Letters to the Editor
-
It sounds to me, fetboy,
like you're all for discrimination, as long it applies to beliefs/speech/action that you find objectionable. You said:
By firing someone based on their conduct or behavior, you are not imposing anything on them, you are disassociating yourself with them. Imus’ conduct and behavior is not something I want to be associated with. I know some employers use that reasoning to discriminate against gays and transgendered individuals, which is why I am in favor of legislation that would criminalize discrimination against gays and the transgendered.
Yes, some employers do use that reasoning (i.e., the same exact reasoning as yours) to discriminate against gays and all sorts of other groups, and it's poor reasoning in their mouths as well as yours. It's poor reasoning because we value free expression. Not just the free expression of lesbians, transgendered persons, Latinos, and all the other groups you deign to pity, but everyone, including someone you consider to be a racist. Why? Because we can't trust ourselves to always know on a case by case basis what point of view is "right" and "good." If we did know that, we wouldn't really need any laws. [Read previous few sentences in the voice of Captain Kirk.] Instead, the idea is that we apply laws equally, and hope that their fundamental logic is correct.
Incidentally, "force" does not mean only the threat of physical violence. As I mentioned before, threatening someone's job is generally sufficient to silence them, or coerce them to mouth your values. In fact, it's often sufficient to get someone who otherwise wouldn't sleep with you to change their mind. That's why there are laws against sexual harassment.
-
To the Lepra
Are you trying to say that you are in favor of passing legislation that would protect racist, misogynistic, punk, red necks from discrimination for being racist, misogynistic, punk, red necks?
I don't think you will get a whole lot of support with that position. No company wants to hire racist, misogynistic, punk, red necks, and no company wants to be forced to continue to employ racist, misogynistic, punk, red necks, after the racist, misogynistic, punk, red necks have publicly made it clear that they are racist, misogynistic, punk, red necks.
Why stop with racist, misogynistic, punk, red necks? Why not ensure that pedophiles and sexual harassers are also protected from discrimination for being pedophiles and sexual harassers?
-
To the Lepra
You wrote.
"Incidentally, "force" does not mean only the threat of physical violence. As I mentioned before, threatening someone's job is generally sufficient to silence them, or coerce them to mouth your values. In fact, it's often sufficient to get someone who otherwise wouldn't sleep with you to change their mind. That's why there are laws against sexual harassment."
If anyone is threatening to fire you unless you have sex with them. Try to get it on tape, report them (even if you can't get their sexual pressure on a recordable medium), and sue the pants off of them.
If you dislike that your employer is holding you to standards regarding you behavior and conduct, then quit, unless their standards violates anti-discrimination laws, in which case take them to court, and again sue the pants off of them. You have that right. Unless you work for the military, like I do.;)