Prosecuted for a hate crime instead of murder….scary

[Milk-Drops]

That last question is a personal attack on the other poster and would have been better to have been left out.

No, it's concern. We usually get our information from sonwhere and I am concerned that the person is listening to a commentator that is exaggerating the situation for ratings.

 

[Milk-Drops]

The culture influences how laws are interpreted and acted upon.

Yes, the basis here is that the Constitution still exists and freedom of speech is very protected. So unless a person commits a crime first the hate crime legislation does not apply.

 

[Milk-Drops]

There are a number of testimonies of Americans losing their jobs or such for saying words that someone else did not like but were just their view.

Yeah, that's been going on since forever. Private businesses have that kind if power here.

For example, yesterday I heard about a high school girl who was suspended because she did not like a "trans" boy who walked into the girls locker room and watched the girls changing. The school said they could do nothing to restrict the born boy who strangely enjoyed watching girls change and did not change himself as we want not on the team. So she complained to a student in class and was suspended. Her father, a coach in another school, wrote the incident on twitter and was suspended from work. Now was this legal? Does the US constitution protect both of them legally? I cannot answer that but the reality is they and many others have lost their positions for saying words that someone else did not like. Freedom of speech is no longer a right and is not protected. The US has changed (other countries as well.)

There is probably more to this story then what we know. Also freedom of speech protects us citizens from being charged with a crime for stating their opinion.

That does not protect individuals who say stuff that employers have outlined as unexceptable.

 

[Milk-Drops]

Please define what is reasonable from a lgtb point of view?
If as lgtb say, maintaining that marriage is only for one man and one women is unreasonable, where is the definition of reasonable.

In the US reasonable Doubt is that a prosecuted Ned's to demonstrate in court that the defendant committed a crime. The jury then decides if the evidence is enough to convince them.

 

[Who Me]

In the US reasonable Doubt is that a prosecuted Ned's to demonstrate in court that the defendant committed a crime. The jury then decides if the evidence is enough to convince them.

So it depends what society considers to be reasonable.

example, reasonable evidence in the deep south durring the slavery period of the US would be totally different today for a black man accused of a crime.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Yeah, that's been going on since forever. Private businesses have that kind if power here.

Not when I worked there. It’s pretty clear things have changed in the last 20 years.

There is probably more to this story then what we know. Also freedom of speech protects us citizens from being charged with a crime for stating their opinion.

Not any more.

That does not protect individuals who say stuff that employers have outlined as unexceptable.

Ah, so you do admit freedom of speech is no longer protected.

 

[Christ_empowered]

Corporations run the show. Have anything on a social media presence that an employer finds objectionable…

Bye bye

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, it's concern. We usually get our information from sonwhere and I am concerned that the person is listening to a commentator that is exaggerating the situation for ratings.

That is not how you asked it. It was clear to me that the poster is NOT AFRAID. You accused him of being afraid. that was not a legitimate concern since he obviously is not.

 

[WIP]

Milk-Drops said:
That does not protect individuals who say stuff that employers have outlined as unexceptable.

Ah, so you do admit freedom of speech is no longer protected.

I think you might be misunderstanding what freedom of speech is. It is a right that protects one from prosecution for expressing an opinion. There are limitations to the right. We don't have the right to make false statements or opinion about another. This is where slander laws come into play. Our 1st amendment right does not protect our employment. For example, when I was working I engaged much interaction with customers and/or potential customers. I had to be careful what I said so as not to reveal too much information that could undermine the reputation of our company or potential sales, making derogatory comments about my company or my coworkers, not making statements that were less than accurate about our company, and so forth.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I think you might be misunderstanding what freedom of speech is. It is a right that protects one from prosecution for expressing an opinion. There are limitations to the right. We don't have the right to make false statements or opinion about another. This is where slander laws come into play. Our 1st amendment right does not protect our employment. For example, when I was working I engaged much interaction with customers and/or potential customers. I had to be careful what I said so as not to reveal too much information that could undermine the reputation of our company or potential sales, making derogatory comments about my company or my coworkers, not making statements that were less than accurate about our company, and so forth.

I think you are unaware of the people who have suffered significant loss in the US because they refused to go along with the political climate. A man was suspended for supporting a co-ed who was suspended because she voiced her view that males ought not to be allowed to watch girls changing their clothes. The right to free speech is gone.

 

[WIP]

I think you are unaware of the people who have suffered significant loss in the US because they refused to go along with the political climate. A man was suspended for supporting a co-ed who was suspended because she voiced her view that males ought not to be allowed to watch girls changing their clothes. The right to free speech is gone.

I was responding to your comments related to the part I quoted. We get the same thing here on CFnet. Sometimes we restrict discussions of certain topics because of the attitudes such topics bring out and some claim we are violating their free speech, which is not true.

 

[Milk-Drops]

So it depends what society considers to be reasonable.

example, reasonable evidence in the deep south durring the slavery period of the US would be totally different today for a black man accused of a crime.

Mainly because black me were not seen as human and did not have the same rights as White men.

 

[Milk-Drops]

So it depends what society considers to be reasonable.

Since the founding of this Nation, yes. That's why we have a bill of rights to protect our rights and for apeals.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Mainly because black me were not seen as human and did not have the same rights as White men.

That was changed a long time ago. Time to get updated.

 

[WIP]

That was changed a long time ago. Time to get updated.

The hypocrisy of our society is found in the people. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people has an inherent flaw. That is, the people are flawed and impart their own bias into the laws. A great example is with the wording of our Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...."

These words while sounding glorious and wonderful were written at a time when those who were declaring their independence still allowed and/or even participated in the owning of slaves making themselves hypocrites. What they really meant is that all white men under the rule of the English crown were created equal. People of color including black people and native Americans were not considered equal under this declaration and did not have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The hypocrisy of our society is found in the people. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people has an inherent flaw. That is, the people are flawed and impart their own bias into the laws. A great example is with the wording of our Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...."

These words while sounding glorious and wonderful were written at a time when those who were declaring their independence still allowed and/or even participated in the owning of slaves making themselves hypocrites.

No, they were taught that slaves weren’t people. They weren’t hypocrites, just ignorant.

What they really meant is that all white men under the rule of the English crown were created equal. People of color including black people and native Americans were not considered equal under this declaration.

There were different opinions. There were also people from Africa who had come as free men.

Slavery had been a part of the world for millennia. Their words were surprisingly modern.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I was responding to your comments related to the part I quoted. We get the same thing here on CFnet. Sometimes we restrict discussions of certain topics because of the attitudes such topics bring out and some claim we are violating their free speech, which is not true.

Why is restricting topics because of the lack of self-discipline or Christian righteousness in your view NOT on the part of some restricting free speech?

 

[Christ_empowered]

Hypocrisy is a part of all societies. Foreign friends and acquaintances have told me that it’s more pronounced in the USA. I think that has more to do with the myths if rags to riches and limitless opportunities and fairness….

Which is reinforced at all levels but I suspect reflects the interests of the elites.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Hypocrisy is a part of all societies. Foreign friends and acquaintances have told me that it’s more pronounced in the USA. I think that has more to do with the myths if rags to riches and limitless opportunities and fairness….

Which is reinforced at all levels but I suspect reflects the interests of the elites.

I agree, it’s more pronounced in the US. I think it’s because reality is divorced from theory in American thinking. For example, “if you’re been forgiven you will naturally forgive others.” That’s what some actually say. They’ve made themselves totally blind to the bitterness and anger in christian’s around them AND their own unforgiving responses when offended.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I dunno

I find rich USA Christians a bit ridiculous at times. Go on mission trips all kinds of outreach to the poor in other countries…

Here at home? Vote Republican, hatred of so called welfare bums…

Ugh