Everyone has opinions that are offensive to someone. "Publicy facing company"... feh. Any big corporation could fire any LGBT person for fear of offending China or Saudi Arabia if we foll wed your logic. Careful of the bed you are making.
-
-
Replying to @IAmDeathRay @WaPoMax and
No, because sexuality and gender identity being a protected class does not imply that all "opinions" are protected in the same way, that's what I keep telling you
1 reply 1 retweet 26 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @IAmDeathRay and
"Opinions" being protected - "You can't fire someone because of words that they say" - is fundamentally untenable and nobody really believes it
1 reply 3 retweets 28 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @WaPoMax and
I'm glad you are such an outspoken opponent of the freedom of speech.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @IAmDeathRay @WaPoMax and
I am, because this version of it is untenable and meaningless If you really think everyone should be guaranteed to have whatever job they want regardless of their behavior the fight starts at a much deeper level than Maya fucking Forstadter
2 replies 1 retweet 23 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @WaPoMax and
I'm sure you would like to avoid what Maya ACTUALLY said by resorting to a "deeper" level, because her tweets of evil were actually so anodyne and you could never justify terminating her or calling her an "enemy of democracy" because of them.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @IAmDeathRay @WaPoMax and
If I'm her boss I can terminate her for any reason I want
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @WaPoMax and
Now THAT is a liberal talking. I am grateful that you aren't sugar-coating your opinions.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @IAmDeathRay @WaPoMax and
Lol, I mean that's the "neoliberal" way to frame it based on what the law actually says For the record I'm in favor of any action taken to restrict employers from exercising their legal right to fire trans people in places where that right exists
2 replies 1 retweet 18 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @WaPoMax and
Again, "freedom for they/he/she but not for thee". And you wonder why the Democrats are in such terrible, terrible shape. (Well, YOU don't. You probably think they are crushing it.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yup, the difference between "liberals" in this sense and non-liberals is having actual material interests at stake that go beyond the legal abstraction of freedom, which is only a means to an end
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @IAmDeathRay and
And honestly one of the major reasons the Democrats are losing is this insistence on fair play and sportsmanship, like this is a game and not a battle for survival The West Wing having Bartlett make sure to appoint a conservative and a liberal to balance the Supreme Court
3 replies 4 retweets 31 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
I've had this conversation with people at work. It'd be great to play fair, but you can't play fair if the other team is blatantly, openly cheating. Cheaters do, actually, prosper when there's no refs to stop them. Democrats have to play at the GOP's level, full stop.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.