Freedom of speech also has personal responsibilities
Mon Sep 25, 2017 1:51pm

That includes the ramifications of exercising one's freedom of speech. We are guaranteed that our government CANNOT punish us for exercising our right to free speech, guaranteeing us freedom from governmental punishment. However, freedom of speech does NOT guarantee freedom from the personal & private sector consequences.

IOW, the government CANNOT jail or punish us for speaking our minds, but our friends, family, employers, and the general public ALSO have freedom of speech and expression, as well as other rights, such as freedom of association in whom they allow to be associated with themselves or their brand. Thus, we can be fired, divorced, ostracized, or vilified in the public eye. We have ZERO guarantees that our speech must be "accepted", it simply cannot be legally prevented beyond an employer prohibiting their employees from saying or doing certain things lest they be fired or our family/friends deciding they no longer want to associate with us.

So, that translates into one having personal responsibility to police our OWN "free speech" so that we do not suffer the negative PERSONAL consequences that may follow ill-considered or "socially unacceptable" speech.

It is PURE BS for the POTUS, or his representatives, to threaten a private citizen with punishment for exercising their right to free speech. They should have kept their big mouths SHUT. If they wanted to put it out there that they think that NFL owners should require compliance with traditional behavior associated with the National Anthem or our flag from their employees, they should have had a NON-SPOKESMAN make the comment. Sanders speaks FOR the White House and tRUMP IS the POTUS, making both of them absolutely the WRONG PEOPLE to make such remarks from an official podium. NO surprise that none of them seem to understand that simple truth. The POTUS is not a "private citizen" while in office and the WH spokesperson represents the OFFICIAL position of the POTUS.

  • Empowered by freedom of speech in the First Amendment? We may or may not agree with the protesters. It was numbered first because it was considered most important. It is the key which enables and... more
    • Freedom of speech also has personal responsibilities — Sia☺giah, Mon Sep 25 1:51pm
      • Personal responsibilityPikes, Mon Sep 25 3:36pm
        I wrote that position many times. Why does this national anthem begin games? It's the prelude to the entertainment. It is ownership using as political statement for emotional response from fans. I... more
      • to punish them in any way... A gov't representative may offer an opinion that the EMPLOYER should or should not fire someone, but it is still 100% up to the employer... And, certainly exercising ones ... more
        • Trump's Threats Are a PunishmentMeerlin, Mon Sep 25 2:38pm
          whether or not any players, announcer, etc. is fired, games are boycotted, etc., because the threat alone injures the victim of the threat. Trump is the one showing disrespect for the Constitution,... more
          • Not a threat...Sprout, Mon Sep 25 2:54pm
            If I tell everyone I think you are a jerk, that is not a threat. If others believe me and stop hanging out with you, that doesn't make me telling folks you are a jerk into a threat. If you are a... more
            • You Are Not the POTUS of the USAMerlin, Mon Sep 25 3:02pm
              who is infamous for threatening and making good on his threats.
              • So what?Sprout, Mon Sep 25 3:05pm
                Are you claiming that the POTUS has the actual authority to fire a professional athlete? Of course not. Therefore saying that such a person SHOULD be fire is NOT actually a threat TO fire them. No... more
                • 18 U.S. Code § 227 - Wrongfully influencing a private entity’s employment decisions by a Member of Congress or an officer or employee of the legislative or executive branch (a) Whoever, being a... more
                  • The NFL rule book:PH👻👻EY, Wed Sep 27 2:53pm
                  • So, what obligation or evenSprout, Mon Sep 25 4:09pm
                    perception of obligation does the team have to fire an employee based on the opinion on the POTUS that the employees actions warrant firing? What official act was the POTUS threatening to take, or... more
                    • We're this the 1960s and 70s, PH👻👻EY, Mon Sep 25 7:12pm
                      I could get behind these protests. But, these black players are hardly in a position to complain. They are entertainers, and I am not amused. Police training reform world be a better challenge. How... more
                    • as the same kind of warning, with real teeth. So there you have someone acting on the "president's" lead.
                      • (the official act of another. Res ipsa loquitur, as they used to say on the Appian Way.
                        • DistractionPikes, Thu Sep 28 1:40am
                          Page out of Reagan's book. USSR shoots down Korean passenger jet with Americans on board, tension is so thick it can be knife cut, and James Watt announced the ethnic make up of his cabinet.... more
                        • Again... what authority does he have thatSprout, Mon Sep 25 4:30pm
                          would allow him to influence? What authority do you have to allow you to influence the manager into firing the employee? Or are you suggesting that a federal official may not express dissatisfaction... more
                          • Read the LawMerlin, Mon Sep 25 5:08pm
                            18 U.S. Code § 227 - Wrongfully influencing a private entity’s employment decisions by a Member of Congress or an officer or employee of the legislative or executive branch (a) Whoever, being a... more