely misunderstood it.
| Quote: |
American Booksellers involved a First Amendment challenge to an Indianapolis civil rights ordinance that made it a crime to distribute materials that depicted women as "sexual objects for domination, conquest, or use." The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated the ordinance calling it "thought control." The Court ruled that the First Amendment gives government no power to establish "approved views" of various subgroups of the population.
|
Umm... irrelevant. The above would not be specifically stated to be a group of specific women.
I'm really not interested in the fine points of the law. It's not the point of this thread. His comments were racist and were not free speech because he spoke them at work. Case closed. Whether he "should" be dismissed is solely between him, his employer and their fan base. |
Yes but you added he should be prosecuted. Under what law? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| You might want to review some of those cases before you claim calling public figures racist names is akin to a threat of violence. |
You might want to read my post again because you completely misunderstood it.
| Quote: |
American Booksellers involved a First Amendment challenge to an Indianapolis civil rights ordinance that made it a crime to distribute materials that depicted women as "sexual objects for domination, conquest, or use." The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated the ordinance calling it "thought control." The Court ruled that the First Amendment gives government no power to establish "approved views" of various subgroups of the population.
|
Umm... irrelevant. The above would not be specifically stated to be a group of specific women.
I'm really not interested in the fine points of the law. It's not the point of this thread. His comments were racist and were not free speech because he spoke them at work. Case closed. Whether he "should" be dismissed is solely between him, his employer and their fan base. |
Yes but you added he should be prosecuted. Under what law? |
That would depend on the laws of the locale, of which I am not aware. That was a personal statement, not one made based in law - which is why I said "should" as opposed to "can". However, I do not think one should be able to say such a thing and suffer no consequence. By what rights does he call them w h o r e s? He has no standing on that. He has no defense. Defamation DOES apply, I'd think. Not a lawyer, though. And, really, don't give a shit about the issue beyond whether it was a free speech issue or not, so take it up with someone else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
twg
Joined: 02 Nov 2006
Location: Getting some fresh air...
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:02 am Post subject: Re: SHOULD ROSIE O'DONNELL BE THE NEXT TO GET THE HEAVE-HO? |
|
|
| stevemcgarrett wrote: |
| GLARRR! BLARGLE! LIBERALS! GRAHHHA! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
