Comment by adamtaylor_13

5 months ago

Freedom of speech, not freedom from consequences. People aren't "making comments," they're celebrating the murder of a man whose opinions they disagreed with.

Many Americans are waking up to realize that a large number of people they considered friends and colleagues would revel in their death if they let their political opinions be heard.

I would 100% fire someone for celebrating murder. Sorry, call me old-fashioned, but I believe in hiring people of integrity, and I will fire you if I find out you don't have any.

9 comments

adamtaylor_13

Reply
ceejayoz  5 months ago

> Freedom of speech, not freedom from consequences.

Freedom of speech requires freedom from government consequences. I have freedom of speech still if you say "I don't like your speech"; I don't have it if the cops say "I'm arresting you for your speech".

> I would 100% fire someone for celebrating murder.

And you can. You can also skip their birthday party. But "I'm glad so-and-so is dead" largely can't be a reason to, say, lose your drivers' license, social security benefits, or government employment, because the First Amendment applies to government specifically.

Facebook, Google, the grocery store, etc. have never been subject to the First Amendment.

(People can, and do, get fired for espousing Charlie Kirk's beliefs, too. That's free speech/association for you.)

  • adamtaylor_13  5 months ago

    > "I'm glad so-and-so is dead" largely can't be a reason to, say, lose your drivers' license, social security benefits, or government employment, because the First Amendment applies to government specifically.

    Unless I'm mistaken, that's not happening. If it is, it's wrong and should be corrected.

    • ceejayoz  5 months ago

      In Jimmy Kimmel's case, the FCC chair threatened ABC's broadcasting licensure to pressure them to punish his (very, very mild, incidentally) protected speech.

      2 replies →

throwaway-11-1  5 months ago

[flagged]

  • adamtaylor_13  5 months ago

    It's clear you've never even watched the very videos you claim to be citing.

    1a. He's referencing DEI, citing how it debases people. He literally says, _in the video_, "I don't want to have these thoughts, but that's what DEI does." I know you won't go watch it, but you're just parroting a false statement that Charlie Kirk never made.

    1b. He never said that. He said that Black families had better standards of living before the Civil Rights Act, referencing both household incomes, rates of fatherlessness, and crime rates. All objective facts that are true. It's hardly racist to point out how America is not getting better for black Americans.

    2. I've not heard this one. Feel free to cite a source and I'll take a look.

    3. I've also not heard this one. Once again, I'll go look if you'd like to provide sources.