I understand what you're saying. There is something that doesn't feel right about this person being suspended for expressing his non-mainstream opinion. But I think its one of those "slippery slope" things. I don't like the idea of firing someone for publicly expressing a view that is not totally politically correct. On the other hand, at some point isn't there a line which the employer is right to expect should not be crossed? For instance, would anyone object if a public person was fired for expressing Holocaust denialism (even if he has a "right" to do so)? I can't imagine anyone would. The issue here is that defining this line is difficult because people with different political views/sensibilities simply don't agree on what's truly offensive and what isn't.
It's ironic that conservatives here believe the left is so afraid of engaging in debate that we somehow "suppress" the opponent's viewpoints. Yet, it is more than likely a conservative who would say such things as someone being "unamerican" just because that person doesn't align with their conservative ideology. In my personal experience I have had friends who have shunned me because I lean left while they are conservative. I truly find it disturbing that people like Texxx and solid exist who are so far removed from reality. Maybe they have been trolling us this entire time. If they have, congrats, you guys got us.
Totally forgot, A&E is actually owned by the left. There was a secret vote on how to handle this. The decision was unanimous.
So let me draw the lines on what side thinks what is offensive... Liberals: When someone says negative things towards homosexuals and minorities Conservatives: When people are being "politically correct".
I found what he said to be objectionable. I don't watch the show, but from just the way he looks I would expect "red neck" opinions. I also think A&E has the right as an employer to "shoot themselves in the foot" if they want to. What I object to is the "let's scream the ole fart into oblivion" approach from some members of the gay community. He has every right to his opinion. How about engage him in a conversation, a meeting, a dialogue. Maybe both sides will gain a better understanding. What I don't like is "banish him" because he doesn't agree with us. Just wrong. Intolerant.
Yet I don't see any member of the LGBT community screaming at the "ole fart into oblivion." Are they not allowed to speak against what he said? I'm sure there are many members of the LGBT community who are willing to engage in one on one debate with him and destroy him intellectually.
Your reality, not our reality. Reality is socially constructed. We likely don't move in the same circles. I would imagine that Texx and I don't agree on everything. Differences are O.K., we can coexist. You don't have to "yell me into submission" or worse. That is what tolerance is about.
Where do you get this "yell me into submission."? I bet there are thousands of LGBT individuals or supporters that would love to go on a one on one debate with him. It's quite hilarious that you are preaching tolerance to me. One side has a large group of individuals that is intolerant of certain groups of people for who they are, while the other group is intolerant of those individuals being intolerant.
I don't know if this has been brought up, but why is Baldwin still doing capital one comercials. He sent out some gay slurs via twitter and appologized for it, then sent out more slurs a second time. He still seems to keep his job. Paula Dean had some racail slurs or something a long time and loses millions. This guy voicies his beliefs and gets suspended. Guess it just depends on the decisions makers.
Imagine that! Yes, companies get to decide how to deal with issues within their own companies. Or maybe the left also owns Capital One?
And the criticism the guy is receiving, an opinion differing from yours, is apparently unacceptable...but it is the same right to free speech that you are saying is taken away by the left.
The right are truly the intolerant people in our society today. They are all for the free expression of opinions, unless it differs from their opinion.
That redneck dude from Duck Dynasty has the right to say what he wants. A&E has the right to fire him. LBGT groups have the right to say whatever they want in opposition to what redneck said. WHY IS THIS EVEN AN ARGUMENT? There is NOTHING to argue. Nobody is being discriminated against everyone's rights are being honored. BigTexxx posited a fallacious argument with apparently no understanding of the constitution and what the freedom of speech entitles and what it was meant to hold in check.
Hear the opinion of a gay feminist: http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/19/p...ascist-utterly-stalinist/?onswipe_redirect=no
I meant "you" generically, not you specifically. I am just saying that if we don't share the same reality, be can talk in a civil way and see if we can learn something from each other. We (generically) don't have to scream each other into submission. I believe that all people can work out their differences (or at least peacefully coexist) if they try. Otherwise, we move closer to violence and then nobody wins. And I believe that as a society we are closer to violence than you might expect. Way too little compromise and way too much bullying.
Agreed. I saw an article about a Senator that wanted to make Poor kids do Janitorial work for their free lunch. My first thought was . . . .these guys are not going to be satisfied until the poor pull a Robespierre and drag out the guillotines. The complete lack of compassion . .. caring . . .empathy. The outright lack of any attempt to try and understand each other. Rocket River This is our America
