• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court rules for Pennsylvania cheerleader in school free speech case

trixare4kids said:
You might want to rethink this... I added a late edit. ;) Plus, see post #41.
Click to expand...

Oh, I was dead serious...but even if your response was snark, the acronym itself allows me to leave the pistols on the shelf...lol...unless you want thin skinned Nate in this conversation, in which case "WAAAAH!!!" ... lol

Obsessing about politics on FB to a captive audience of colleagues, friends and family that may disagree with you is the height of tackiness, especially when literally everything political that gets posted these days is inflammatory. I unfollow every single politics obsessed person on FB, regardless to what side they're on. I'm just bored of the shouting...it's all "stupid shit", certainly not worth testing relationships over.
 
trixare4kids said:
Stop lying. I did not call you sophomoric. I called your pov, your assumptions, sophomoric.

Like I said, if you can't handle it, stop reading my posts.
Click to expand...

lol...tried that defense once....got the infraction points anyway.... ;) :LOL:
 
trixare4kids said:
Please give examples of what you deem "stupid shit people" post to social media.
Click to expand...
I work for a billion dollar financial firm. They deem "stupid shit" as anything that is "antithesis" to their "core values". Homophobic rhetoric, racist rhetoric, promotion of violence, And the whole "core value' thing may be BS, but those are things that will cost them money. A few years back they hired a guy to work in the mailroom, The guy struck me as some sort of gang member and I was baffled how he got hired. Within a year, he was terminated because he posted a photo of himself on FB posing with a 22 and throwing up Latin Kings. That's "stupid shit"
 
OlNate said:
Oh, I was dead serious...but even if your response was snark, the acronym itself allows me to leave the pistols on the shelf...lol...unless you want thin skinned Nate in this conversation, in which case "WAAAAH!!!" ... lol

Obsessing about politics on FB to a captive audience of colleagues, friends and family that may disagree with you is the height of tackiness, especially when literally everything political that gets posted these days is inflammatory. I unfollow every single politics obsessed person on FB, regardless to what side they're on. I'm just bored of the shouting...it's all "stupid shit", certainly not worth testing relationships over.
Click to expand...

There are pages/groups there just for discussing politics though and lots of people use their real names... How is discussing politics on a particular FB group anymore tacky than discussing them here other than here, we can use an anonymous nic?

Personally, I do not, and would not discuss any politics using my real name, not in this explosive political climate.
 
trixare4kids said:
Stop lying. I did not call you sophomoric. I called your pov, your assumptions, sophomoric.

Like I said, if you can't handle it, stop reading my posts.
Click to expand...
Semantics. Your quote, "Your sophomoric opinion is noted." Why do you say that, or do you just like the sound of the word? If you get this question wrong I will stop reading your posts

T/F President Biden won a fair election free from statistically significant voter fraud last November.
 
trixare4kids said:
www.cnbc.com

Supreme Court rules for Pennsylvania cheerleader in school free speech case

The Supreme Court upheld First Amendment claims of cheerleader Brandi Levy, who was disciplined by a Pennsylvania high school for a critical Snap off campus.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com

Supreme Court rules for Pennsylvania cheerleader in school free speech case​



Excellent! Free speech, even speech deemed ugly, should be protected speech when expressed "off campus".
Click to expand...
Yes. I was very happy to see 8 Supremes agreed on this. That one dissented, however, is a bit troubling.
 
HenryChinaski said:
I work for a billion dollar financial firm. They deem "stupid shit" as anything that is "antithesis" to their "core values". Homophobic rhetoric, racist rhetoric, promotion of violence, And the whole "core value' thing may be BS, but those are things that will cost them money. A few years back they hired a guy to work in the mailroom, The guy struck me as some sort of gang member and I was baffled how he got hired. Within a year, he was terminated because he posted a photo of himself on FB posing with a 22 and throwing up Latin Kings. That's "stupid shit"
Click to expand...

Good example!
 
mrjurrs said:
While I am all for free speech, it's obvious none of these justices went to HS in the time of social media.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. When I wasn't at school and I said f something the school then didn't get the punish me.

I don't care if these idiots have nothing better to do with their time than Snoop and the social media of teenagers. Profoundly creepy by the way. They shouldn't get to be able to enforce school rules outside of the school jurisdiction.
 
mrjurrs said:
Semantics. Your quote, "Your sophomoric opinion is noted." Why do you say that, or do you just like the sound of the word? If you get this question wrong I will stop reading your posts

T/F President Biden won a fair election free from statistically significant voter fraud last November.
Click to expand...

You assumed to know what activities I would participate IRL. That makes your assumptions sophomoric; pretentious, juvenile.

What in God's name does your last sentence have to do with this thread?

Never mind. :whistle:
 
CLAX1911 said:
It doesn't matter. When I wasn't at school and I said f something the school then didn't get the punish me.

I don't care if these idiots have nothing better to do with their time than Snoop and the social media of teenagers. Profoundly creepy by the way. They shouldn't get to be able to enforce school rules outside of the school jurisdiction.
Click to expand...

For the primary reason... where would it end.
 
Ikari said:
It needs to be raised, because some of this crap is just getting too much. I don't care if some douche goes on a tirade in public or says stupid stuff (again, assuming that this is not in the commission of crimes and such). And for the most part, people should be free to do so. Social media has really changed the landscape, and I'm of the opinion that it hasn't been changed for the better.

I think that companies do need to be restricted, somewhat (probably not completely), from retaliating against employees that do stupid shit on their personal time.
Click to expand...
Although I agree, I can see the other side's argument having merit as well. A business is in business to make business. If something written by an employee harms the opportunities to conduct business, then that employee needs to be fired. It makes perfect sense.

Case in point. I use my real name to write a screed against, say, Kayleigh McEnemy. As a result, her posse bombards this place with emails and phone calls making it impossible for my employer to conduct business. What choice do they have but to terminate my employment?

None. And, they would. That would be the case, even though I am a total rock star here.
 
trixare4kids said:
The SC decision above addresses the broader question of whether public schools can punish students for what they say off campus....
Click to expand...
There's no way you can believe in the First Amendment and support what the school did.

The government whether it's through public School or any other edifice does not have the right to intrude on people's personal lives. It doesn't matter if that person goes to that government edifice or not.
 
trixare4kids said:
For the primary reason... where would it end.
Click to expand...
I think it's a problem here is with the school thinking it's an authority figure and people's lives it most certainly is not it is a service.

I don't think the ruling goes far enough the school should be fined for persecution. Possibly even some individuals within it for snooping in the social media of teenagers maybe even investigated to see if they're perverts.
 
CLAX1911 said:
I think it's a problem here is with the school thinking it'suthority figure and people's lives it most certainly is not it is a service.

I don't think the ruling goes far enough the school should be fined for persecution. Possibly even some individuals within it for snooping in the social media of teenagers maybe even investigated to see if they're perverts.
Click to expand...

I think there's a lawsuit coming the school's way in light of this ruling. She was denied her spot on the cheerleading squad.
 
trixare4kids said:
Yeah, but he is not an employee of a private company nor will he ever be.
Click to expand...
He is. Trump never went public. No one can fire him but he is an employee.
trixare4kids said:
You wrote, "Employers check that when they make hiring decisions, and yet idiots keep on showing who they really are." Give a relevant example of someone who would write "stupid shit" on social media that would then disqualify them from being hired by a private company.
Click to expand...
 
trixare4kids said:
I think there's a lawsuit coming the school's way in light of this ruling. She was denied her spot on the cheerleading squad.
Click to expand...
The people who acted in this should face personal punitive action. They should be investigated for snooping in the social media of a teenager. That's something pedophiles do.

There has to be some accountability or this crap will continue.
 
trixare4kids said:
There are pages/groups there just for discussing politics though and lots of people use their real names... How is discussing politics on a particular FB group anymore tacky than discussing them here other than here, we can use an anonymous nic?

Personally, I do not, and would not discuss any politics using my real name, not in this explosive political climate.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I was talking in the context of those folks who blather on and on all over their timeline about politics. If you're talking private groups, that's a bit better, but you're still using your real name, and depending on how careless your rhetoric is, you could still end up getting bit in the ass, or at minimum risk hurting / offending someone who happened to stumble into your group that you may otherwise get along with. (Universal you, as you have said you basically agree with me - at least, your stated behavior would indicate that)

And I guess while I'm tidying up what was perhaps a clumsy thought, I should also say that I'm talking about the kind of posting that reflects this explosive political climate. Some really constructive discussion happens on social media - my MPP has great discussions about political issues, like what to do about the current gypsy moth infestation, or how do we feel about the traffic on Bridge Street. Stuff that can't be turned into just one more gong show, basically. He's my kind of conservative...hehe...
 
She was only a JV cheerleader. Shouldn't we protect the right to free speech to only Varsity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom