ITT: Unpopular opinions. I'll start: >You should be

>>37624721
I agree, so long as you're not working or acting on their behalf at the time

Isn't that just common sense? But I mean if it happens you can still be beaten up by some guy offended by it

You're allowed to say whatever you want at work. They're also free to decide that they don't want you representing their company with your pol faggotry. That's life man.

>>37624721
I disagree. Your employer should be able to fire you for that if he so chooses. What kind of fantasy world do you people live in hahahaha

>>37624764
I don't care, so long as they don't target my livelihood.

Also, as if social media liberals would actually confront me about it IRL

>>37624721

Let me guess, you voted for Trump

If an action or thing doesnt have a destined use or place it doesnt exist therefore there is no right or wrong just pos and neg and the reactions that occur

>>37624777
because boycotts last less than a month. It's purely PR bullshit when they fire someone on that basis
Especially when harvard takes away peoples acceptances for making edgy jokes that don't even reflect their personal views. It's called dark humor for a reason
>>37624804
I'm not American and I think Trump is a retard. I also think /pol/ is retarded.
>>37624773

File: IMG_0845.jpg (33KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x600px

>employee call customer a nigger
>company loses millions of dollars
>can't fire him

>Unpopular opinions
>People still get mad over your opinion

lol

>>37624804
Lemme guess u didnt vote

>>37624832
If it's at work, then it's a different story. I'm talking about off time.

>>37624825
They're choosing to hire you. Why would they retain somebody who shoots his fat mouth off about muh negros and joos? That's just not good business.

File: woc.jpg (51KB, 492x399px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 492x399px

>>37624721
Why should anyone have to pay you to misrepresent their business while fishing for /pol/ upvotes? lol

How do you function?

>we shouldn't allow sandniggers to infest the first World with their backwards culture

>>37624850
And yet, all of you would be fucked if all your 4chan posts went public. Everyone's fucked up in private.
>>37624857
>>37624850

>>37624773
It's unfortunate that people have come to believe that only companies have rights. (This is my unpopular opinion.)

>>37624908
Don't behave like a manchild and you won't have issues. This isn't difficult.

>>37624721
>tfw no asian gf is a meme

>>37624857
what employees do in their free time misinterprets a business?
what are you on?

>>37624946
Maybe try to read your contract next time

>>37624961
>dark humor with a couple of chaps makes me a manchild

File: 14967149987635.png (245KB, 365x765px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 365x765px

>>37625006
If you're stupid enough to post racist/prejudiced comments on your facebook or twitter or whatever, then yes, you deserve to be fired for misrepresenting* their business. Why do you want to fit in so badly with the most embarrassing, low-intellect board on this already embarrassing website?

>>37625055
i didn't ask you whether someone deserves to be fired, i asked you how it misinterprets a business and you avoided the question entirely

File: 1400615901359.jpg (56KB, 845x771px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 845x771px

>>37625084
Your employer shouldn't tolerate bigotry toward his customers in any capacity. That includes allowing his employees to publicly belittle them.

What is so difficult to understand, manchild?

>>37625146
i doubt islamic terrorists and yeeeee boi niggers are potential customers for any decent business, but yeah, good luck baiting, pal

>>37625146
>towards his customers
Except he didn't say anything offensive towards his customers? Face it, everyone says offensive shit when they're not at work. Not everyone is the castrated nice Tech support guy

It's like if I ranted about how some of my customers are fucking idiots on social media. That doesn't mean I yell at them during my job. It means I'm blowing off steam. Fucking idiot.

>>37624721
>All people born with disabilities should be executed.

File: 1496719379115.jpg (89KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1280x720px

>>37625185
He said he was making racist comments. His employer has every rate to protect his business and its reputation.

If you children can't contain yourself on facebook you deserve to be fired.

>>37625211
So you're saying employers should have full control over their employees social lives? Because that's what I'm getting from this.

File: 1379223653535.jpg (23KB, 281x294px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 281x294px

>>37625234
He has the right to fire you for misrepresenting his business. You can fish for attention from your /pol/ friends all you like but he doesn't have to tolerate it.

If you can't contain yourself on public social media you're an idiot.

>>37625084
>misinterprets

Oh my god you are stupid. Are you 14?

>>37625234
I dunno how you're not getting this. Even if it isn't during work hours, people still get an impression of what a company hires if they known employee. If their employees are spouting crazy shit in public areas that are on record, then it's in their best interest to avoid that shit, you're not special and easily replaceable, so there's really no reason to keep someone like that employed.

They're not ~controlling~ your social life, just don't act like a retard in public spaces and keep it private, just like everyone should do with basically everything.

>>37624812
What would be the difference between a right and positive action? Couldn't right and wrong be used as gauges of people's reactions?

Traps/trannies are equally as female as natural girls if they identify as a girl

>>37625207
Bad opinion, could create a cafe system of which a certain elite determine what a disability is and this who gets to live. Same reason you shouldn't ban certain people from reproducing.

The only way it works and doesn't devolve into tyranny is if you create a document listing specific disabilities and that is to never be changed under any circumstance. And even then it's unjust because what we consider a "disability" is arbitrary.

>>37624721
pegging needs to become mandatory so all guys can have prostate orgasms

>>37624825
As a comedian I don't understand how you call edgy memes with shitty puns "dark humour". It's literally entry level 14 year old nonsense. Harvard should deny people on the fact that they're this pathetically unfunny

>>37625084
"Hey, isn't that the place that employs that fat man child who posted how the Ariana Grand concert was a "blast"?? "Let's go somewhere else. "

If someone is dumb enough to post this shit, they're too dumb to be employable. It shows these people lack basic common sense.

>>37625185
But isn't it ironic that you're a fucking idiot who doesn't understand society? Also most people are decent. You're just a hateful man child.

>>37625169
>black people and Muslims don't buy anything ever
>there aren't empathetic whites who also hate bigotry

>>37625497
>hateful manchild
sure. i really hate blacks and gays because i made a joke about aids

>>37625234
No he's saying nobody wants to hire racists. Not that he's trying to control their lives. Are you seriously this dense?

>>37625523
>bigotry
>manchild
Christ, I've only been gone a month. Did this place really turn into reddit?

>>37625524
You make aids "jokes" 30 years after they're relevant? It's pretty clear you hate comedy.

>>37625523
Dont be a retard!

Blacks buy weed and liquor.
Muslims buy cigarettes and wives.

>>37624721
I agree in free speech, but I also agree that you should be willing to face consequences for them.

It's your right to be a Nazi, liberal, whatever. Doesn't mean that anyone must be forced to associate with you.

File: 1490239480058.jpg (68KB, 699x485px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 699x485px

>>37624849
>Employee goes to customers house after work and calls him a nigger
>Customer says he'll never go to their store again
>Can't fire employee
>Lose millions
It's like things that happen in real life are permanent and other humans actually remember things that happen and have their own free will.
Weird. Maybe I should not shout out every single thing that comes to my mind like I have tourettes?

>>37624788
You'd have to go outside first, idiot

>>37624908
Look at all this fucking PROJECTION. If all my 4chan posts went public no one would give a shit because most people understand context and subtlety, and I don't go around posting long insane rants about the Jews.

>>37625585
so its fine to refuse service to gay people or refuse to hire them?

>>37625595
>>Employee goes to customers house after work and calls him a nigger
>It's like things that happen in real life
Show me an example where that's happened before.

>>37625600
Usually it's something along the lines of "Let's see what your employer thinks about that!"

And yeah, I make jokes about women and gays IRL and don't get shit for it.

>>37625401
Underrated
fdfdsddsdssf

>>37625548
I'm not a comedian, dude. It's a prerequisite to have a shitty sense of humor as a college student
>people in my college unironically find adam sandler funny

>>37625234
It's funny you can tell who supports Trump because all of their arguments turn into hyperbole and whining that they can't go into a black church and shout nigger into the pastors face.
Are you entitled to have a job? Is anyone (besides the government) required to put up with you? How come your employer can't fire you for any voluntary action you choose to take? It's his right to do so, just like it's your right to say it. Before you post a selfie of you in your klan robes on twitter you always have the choice to NOT do it before you get fired.
Sometimes I wish I didn't have to explain social intricacies to autistic right wing retards every day.

>>37625722
But I'm not a Trump supporter? I never voted for him and I'm not American. I've said earlier in this thread that I think he's a retard.

I will say that if you advocate genocide, that should get you in trouble. It is the law in my country, after all. That's when your free speech should end

>>37625652
I don't need to show you an example that it has ever happened. It's possible to happen and a reason why you can get fired for saying racist shit.
What if you were on the street and called someone a nigger, that person recognized you from your job and posted about it on twitter? Would you not deserve to be fired for costing the company hundreds of thousands of dollars in bad PR? Racists are liabilities to companies, it's risky to keep them on board for reasons like that.

File: bfnmnigvb57vcpfskmac.jpg (23KB, 636x252px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 636x252px

>>37625234
if you're stupid enough to let rip on social media you deserve it desu

File: witnessed.jpg (49KB, 600x602px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 600x602px

>>37624721

Yeah I agree with you robot. Too bad this place is crowded with normie sheep and women huh

>>37625640
>>37625640
Sure. As long as the company (or it's owner) can accept that it may fail because of this.

>>37625678
Fair enough. I'm fairly liberal, but I don't give a shit if people make racist or sexist jokes. I make them myself sometimes.

>>37625401
Go back to tumblr
0riginal

>>37625764
>It's my fault people are crybullies

>taking away freedom from companies
>just to protect some people so that they can say "nigger" at work

is this ironic? this is pretty much the reverse of tumblr faggotry

>>37625782
>tfw I am the true one percent because next to no one agrees with me on this, including /r9k/

>>37625874
not "at work" obviously

>>37625883

Yeah well I know many more controversial truths about the world that when normies hear it they shriek like they just saw the devil. Most people can't handle the truth about anything they want to live in blissful ignorance.

>>37624721
>I should be able to do whatever I want but my employer shouldn't

>>37625948
It's more like no one should give a shit what I say. We've become easily offendable pussies as a society
>uncle lives in South Korea
>posts crazy right wing shit on his facebook all the time
>entire family hates him but his employer gives zero fucks and he's still kept his job after all these years

You can say literally whatever you want to anyone, but you have to deal with the consequences of those statements, you autistic clown. If a major corporation fires someone over something they said they are not "choosing sides" or "making a statement" they are trying not to alienate potential business. Also, choosing not to continue to employ people who talk shit on customers is defensible free speech.

>>37625948
>say
>do
No difference at all right
But actually you should never ever try to say something or to prove something to normal-moral faggots who may find this "offensive"

>>37626023
only difference between say and do is the power necessary for the latter
if you gave a random poltard power he would practice what he preaches

>>37625991
>It's more like no one should give a shit what I say
Why? Words hold value, and you truly cannot believe that words are powerless or without value.

>>37624721
Let me get this straight, OP:

You believe that private businesses should be forced to employ someone even though their actions may hurt their income and decimate their public image?

I'm sorry that you're sad about being yelled at if you had the guts to yell nigger in polite society, but that does not mean you can infringe on people's freedoms to end contracts with employees.

>>37626081
So? If someone walked up to me and called me a chink or some other slur, that'd be 10 seconds of me feeling uncomfortable. No one should have to lose their livelihood because they made someone feel uncomfortable for a short period of time.
And for the record, I'm not white. So far every leftard in this thread has:
>assumed I'm fat (I'm the opposite)
>assumed I'm a neckbeard
>assumed I voted for Trump
>assumed I visit /pol/
>assumed I'm racist or hold extremist views
>assumed I'm some sort of neofascist
>assumed I'm white
I'm none of these things.

>>37626190
>I'm sorry that you're sad about being yelled at if you had the guts to yell nigger in polite society,
What? That's free speech. They should yell at me. That's their freedom of speech. I encourage it.

>Thinking racist and pretending to be different just for being accepted is worse than someone that talk in a racist/sexist way. You can choose to avoid or disagree/ignore/discuss with the second one while the first one will just remain the same

>>37626192
>No one should have to lose their livelihood because they made someone feel uncomfortable for a short period of time
You aren't entitled to anything, your employer gives you a job, and if you fail to live up to his standards he'll hire someone that will. Not really hard to grasp.

>b-but it shouldn't be this way
well tough titties
also your mother is a whore, it's just words lol :^)

>>37624721
I dont believe that healthcare is a right, and I think the current US system is the best healthcare system in the world. I also have absolutely no problem with pharmaceutical companies charging exorbitant prices for their drugs... if they spent billions of dollars creating them, they should be able to charge whatever they want for their product.

>>37626306
That didn't offend me. See what I mean? We've become pussies. Other countries give zero fucks. This ideology of ruining people's lives because my fee fees were hurt is a purely western thing.

>>37624721
unpopular opinion
>employers should be able to control every aspect of a company that affects it's look in the eyes of the public, even if they are a bomb company that doesn't like having turbans visible on site then they could just fire their turbans

File: 1494305205502.png (976KB, 848x1080px) Image search: [Google]

976KB, 848x1080px

>there should be a license to breed and own pets normies are too irresponsible to handle things like that
>monarchism is the final redpill
>artificial sweetener is better than sugar
>they really don't make music like they use to anymore

>>37626350
>Other countries give zero fucks
No, you're just a sheltered dumbass who thinks he has it tough in america because he can't spew every little thought from his mouth like verbal diarrhea.
Also if you want to be unfireable have an indispensable skill, I'm assuming that's what your uncle has.

>>37626350
If you don't like the standards your employer sets for you start your own business. Then when you lose a client because he calls a black customer saw an employee talking shit on black people on twitter explain to me how you'd handle it.

File: hqdefault.jpg (18KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x360px

>>37626397
you and me are similar

>>37626209
Point
-------
You

Also, it's amazing that you're so retarded that the basic tenets of free speech are foreign to you.

Free speech is between you and institutions. The government can't stop you from saying nigger.

However, people have a right to associate with whoever they want. If you swear in front of people, they can easily tell you to do away.

You're not advocating for free speech. You're advocating that people be unable to criticise or respond to a form of free speech you identify with.

You stupid fucking faggot.

>>37626533
Freedom of speech is the right to articulate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship, or >societal sanction.[1][2][3][4]
>societal sanction

>>37626587
>unironically citing wikipedia
you deserve to have your rights taken away.

>>37626608
Wow you sure convinced me there, anon.

>>37626587
Not the guy you're replying to, but lets put this another way.

You own a small business in a small town. Everybody knows you, you know everybody. You're a pillar of the community.

Then you hire Joe. Joe is a racist/sexist homophobe. Uses racial slurs in public, on facebook, etc. All of a sudden, nobody really wants to come into your store. Sure, Joe is fine when hes at work. But everybody knows about Joe, and dont really want to associate with him... and by extension, your business.

You cant fire Joe? You just have to sit back and let him destroy YOUR livlihood?

>>37624721
Thing is that you're working for someone else, they are in their right to fire you for acting out in a way they do't like. If you don't like it, make your own company.

>>37626356
widely popular opinion, but also the correct one

>>37626645
Point taken. But what if its randoms who aren't in your community, taking an obscure comment you made on some page and threatening to get you fired

>>37626587
>societal sanction
1. The fact you used Wikipedia is hilarious.
2. This still refers to institutions.

A sanction means a penalty. As in "sanctions against a country".

Societal sanction is not "omg help me /r9k/ I called Obama a nigger and now my coworkers are mad at me!" Societal sanction would be not having access to the social sphere, being denied a platform, etc.

>aka stuff that actually happens but you don't care about because you're whining about this

The point is to maximise freedom. If "societal sanction" as you mean it were prohibited, no one could ever respond to anything anyone ever said. No one could ever be friends with anyone because " oh wow you're excluding me from your Church group because I keep swearing? Wow this is literally fucking fascism".

Your position is more dangerous to liberty, you stupid retard.

>>37624721
>women in the USA and to a lesser extent in some other countries do play life on easy mode
>babies with certain genes should be aborted or killed (the list of bad genes might be changed in the future e.g. if all of these babies get to grow in a healthy environment)
>there are more than two sexes but feminists got the idea partly wrong
>self-identified gender/sex should not be person's official gender/sex
>capitalism is overrated but communism isn't the ideal system either
>conscription is usually a bad thing
>universal basic income is good but only when the rich are excluded from it (it wouldn't technically be universal at this point but I digress)
>memes in general are overrated but necessary

>>37626690
Look at it from the business owner's perspective.

If it truly is a random person who isnt in your community, and nobody in your community cares, then fuck it, whats the harm in keeping him? But if you think that its going to negatively impact your business, then its your call on whether or not to fire him.

Your obligation is to protect your business, and you cant let a dumbass comment from some employee take you down. I truly believe that a business owner should be able to get rid of any employee he thinks will hurt his business.

>>37624721
>men are cancer
>women are superior
>trans people are bad and fake

>>37626699
>>37626699
The way I meant it was:
>people trying to fuck with your life because you said something mean
That's very different from people telling my why I'm wrong

>>37626690
You're referring to left wingers ratting out people to their employers?

1. This is very rare and done by a small group of people. You're not a contrarian for holding this view.
2. Companies still have mission statements and brand identities that they maintain, so firing this person may be a PR stunt. See Chick-fil-a or some vegan hippie soap store. If you don't like it, you have an issue with the free market.
3. Depending on the job, a person's perspective may affect their capacity to do a job. I would never go to a doctor who publicly denounces vaccines for causing autism. This can apply to teachers, cops, judges, etc.
4. While you can argue (and I would agree) that this behaviour is often inappropriate, to prohibit it entirely would produce more problems. All these people are doing is holding individuals responsible for what they say. If this was banned, then no one would ever be accountable. I'd risk the former than go with the latter.

>>37626798
I 100% agree with you (not the guy you replied to) except point number 3. I agree with the first two sentences, but then you listed a bunch of government jobs (teachers, cops, judges). Yes, i agree that their perspective can change the way they do their jobs. However, being government jobs, I do not believe that they should be barred from those professions, no matter what their public words/beliefs are. I am all for a private company being able to fire an employee for public comments. But i do believe its a first amendment issue to fire someone from a non-elected government position for words.

Men should feel entitled to anal sex unless they are willing to also get fucked in the ass. By a penis, don't pull that pegging shit because it's not the same and I don't want to engage in your femdom faggotry either.

>>37626765
>it should be illegal to be mean to me for something I said!

Again, you're really fucking stupid.

In our current system, maybe you'll get fired if you say something offensive on Twitter. Solution? Don't be fucking retarded in public.

Under your system, no one could ever be fired ever. No one could ever be expelled from anything ever. All groups, organizations, corporations and other entities would be meaningless since an outgroul defined by a differing belief system is a basic unit for societal interaction.

>>37624721
The woman should ideally be the dominant and penetrating partner in a sexual relationship. Unfortunately not many women are up to the task.

Unless your boss hired you knowing your being sexist racist and accepted it, he can fire you if you are becoming a treat for his business. You can share and talk about your ideas, but not when you are related to my business.

>>37626858
You are makking ridiculous scenarios that would never happen. What he talks about has become a serious issue. I don't even have social media any more because I work for a company that is obsessed with PR. They even told us during orientation that it's not just the uniform, we can't even wear clothes that are a similar color to their uniform to the wine merchant or we'll be fired. So a nigger lover is offended when someone says they do not enjoy rap music. They should not have to be fired over something so trivial, yet this is exactly what is happening. We need some protections in place because this is people's livelihoods we are talking about.

>>37626914
Since when did businesses own a person's body, mind and soul for 24/7/365? When it has nothing to do with work then it has nothing to do with work. Just being an employee is not enough to call their behavior related to the business.

>>37626858
You're blowing everything I'm saying way out of proportion to make me seem retarded. I said it's a draconian and unnecessary punishment, you're saying that I think there should be no punishments for anything ever.

>>37626847
That's a fair point, since that is between an individual and their government.

However, if a person's actions deliberately go against constitutional guranteed, then it makes sense for them to be fired.

Let's say you live in a country with freedom of religion, and a judge publicly denounces people of a certain faith. That could be a warning sign that this individual is violating a basic tenent of the country's constutution, and there should be an investigation into whether this individual has discriminated against people of a certain faith.

As for cops and teachers, they have a responsibility to the community. I would be horrified if I was Asianand I discovered the chief of police in my town openly despises chinks. How could I feel safe ( or that ny tax dollars are at work) when someone commissioned to protecting me openly hates me? What if my child committed a crime? Would they be safely taken to the station or could something happen?

>>37624764
The concept of fighting words is dumb.

Any harm intentionally done to the head of another person should be considered attempted murder.

>>37626917
>you're making ridiculous scenarios!
>what if I get fired for saying I hate rap music?

But yes, I agree that the decimation of private life is sad, but not because people are being held responsible for public statements.

>>37626935
Because it affects the business's clientele.

>>37626960
Or I'm taking what you said to it's logical conclusion because you were too dumb to think ahead.

>>37626917
>this is people's livelihoods we are talking about.
Yes, and its a business owner's livelihood to deal with the backlash. Why should he be responsible for something your stupid ass said on twitter? Even if it was "completely innocent," he still has to deal with all the backlash and fallout.

The shitty situation isnt the business owner's fault. It's yours for spouting off on twitter, or its the SJW's fault for making a big deal out of something you said. Either way, a business owner cant sit back and let it destroy HIS livelihood.

>>37626935
Same goes for this. No, they dont own you. But what you do outside of work can negatively impact their business, and they should be able to run their business as they see fit. Dont like it? Dont work there.

>>37626961
I'll buy that. I still think its getting into a grey area though, because in today's climate even a lot of political speech is being considered "hate speech." Like the part where you said if you were asian and the police chief hated chinks? What if you were mexican or muslim, and the police chief said that he voted for trump?

I agree with you, I just think we're getting into a messy territory there because a lot of people will make the argument that you hold bigoted beliefs just because of your political views, etc.

>>37627012
>I agree that the decimation of private life is sad
>but it's good because people are being held responsible for public statements!

>>37627038
>implying sjws have any money to do business with

Anyone who is offended by a person disliking rap is not going to be paying for anything. They are single issue voters, give me free shit. They accept people being trampled on when they don't get enough free shit. Bread and circus. How is a business hurt by an employee not liking rap? I mean maybe if it's a rap business, but even that's a stretch.

>>37627012
Really? What I said was pretty minor. If what I proposed were in place, people would take responsibility for their own feelings.

>>37626935
There are companies that put in contract things as behavior policy on social media that works even for your personal account. It's just a matter of reputation, as long people take your personal opinion as your company opinion the one losing the most is not you. Maybe it isn't right, but it works like this.

>>37627138
Thats a business owner's call. If he thinks its going to hurt his business, he should be able to fire the employee.

And stop using hyperbole about how those people wouldnt be able to buy anything. What if a guy owns some little hipster cafe where SJWs and Nu-males congregate? Then his employee pisses them off (either with actual inflammatory words, or just trivial bullshit like not liking rap). The guy who owns the cafe is fucked, his clientele hates the business for associating with a "racist."

Likely? No. But stop acting like sjw campaigns cant smear a business.

>>37627038
>trump

I'll be honest: I'm pretty left wing and I'm nervous about how partisan people are. I work at a university and professors publicly make fun of Trump and (a few years prior) Stephen Harper.

On one hand, I get it. Harper put a gag order on several scientists, and many people have similar fears that Trump will enforce anti-science policies. In that case, I understand why professors and scientists want to emphasize to their students that their livlihoods are on the line.

On the other hand, I imagine being a conservative student and hearing about how my professor hates Trump. My political views have helped me network with professors, and while they haven't given me any tangible returns, I could see that being the case in a few years. My professors *like me* because I'm left of centre.

As for Trump, I do think he's said offensive things and I know there are people who like him for saying those things. There are also people who like him for other reasons. Making an assumption about why someone boted for him is a huge leap and I agree with you that denying someone a job over that would be very unethical.

With that said, I've seen people lose jobs over slurs, but never over open Trump support. Could be wrong, though.

>>37624721
I like saying whatever I want on 4chan but in practice this is an awful idea, a lot of the shitty things people say aren't even backed by any real thought, just slinging shit for the sake of it.

>>37627062
>he thinks that spying and big data is the same as Being called into his boss's office over something he posted on Normie Book
Hmm...

>>37627139
>responsible for their own feelings
At what point are feelings legitimate? You clearly think people being offended by slurs is stupid, but what about if I made several Facebook posts airing your family's dirty laundry? Or mocking a sick relative?

Again, it's childish to say that your words have no consequences, but still defend how essential free speech is.

>>37627208
A business only cares about "sjws" if they are a sizeable market portion.

And at that point they are within their rights to cater to their feelings.

>>37627216
I'll pretty much agree with everything you said there.

I wasnt even trying to make this a political conversation, Trump was just the easiest way for me to make the point. We were talking about being barred from government jobs for being racist, bigoted, holding certain beliefs, etc. I dont think that voting for Trump makes you a racist. I know a LOT of people who do, however. The only point I wanted to make is that we get into a messy area when we start denying people access to public sector jobs due to ANY belief, public statements, etc. because it becomes a slippery slope.

I dont think voting for trump makes you a racist. Lets say the head of the KKK ran for president though, and I'm a cop who publicly supports him and voted for him. Should that cop lose his job? At what point do we draw the line? What if the cop just really liked the KKK leader's economic vision? Or what if he was just a huge racist?

I know thats kind of an extreme example, but I think it proves the point well. In today's world, the lines between racism/sexism/bigotry and politics are becoming blurrier, and I just think its hard to deny somebody a public sector job because of any belief that they hold... going back to the first amendment issue.

Private sector jobs can do whatever the fuck they want.

*I am in no way endorsing these politicians, I just wanted to make a point.

>>37627310
>And at that point they are within their rights to cater to their feelings.
So you agree? If my employee pisses off my customers when he is off the clock, i should be able to fire him for hurting my business?

>>37627310
>At what point are feelings legitimate? You clearly think people being offended by slurs is stupid, but what about if I made several Facebook posts airing your family's dirty laundry? Or mocking a sick relative?

>Again, it's childish to say that your words have no consequences, but still defend how essential free speech is.
That's already happened to me. I didn't care.

>>37626010
>. Also, choosing not to continue to employ people who talk shit on customers is defensible free speech.
Businesses shouldn't have the right to free speech, nor should those interested in free speech as a social ideal want to give it to them.

>>37626743

Big surprise, the conversation stops here because AS SOON as anyone frames it as a private institution protecting their financial well-being the argument as to why ANY intelligent corporation would employ outspoken bigots completely dries up. There's literally no reason to employ someone who could actively turn people of any kind off to being your customer. None.

>>37626847
You can't have someone who hates black people (or at least publically states to) teaching children, some of them are going to be black. Swap the position and race where necessary.

>>37627497
Not at all. The influence of firms over our discourse should be reduced at all costs. I have no problem with firms doing that as long as an independent body calculates a fine greater than their expected losses, and the state forces them to pay it.

>>37624721
>as an employer you should be able to hire and fire anyone for whatever reason you want whether its race, religion, hotness, or just a whim.

>>37627520
I agree with you... kind of. Read the rest of the conversation I had with the other guy.

Basically, where do you draw that line? If I come out and say I'm a trump supporter, does that mean I cant be a teacher? A lot of people would interpret that as me hating muslims and mexicans (and women).

I agree you cant have an outright racist teaching kids... but it's pretty hard to determine where to draw the line in a public sector government job. Because at what point does it become infringing on your first amendment rights?

Again, private sector can do whatever they want.

>>37627431
They do though, and even if I agreed with you the rest of that post is Factual, they DO have and excercise free speech and what you or I think of that morally is irrelevant to this conversation.
You've chosen the least relevant portion of this post to take issue with. Now explain to me why you, as an employer, would continue to associate with anyone whose outspoken opinions on anything could potentially negatively impact you business.

>>37624721
I believe all people over the age of 70 or 75 should be euthanized. Old people are a huge drain in pretty much every society and there's no good in keeping them around.

>>37627869
The question is about what they should be able to do. The fact that they are able to do it is what's really irrelevant.

>>37627967
Explain to me how firing someone for alienating customers is a free speech violation.

>>37628084
As far as the law is concerned, it isn't. No one had disputed this; the opening post even uses the term "should". But as far as I'm concerned, the law is wrong. As someone fond of the idea of free speech, I dislike the first amendment for failing to account for the ways private entities are able to suppress each other. Firms should not be allowed to dominate our discourse, and mobs should not be able to bully people into silence.

>>37627613
I'll say that Trump is a toughie because people really do jump to a lot of conclusion when they hear you support Trump, but I feel like this is the first time that's ever been the case. Until Trump, just saying I'm a conservative, I'm a Republican wasn't enough to make people think those kind things about you. Trump's the only situation where it can be ambiguous and people assume the worst. Because if your outspoken about your various isms or obias otherwise, no one is going to be confused about that.

>>37627967
as an employer you provide a "company policy" upon hiring someone. you let them know what is expected of them. if they fail to meet those criteria they are fired. as the employee, upon being hired, you are agreeing to meet those criteria. if the policy was never given officially, then a superior needs to give you verbal and written warnings before firing. this is not a free speech violation if you are not doing what you were hired to do.
its not like you are being arrested for saying something offensive, you are just no longer going to be employed by someone.

>>37628263
>You SHOULD be able to say whatever you want.

Already been addressed in my response to OP. You CAN say whatever you want wherever you want but the consequences are yours to own. You think you're entitled to a job once you have it regardless of your lack of decorum and the way it reflects the company you work for?

>>37628263
the right to free speech means the state cannot charge you with a crime for saying something offensive... this has nothing to do with an employer choosing to fire you

>>37628312
The mere act of writing a policy which makes off job speech a condition of employment should be seen as a free speech violation.
>>37628323
You didn't address anything. By moving the conversation from "should" to "can" you changed the subject entirely. Because of this everything you said is completely irrelevant. From it's onset, this discussion was about what firms should be allowed to do, not what they're currently able to do.
>>37628341
That's the problem I have with it. The right to free speech is far too narrow and needs to be expanded.

>>37628499
>The mere act of writing a company policy.

Wrong again you're employed at their discretion, whatever hoops they want you to jump through as a prospective employee are yours to place, moreover if you agree to them and are fired within the context of them. In the exact same capacity, you are allowed to disagree with those hoops and elect to not be employed in the first place.

>>37628743
Again, I'm arguing that they should not be allowed to construct whatever hoops they want.

Is it really that hard to read with all that corporate cock in your mouth?

>>37624721
I'm fine with this long as the person talking shit don't mind getting knocked for it.

>>37628804
I guess I'm confused at who you think the discretion for determining hireabilty should belong to.

>>37628847
it belongs to the buisness so long as the buisness does not act arbitrairly. if a buisness acts arbitrairly they rescind thier right to have control over it and the state should intervene.

If you dont use your things the right way they should be taken away

>>37628847
The company for the most part. I just think they should not be allowed to make off-job speech a condition for hiring or continued employment at all, and should be fined if they're found to be doing so.

I just have a very extreme position on free speech.

>>37628889
Free speech means the GOVERNMENT cant censor you, nothing more. you're just anti-property and authoritarian

>>37628920
>he posts on 4chan
>doesn't believe in enforced free speech

>>37628920
Your conception of free speech is dangerously reductionist.

>>37628984
His conception of free speech is the one outlined by the constitution.

By the way, Chris Cantwell posts and says racist anti semitic pro genocide shit online through podcasts all the time and he's a business owner

Please tell me again why me making an off color joke about women should cost me my job

>>37628880
Firing someone for a widely publicized incident (these are never some dude with 20 followers on twitter talking shit) that could otherwise alienate potential clientele is not "arbitrary". CNN was right within their rights to fire Kathy Griffith just like Fox was within their rights to fire O'Reilly.

>>37629016
I addressed that earlier. See:
>>37628263
>As someone fond of the idea of free speech, I dislike the first amendment for failing to account for the ways private entities are able to suppress each other. Firms should not be allowed to dominate our discourse, and mobs should not be able to bully people into silence.

>>37629078
How do you propose to account constitutionally for "mobs" that basically just consist of people online retweeting something someone posted?

>>37624721
Retort: An employer should be allowed to fire someone for whatever reason they want.

I'm an extreme right-winger, but I believe microaggressions exist and are problematic.

>>37624721
>>37625207

Man these threads suck because it's always edgy shit that is extremely popular on 4chan and half of reddit, so it's in effect not unpopular at all.

You want an unpopular opinion?


The Emoji Movie doesn't look bad.

>>37629072
These incidents give the company bad publicity. if they didnt do anything and just ignored away, have you ver heard of the striesand effect?

>>37629213
Actually, this opinion is pretty unpopular on 4chan if you took the time to read the thread. 4chan is full of corporate cock sucking lolbertarians

>>37629109
Just criminalize all actions that work to suppress speech of others. It doesn't matter if it was by a mob or an individual.

>>37629259
>, have
ignored it anyway*

>>37628984
The constitution doesn't matter. Being moral and doing whats right matters more than some outdated document.

>>37629279
It's not "suppression" if all you're doing is retweeting something they said or telling them you don't like something they said. You're proposing the further reduction of free speech.

>>37628277
I see where you're coming from, but even if it wasn't trump, it would be something else.

>You're a conservative? Oh so you hate gays and don't support women's rights?

See how easy it is? I don't support having a legitimate racist or homophobe or sexist in influential positions... But I also realize the fact that the government can't tell people how to feel, and legally shouldn't be able to discriminate against an employee for having views that conflict with the mainstream. I just think it's a trickier issue than most of the people in this thread are making it out to be.

Again, that applies to public sector only. Private companies can do whatever.

>>37629346
private CAN do whatever but that doesnt mean they ought should be able to!

you should been allowed to kill yourself at whatever age you want legally

>>37629412
H O O O O O O O O O O O O WOW YOU'RE ACTUALLY GONNA SAY THAT
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DLbkVPXxNTI

>>37629259
Bad publicity from who? The people who care that O'Reilly/Griffith got fired are a lot quieter than the protests and months to years of problems that they'd have had to out up with in keeping them on. It's a decision between amputating the limb or letting the dead weight drag the whole body down for the foreseeable future, and even so if the sompany felt it was the right decision they're under no legal/moral obligation to continue to support them.

>>37629483
refer to the previous comment where i debunk this notion that because someone does something like this it can hirt a company,.
>>37629279
>>37629287

>>37626963
Lol pus$y

>>37629270
It's 50/50

afa ehdhjlk 125

File: 1480258613915.png (193KB, 499x478px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 499x478px

>>37624721
>people with mental disabilities should be gassed (for their and their families' sake)
>there are several anthropological species on Earth (eurasians/several types of africans/abos) but that doesn't mean we should hate/discriminate each other
>women are objectively mentally and physically inferior to men in all ways imaginable and should have a legal status similar to the one minors have now
>there should be a voter enabling certificate you aquire after extensive randomized tests on various subject like law, economics, geography and mathematics
>embryo genetic manipulation should be implemented and standardized ASAP
>organized religion has 0 objective proof backing it up
>most religious people, are religious because they were brainwashed while they were in a vulnerable state (while being children, after divorces, after close relatives dying etc.)
>the left-wing takeover of the west is a good thing since its socio-economical emplosion will lead to the creation of a better, post-religious rightism

>>37629482

> Dang I Was gonna kill myself but i dont wanna go to jail