----------------------

[Devlyn]

"Personally, I think all marriage is bad" Robert Freeman

[LivingInGrey]

m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19017526

Looks like Chick-fil-a isn't the only one in the mix now...

Edit:

Amazon and Microsoft are on the side of gay marriage...

[Jamie D]

Is there any limit on speech. Are all of these acceptable?:

1. "You should vote to prevent gay people from having the right to marry each other."
2. "You should shun any gay person who wants to get married."
3. "You should be ready to commit violence if necessary to prevent gay people from getting married."
4. "Come with me to the church. We gonna' bust up a gay wedding."

You ask good questions.  The (civil) libertarian point of view is the should be no limit on (political) speech.  Keep in mind, however, that one must be responsible for the consequences of that speech.  Inciting a riot is fundamentally different from expressing an political opinion.

[Jamie D]

WHAT PEKY SAID:
This is the kind of rhetoric that was used to try to keep segregation against black people alive back in the early 60's; now it is directed against the LGBT community. 

Nobody wants to impose any view in any lonely rich CEO, what we do not want is a Corporation discriminating against a minority

And all the civil rights legislation did not create one fewer bigot.  Changing hearts and minds was the result of the robust conversation and the exposure of how groups were unfairly treated.   Consensus is better than coersion.


Change is an on-going function of society.  Government works poorly as a change agent.

[Jamie D]

I think if they want to keep marriages as a ceremonial thing that would be fine. Removing all of the legal crap would be best.

AGREED

[aleon515]

OTOH, if there is ANY evidence of any sort of discrimination against gay workers or customers, I think they ought to throw the book at them.

--Jay Jay

[Beth Andrea]

True, but most of the people on that site only go against it when it is something they are in favor of.

Not just on that site, but everywhere. If someone doesn't agree with the "Left's" party line", the liberals are just as quick to silence the opposition as any on the right...whether that silencing is shouting them down, firing them, cancelling contracts, or writing/publishing negative articles in the media...

Tyranny can be found anywhere, if those who think "they know best" are given any power.

imho

[Beth Andrea]

People can say what they want but, that doesn't protect them from retailiation. Sure neo-Nazis might have the right to do a speech in public but the counter demonstration will also be legal, you reap what you sow.

Also, what freedom of speech? Yell fire in a theatre, or hes got a bomb in the airport see how free you are then. There are some pretty good reasons to limit free speech, and we do it is not some inalienable right, and more and more in the information age what you say has consequences.

The difference here is that the protestors (anti-Nazis) are known to get violent during counter-demonstrations. The Nazis are generally full of hot air, doing everything they can to alienate (and not "rally") the audience, while the anti-racists, gay "pink battalions", etc are throwing rocks and breaking windows of stores that just happen to be on the same street the Nazis picked to demonstrate on...

Don't talk about "consequences" unless you apply them equally to all.

[peky]

And all the civil rights legislation did not create one fewer bigot.  Changing hearts and minds was the result of the robust conversation and the exposure of how groups were unfairly treated.   Consensus is better than coersion.


Change is an on-going function of society.  Government works poorly as a change agent.

But has put a few of them on jail, and had deter many more

[aleon515]

I think these right wing groups are REALLY worried right now. There is, as they say, a generational cliff, because they know that even conservative young people mostly are for gay rights. Certainly not all of them. And then there are just fewer conservative young people. There is also the cliff having to do when basically there are going to be tons of states (US politics) where there are more brown people than white people. They are going to be working extra hard in the next few years, because these things just will happen. But they are not, meanwhile, going to become nicer.

--Jay Jay

[Jamie D]

But has put a few of them on jail, and had deter many more

How did jailing work with Gandhi, ML King,or Nelson Mandala?

[peky]

How did jailing work with Gandhi, ML King,or Nelson Mandala?

Mr. Gandhi, Dr. King, Mr. Mandela, and many more where the people who opposed the right-wing corporation driven oppression against the disenfranchised; and were imprisoned by governments that were directly or indirectly influenced and manipulated by people the like of the ChickFil-A CEO.

The laws that protect minorities have put people who beat up, kill, or otherwise infringe in the human rights of other people in jail, these folks are the proverbial bigots, racist, and male chauvinist pigs.

If you look at the top 500 companies you will notice that most if not all support and protect transgender, homosexual, female, and minority folks by their company polices; and more important and seminal to our conversation is that their CEO's voice their support and lead by example keeping their personal and private belief where they should be "in their closet."

Why do they do this? Out of enlightenment and good will to fellow human beings? Perhaps, but I think they do it mainly because it is good for their "bottom line," money.

[dalebert]

Why do they do this? Out of enlightenment and good will to fellow human beings? Perhaps, but I think they do it mainly because it is good for their "bottom line," money.

And they're way ahead of government with those policies. I think this is the way to make change rather than with decrees and laws. The bigots just get more subtle and go into hiding or even feel resentful and fuel counter-movements when they feel they're being forced to do something they don't want to do.

I don't feel I have a right to force someone to do something they don't want to do with their own property, like hire someone or keep them from firing someone. At the same time, I don't want to end up supporting a bigot's company by taking a job for them or buying their products simply because they've pushed their bigotry into hiding to avoid being sued. I'd rather avoid such companies altogether and watch them go into a death spiral as the rest of the civilized world moves on into the future without them.

[Jamie D]

Peky, I think you missed my point.  I could have easily listed lesser-known political dissidents in communist China, Burmah, or Cambodia.

Political dissidents are not swayed by legislation.

[peky]

Political dissidents are not swayed by legislation.

Ok, then I am assuming that your statement above is your point! If so, I fail to see the connection to the title of the thread, or to mine and Janet's argument that a CEO public words set the tone of a corporation. Chikfil-A and his CEO have turned anti-LGBT, a position indefensible in our modern.

The public is not trying to take the CEO freedom of speech, the public is rather spanking him and his corporation for being a "Neanderthal" out of touch with reality.

[Jamie D]

Peky, you stated:

But [legislation] has put a few of them on jail, and had deter[ed] many more.

I don't think that is the case, or ever has been the case.

[peky]

Peky, you stated:

But [legislation] has put a few of them on jail, and had deter[ed] many more.

I don't think that is the case, or ever has been the case.

Really? See below for a few.

ASSAULT CONVICTIONS



http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/DC-Man-to-Serve-15-Years-for-Transgender-Assault-138621324.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1686781/posts

DISCRIMINATION

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Health/story?id=5843396&page=1#.UBXMyKO_uuI

http://www.thevillage.org.uk/transgender.htm

Please read the link below, and tell me we do not need laws protecting transsexuals

http://www.liminalis.de/2009_03/TMM/tmm-englisch/Liminalis-2009-TMM-report2008-2009-en.pdf

[justmeinoz]

At this point I am glad we are not quite so hung up on free speech trumping bigotry.

[Jamie D]

Peky, none of the examples you gave were about "free speech" rights.  The prosecutions were based on other circumstances.  The issues in this topic is whether one can legislate or act in an official capacity because you don't like what someone said.

That directly runs contrary to the 1st Amendment.

[dalebert]

A picture I saw on Facebook making its rounds.



And my comment:

"I don't like what the mayor's doing and I think he's abusing his power. I also don't like what Chick-fil-A is doing. They're bigots. Is this really an either/or choice? I have to support one or the other? Bulls**t. I choose neither."