I don't know what song you're talking about. But does it contain lyrics such as "I'm embarrassed that anti-war people are from America"?
Jeez, it doesn't have to be the exact opposite. There's some song out there talking about the war and their support for it. In your view, that song be banned and boycotted too because they're forcing their views down our throats. Or maybe not, because you agree with it. If it's the latter, stop saying people are pissed because entertainers are forcing their views upon us, when that's not what's really pissing people off...it's the fact that they're expressing differing views.
If the target audience for that song did not like it or the lyrical content, in turn causing the radio stations to have to pull it from rotation....why would I have a problem with that? Why would any radio station want to play something that its audience didn't want to hear?
That goes against you saying that people don't like the Dixie Chicks now because they're forcing their views on us, not that the views are unpopular.
1. people choose to hire me or not hire me for all different kinds of reasons. i don't doubt that some might be offended by some of my views and take their business elsewhere. my barber has some "animal trophies" on his wall of his office...on occasion, people walk in and walk out. one lady screamed at him and told him he was a murderer for having killed all those animals. she left and that "caused him to lose business." so what? he knew full well that someone could be offended. so they just take their business elsewhere, because he isn't taking those things off his wall...it's a business decision he'll live with. i have some clients who asked beforehand, "are you a christian? it's important to us that our lawyer is christian." if they can ask that and make a decision to hire me based on that...then certainly someone else can make the decision to not hire me based on that. and i have absolutely no problem with that. 2. if someone protests on our property my landlord will ask them to leave...if they don't, he'll have them arrested. you may be able to make some arguments about malls being public forums for speech...but those arguments don't ring in office buildings. but that's still very different from someone choosing not to employ my services.
That's fine, and I understand. What I don't understand is if these people used you as a lawyer, and you kicked ass for them, then they found out you weren't pro-choice or something, then fired you. I think that's silly. I'm done with this argument, BTW.
It doesn't go against anything. They're being hurt financially (theoretically) for forcing their 'unpopular' views on people. If they never would've said anything, this wouldn't have happened. Yet they seemingly would still hold those views that were unpopular to their audience. So it's not the views, it's the combination of the forcing of those views and the popularity of the views. Maybe their popularity is increasing in England now for the same reason. Good for them.
fair enough...i don't totally disagree...as i said before, i know dave matthews isn't in support of this war...that won't change my taste for his music. however, dave matthews hasn't come out and said he's "ashamed of the president" on stage, either. that's just a step up from political viewpoint, i'd say. that's not simply saying, "i disagree." the lawyer analogy probably doesn't work real well...much more of a position of trust than a musician who you can just turn off. so my personal views are a bit more relevant to my clients than they should be to the fans of a country music star.
