So what happened? Did he apologize? Does he get to keep his job or is he being sent to Alcotraz?
Nobody is taping his mouth, nor is the U.S Government jailing him. So, no, his freedom isn't being impacted in any way at all. He can still say as he wishes. Should his employer decide that such an opinion doesn't line up with his organization's and decides to suspend him, that's his business.
Last edited by McGinley; 01-31-2013 at 02:47 PM.
The biggest mistake was the 49ers allowing this dope to go with Artie Lange. Noone knew how it would turn out?
For example 60 years ago, you could use the term "Negro" or "kike" more freely, without fear of backlash, but that's no longer the case. When you are talking about a football player that ultimately represents a private organization (or ballboy, or coach), you can't use the term quite as freely today and not expect backlash.
Just because you don't agree with the backlash doesn't mean anyone's freedoms are being suppressed insidiously, it means that cultural norms are shifting (and, of course, the sheer amount of media consumption and outlets are far greater today).
Furthermore, the idea that this is a new thing is borderline laughable. If an athlete 60 years ago made comments about not understanding why people are up in arms about Communism, I can assure you, that would be a big deal. The bottom line, except for a few outliers who don't write about sports normally, no one is talking about suspending anyone.
The thread headline seems somewhat overblown in that it's expressing outrage over a solution that no one is talking about realistically.
Don't you guys get it? The only way we can protect free speech is by censoring people who criticize those who make anti-gay comments.
1. Artie anecdote about some degenerate thing he did back in the day
2. "Do you have gay sex?
3. Another Artie anecdote about (gambling, drug or drinking) back in the day.
4. "Do you enjoy buttsex?"
5. Repeat steps 1-4
To Artie's credit his show has gotten alot better now that Nick Dipaolo is finally gone.
Arties best question was whats your over/under for banging white chicks this week???..Artie Rules hilarious...
So you are saying there is no difference between the government throwing someone in jail or a private entity deciding to end their professional relationship with someone?Is it any different that when one speaks his mind that the threat of a suspension or losing one's job is to muffle one's ability to speak freely.
Just want to make sure I follow the huge leap you're making. Because what you're talking about is nanny state bull****. That private entities - corporations, people, etc - should not have the right to respond to what you say. That 'freedom of speech' only extends to the first person to say something.
Talk about PC.
Just curious - so if I start my call off with a client tomorrow by saying something outrageous like, 'Good morning, I'm calling on behalf of Cogswell Cogs, Hitler did nothing wrong.' the company has no right to respond to that and fire me?
Or are you saying that you are arbitrarily drawing a line in the sand that certain things should be able to be spoken with no repercussions whatsoever and you will be the arbiter of what does and does not fall within 'SUPER SPECIAL PROTECTED SPEECH' and what is regular old offensive speech?
I wish the 49ers had gotten Tebow to see how the most liberal fan base in the NFL would react to having a crazy right-wing Jesus freak as the face of their franchise. F Woody Johnson.
Like it or not, some people think that homosexuality is wrong, or, even if they are fine with it, they wouldn't be comfortable having a gay teammate in the locker room with them. But, they can't come out and say that because it's not politically correct.
Nope, everyone MUST conform to the currently accepted orthodoxy, else they face the repercussions.
Weinies and Cho cha's were meant for procreation. Weiners dont belong in another mans butt. it's natures design.