Literal anti-free speech, combined with doxing.
Lokarin posted...
Literal anti-free speech, combined with doxing.
not what freedom of speech is.
The Mormon church is backwards and stupid. That isn't news.
SushiSquid posted...
The Mormon church is backwards and stupid. That isn't news.
Oh, you said something bad about the church - you can be fired now 'cuz that doesn't count as free speech
Lokarin posted...
SushiSquid posted...
The Mormon church is backwards and stupid. That isn't news.
Oh, you said something bad about the church - you can be fired now 'cuz that doesn't count as free speech
...
not sure if serious or joking anymore
Literal anti-free speech, combined with doxing.
Kimbos_Egg posted...
Lokarin posted...
Literal anti-free speech, combined with doxing.
not what freedom of speech is.
So you're saying people should self-censor to maintain their livlihoods when under an oppressive regime.
SushiSquid posted...
The Mormon church is backwards and stupid. That isn't news.
Oh, you said something bad about the church - you can be fired now 'cuz that doesn't count as free speech
She was fired for her religion opinion - that's a felony
Lokarin posted...
She was fired for her religion opinion - that's a felony
You're straight-up just trying to troll now. If you don't understand how something works, you're best off not talking about it.
Zeus posted...
Lokarin posted...
She was fired for her religion opinion - that's a felony
You're straight-up just trying to troll now. If you don't understand how something works, you're best off not talking about it.
No, i'm not trolling ... do you not see the injustice here? Is your whole nation monsters?
Ruthie admitted feeling "out of place" as a member of the church for years and said "I felt kind of like the rug was pulled out from under me."
Injustice would be forcing an private employer to keep an employee who explicitly badmouths them and their donors which, by the way, would be violating their right to free speech.
Lokarin posted...
Zeus posted...
Injustice would be forcing an private employer to keep an employee who explicitly badmouths them and their donors which, by the way, would be violating their right to free speech.
Being pro-LBGT is "bad mouthing"
Swing and a miss in your simplistic bias. You still don't know what you're talking about. At all. Like the most fundamental understanding of the concept is flawed.
I'll give you a hint: Free Speech is NOT universal. Period. The end. Now can you start to learn about what you're beating your dick so hard about before you hurt yourself?
Zeus posted...
Injustice would be forcing an private employer to keep an employee who explicitly badmouths them and their donors which, by the way, would be violating their right to free speech.
Being pro-LBGT is "bad mouthing"
She wrote on her FB to honour Pride Month on June 5th that expressed opposition to the strict religious practice of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints where she is a member and teaches at Brigham Young University.
Given how many times conservatives have been punished in the same way,
Zeus posted...
Given how many times conservatives have been punished in the same way,
The difference being that when conservatives are "punished in the same way," it's not punishing them simply for holding an objectionable opinion, it's for holding and acting on an opinion that causes suffering. Being pro-gay and saying the church is wrong to be so aggressively anti-gay doesn't hurt anyone. Being anti-gay and depriving gay people of services does hurt people. Ergo, the anti-gay people that have had their jimmies rustled by having somebody disagree with them should get over themselves, because no actual harm has been done except to hurt their poor wittle feelings (feelings that would not be hurt if they made a different completely voluntary decision).
It's very simple.
Zeus posted...
Given how many times conservatives have been punished in the same way,
The difference being that when conservatives are "punished in the same way," it's not punishing them simply for holding an objectionable opinion, it's for holding and acting on an opinion that causes suffering . Being pro-gay and saying the church is wrong to be so aggressively anti-gay doesn't hurt anyone. Being anti-gay and depriving gay people of services does hurt people. Ergo, the anti-gay people that have had their jimmies rustled by having somebody disagree with them should get over themselves, because no actual harm has been done except to hurt their poor wittle feelings (feelings that would not be hurt if they made a different completely voluntary decision).
It's very simple.
22 y/o Ruthie Robertson from Idaho was FIRD because she refused to take down a Facebook post she wrote detailing her support for the LGBTQ community!!
She wrote on her FB to honour Pride Month on June 5th that expressed opposition to the strict religious practice of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints where she is a member and teaches at Brigham Young University.
Do you think Ruthie is right that the Church is WRONG about the LGBTQ community
adjl if ur so right all the time then why are u always wrong
All the while tiptoing masterfully around the fact that liberals frequently hold and act on opinions which cause suffering.
it's fine because it's not conservatives picking on gays, otherwise it would be orwelian and SJW censorship
Also, either there's a lot of ppl mis-reading the question (which isn't terribly well written, tbh) or there's a lot more anti-gay religious conservatives here than I'd have thought.
moonsaults
Given how many times conservatives have been punished in the same way, I'm inclined to say "Fair, next," even before considering the stated values of the university. The ONLY saving grace is that she meant it as a private post so it wasn't a publicly held position. That said, if I went on social and disparaged something intrinsic to my work (such as calling a client's industry a scam) then I'd be shitcanned as well so I have zero sympathy for her.
Lokarin posted...
Zeus posted...
Injustice would be forcing an private employer to keep an employee who explicitly badmouths them and their donors which, by the way, would be violating their right to free speech.
Being pro-LBGT is "bad mouthing"
Full Throttle posted...
She wrote on her FB to honour Pride Month on June 5th that expressed opposition to the strict religious practice of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints where she is a member and teaches at Brigham Young University.
ie, wasn't just saying "I support gays," but also "I don't like how the LDS (our biggest donor!) and the university operates." #FairNext
Zeus posted...
Lokarin posted...
Zeus posted...
Injustice would be forcing an private employer to keep an employee who explicitly badmouths them and their donors which, by the way, would be violating their right to free speech.
Being pro-LBGT is "bad mouthing"
Full Throttle posted...
She wrote on her FB to honour Pride Month on June 5th that expressed opposition to the strict religious practice of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints where she is a member and teaches at Brigham Young University.
ie, wasn't just saying "I support gays," but also "I don't like how the LDS (our biggest donor!) and the university operates." #FairNext
Imagine if you worked at Walmart and were fired for posting on social media that you don't agree with some internal policy. Would you still feel the same way?
Kimbos_Egg posted...
Lokarin posted...
Literal anti-free speech, combined with doxing.
not what freedom of speech is.
So you're saying people should self-censor to maintain their livlihoods when under an oppressive regime.
And obviously, if you're caught behaving in a way that brings your employer's name into disrepute, you can be fired for it. It's basic employment 101.