Alt-right protestor loses job after being outed

[Ray From Cleveland]

How many companies that test you for nicotine or drugs and a week after you've smoked a cigarette or joint drugs test you? You did them when you were off work, but they still may fire you. Some companies tell you how to behave away from the job. Not that I agree with it but it happens all the time.

That's because those actives cost the companies more money.

Companies drug test to get cheaper Workman's compensation insurance and not having smokers in your workforce lowers the cost of employer provided medical insurance.

Apples and oranges

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Being a Nazi isn't a "protected class" and it's not a religion, so yes you can fire the racist pigs.

Maybe that's how it works in your country or soon will. But in America, every American is protected by the US Constitution and our laws. It doesn't matter what they believe, protest, or what group they belong to. They are still Americans and are allowed to have those views as long as they don't break any laws.

Protected classes of people don't come from Republicans. Protected classes of people come from Democrats who tirelessly try to separate us into dozens and dozens of groups if they can. Then they decide which groups they hate and which groups they love.

Republicans believe in treating all people equal regardless of their views whether we agree or disagree with them.

I guess that's why Republicans are busy writing laws which deprive minorities and poor people of the right to vote, and raised gerrymandering to an art form to preserve their safe seats.

Gerrymandering goes on both sides depending on who is in charge at the time. DumBama went into the White House with a majority in Congress and the Senate. Gerrymandering is a cheap excuse Democrats use to brainwash their sheep that the country is not turning against their views.

Name me one law that Republicans wrote on voting that highlighted minorities in any way. Again, Republicans believe in treating all people equal. Any new standard they put forth for voting applied to all: black, white, Asian, Arab, Jewish.

There are a number of voting laws written by Republicans which have been tossed out by the courts for violating the rights of minorities and the poor "with laser like focus".

A couple. But most have been approved by the courts as well.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So what if employers during the Bush years fired people who marched against war with our enemies? You would have been okay with that? How about occupy wall street?

So what if employers during the Bush years fired people who marched against war with our enemies? You would have been okay with that? How about occupy wall street?

You are comparing people who protested against a war and people who protested to achieve equality to Nazi, racist, white supremist? You are as clueless as your, so called, president.

The people who drove to Charlottesville from Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and other states did so to bring violence to that City.

They did? Then why no violence until the leftists showed up (as always)?

They came there to protest a removal of history. What did ANTIFA and BLM come there for if not trouble?

You see, they could have applied for a permit to have their won protest just like the supremacists, but they didn't. Then they could have held their own protest ten miles away, five miles away, a half mile away to avoid trouble, but they didn't.

They only came there for one reason with bats and bottles. And it wasn't to play baseball and make sure they didn't get dehydrated.

You can't simply absolve them and blame the leftists. It was the RIGHTISTS that deliberately aimed a car into a crowd. Not the leftists.

And the violence clearly came from both sides.

No, it was one kook that ran over people in a car. Nobody on the right excused or supported him.

The leftist groups came there for a confrontation and nothing more. If you go to a large group of adversaries with bats and bottles, you aren't there to look for a political dialog.

Without them, more than likely the crowd would have vented, went home, and left without any violence at all. But leftists can't stand to miss an opportunity to cause problems, just like with the Trump rallies.

These Nazis were marching through the streets terrorizing Jews and others with their Nazi chants and racist rhetoric. Their words actions are an affront to everyone who fought in WWII.

They should be violently opposed.

Terrorizing them? Did they attack anybody? Did they destroy any property?

Violent opposition is what happens in an uncivilized country. We are a civilized country that unfortunately has uncivilized Democrats and liberals.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They outlawed slavery while doing nothing to ameliorate the harm is caused blacks.

What harm? Slavery ended many years ago. Nobody alive today was harmed by slavery.

We're still seeing the effects of slavery in the white supremacists actions.

There are no white supremacist actions.

 

[Tresha91203]

I smell a lawsuit.

Nope. People get fired for social media posts all of the time. This is no different.

I would have fired him, too, and I'm a Conservative. No one wants to have a hater representing their business.

Depending on how his lawsuit goes... A hater may and up owning his business. Perhaps when it's over, maybe he'll let the former owner have a job there...?

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

 

[Vastator]

I smell a lawsuit.

Nope. People get fired for social media posts all of the time. This is no different.

I would have fired him, too, and I'm a Conservative. No one wants to have a hater representing their business.

Depending on how his lawsuit goes... A hater may and up owning his business. Perhaps when it's over, maybe he'll let the former owner have a job there...?

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

You can still get sued.

 

[Tresha91203]

No, it was one kook that ran over people in a car. Nobody on the right excused or supported him.

The leftist groups came there for a confrontation and nothing more. If you go to a large group of adversaries with bats and bottles, you aren't there to look for a political dialog.

Without them, more than likely the crowd would have vented, went home, and left without any violence at all. But leftists can't stand to miss an opportunity to cause problems, just like with the Trump rallies.

These Nazis were marching through the streets terrorizing Jews and others with their Nazi chants and racist rhetoric. Their words actions are an affront to everyone who fought in WWII.

They should be violently opposed.

Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.

So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.

ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.

Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.

Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.

It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.

"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.

You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.

I find genitalia hats very offensive, and am frightened by mobs chanting, "Pigs in a blanket, fry'em like bacon." Blocking entrances and exits is specified as harassment in the law. I'm perfectly fine with equal application of the law to ALL.

Protests have never been classified as terrorism or harassment, not in the 60's when violence abounded and not today. I do not want to lose my freedoms, so I protect them. You don't get to choose who gets free speech or not. Antifa, behind their masks and body armor, certainly intimidate and frighten people. I would hope you want them prohibited from assembling in large, loud, masked, armed groups. They are much more terrifying.

 

[Vandalshandle]

These Nazis were marching through the streets terrorizing Jews and others with their Nazi chants and racist rhetoric. Their words actions are an affront to everyone who fought in WWII.

They should be violently opposed.

Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.

So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.

ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.

Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.

Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.

It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.

"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.

You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.

I find genitalia hats very offensive, and am frightened by mobs chanting, "Pigs in a blanket, fry'em like bacon." Blocking entrances and exits is specified as harassment in the law. I'm perfectly fine with equal application of the law to ALL.

Protests have never been classified as terrorism or harassment, not in the 60's when violence abounded and not today. I do not want to lose my freedoms, so I protect them. You don't get to choose who gets free speech or not. Antifa, behind their masks and body armor, certainly intimidate and frighten people. I would hope you want them prohibited from assembling in large, loud, masked, armed groups. They are much more terrifying.

My best guess is that if you are not chanting anti-jewish slogans, waving a swastika, or wearing white supremacy symbols, they won't bother you at all..

 

[Vastator]

Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.

So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.

ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.

Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.

Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.

It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.

"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.

You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.

I find genitalia hats very offensive, and am frightened by mobs chanting, "Pigs in a blanket, fry'em like bacon." Blocking entrances and exits is specified as harassment in the law. I'm perfectly fine with equal application of the law to ALL.

Protests have never been classified as terrorism or harassment, not in the 60's when violence abounded and not today. I do not want to lose my freedoms, so I protect them. You don't get to choose who gets free speech or not. Antifa, behind their masks and body armor, certainly intimidate and frighten people. I would hope you want them prohibited from assembling in large, loud, masked, armed groups. They are much more terrifying.

My best guess is that if you are not chanting anti-jewish slogans, waving a swastika, or wearing white supremacy symbols, they won't bother you at all..

They don't have the right to bother anyone period. They don't get a free pass to harass, assault, and commit crimes against a certain group just because you don't like them either.

 

[Tresha91203]

I smell a lawsuit.

Nope. People get fired for social media posts all of the time. This is no different.

I would have fired him, too, and I'm a Conservative. No one wants to have a hater representing their business.

Depending on how his lawsuit goes... A hater may and up owning his business. Perhaps when it's over, maybe he'll let the former owner have a job there...?

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

You can still get sued.

It would get thrown out.

 

[Vastator]

Nope. People get fired for social media posts all of the time. This is no different.

I would have fired him, too, and I'm a Conservative. No one wants to have a hater representing their business.

Depending on how his lawsuit goes... A hater may and up owning his business. Perhaps when it's over, maybe he'll let the former owner have a job there...?

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

You can still get sued.

It would get thrown out.

Depends on the circumstances. But that's irrelevant to the issue of this guy at the protest. He could sue. He'd probably win. As long as he wasn't wearing company clothes, doing it on company property, or disemminating these views on company time; he has the right to assemble, and the right to free speech. And he also has freedom of religion, which could certainly be brought to bear against his employer. Civil rights protect this guy against being discriminated against for his beliefs, and legally excersizing his rights.
And no states right to work laws will shelter a company from a civil rights suit.

 

[debbiedowner]

I would have fired him, too, and I'm a Conservative. No one wants to have a hater representing their business.

Depending on how his lawsuit goes... A hater may and up owning his business. Perhaps when it's over, maybe he'll let the former owner have a job there...?

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

You can still get sued.

It would get thrown out.

Depends on the circumstances. But that's irrelevant to the issue of this guy at the protest. He could sue. He'd probably win. As long as he wasn't wearing company clothes, doing it on company property, or disemminating these views on company time; he has the right to assemble, and the right to free speech. And he also has freedom of religion, which could certainly be brought to bear against his employer. Civil rights protect this guy against being discriminated against for his beliefs, and legally excersizing his rights.
And no states right to work laws will shelter a company from a civil rights suit.

You can fire him without telling him the reason and no lawsuit.

 

[Vastator]

Depending on how his lawsuit goes... A hater may and up owning his business. Perhaps when it's over, maybe he'll let the former owner have a job there...?

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

You can still get sued.

It would get thrown out.

Depends on the circumstances. But that's irrelevant to the issue of this guy at the protest. He could sue. He'd probably win. As long as he wasn't wearing company clothes, doing it on company property, or disemminating these views on company time; he has the right to assemble, and the right to free speech. And he also has freedom of religion, which could certainly be brought to bear against his employer. Civil rights protect this guy against being discriminated against for his beliefs, and legally excersizing his rights.
And no states right to work laws will shelter a company from a civil rights suit.

You can fire him without telling him the reason and no lawsuit.

Civil lawsuits don't operate in the same manner that a criminal court case does. All the plaintiff needs to do is levy the charge. Then during "discovery" the employer would have to substantiate his reason, and disprove any evidence the plaintiff may bring against him.

 

[dblack]

I smell a lawsuit.

I hope so. It would be a "teachable moment"if it comes down.

 

[dblack]

Depending on how his lawsuit goes... A hater may and up owning his business. Perhaps when it's over, maybe he'll let the former owner have a job there...?

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

You can still get sued.

It would get thrown out.

Depends on the circumstances. But that's irrelevant to the issue of this guy at the protest. He could sue. He'd probably win. As long as he wasn't wearing company clothes, doing it on company property, or disemminating these views on company time; he has the right to assemble, and the right to free speech. And he also has freedom of religion, which could certainly be brought to bear against his employer. Civil rights protect this guy against being discriminated against for his beliefs, and legally excersizing his rights.
And no states right to work laws will shelter a company from a civil rights suit.

You can fire him without telling him the reason and no lawsuit.

Sure, but it sounds like they made the reason quite clear.

 

[Tresha91203]

Assault is never the correct response to any speech. My brother called me horrible names, copycatted every word I said for an hour straight. "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." We teach this to our children. We do so for a reason. It is flat out wrong to assault someone because of their words.

So what you're all saying is that if ISIS had a permit to march in Charlottesville, they'd have a right to match through the streets and to use their freedom of speech to say hateful things and if anyone started a fight with them it would be on the protesters.

ISIS isn't eligible for a permit as they are foreigners on foreign soil. Just about the worst we have are skinheads (birthed in our prisons). If skinheads get a permit to protest (bearing ugly tattoos, playing loud deathmetal over bullhorns, carrying signs proclaiming, "We hope you all die for diluting our pure blood!"), then yes, assaulting them for being suck is illegal and WRONG. You don't get to punch people you disagree with in America. There is no right to NOT be offended. There is a right to free speech, so govt cannot shut it down. Legally, the one who throws the first blow has committed a crime against another. Mean words are not a crime.

Many a man has smacked his woman for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Many a man has punched an opposing team's fan for offending him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Assaulting someone for what they say is wrong and illegal. Sometimes it's worth it. If someone calls me a disgusting name, hubby would likely shove or hit him. Not cool. Illegal. Wrong. Worth it. I can certainly understand the "worth it" aspect of punching a skinhead, but one doesn't get to cry victim or don a halo for doing so because it is illegal and WRONG.

Speech we like is easy to protect. If you cherish your freedom, you protect it even when it's hard, even swallowing back bile, because that's the only way to keep that freedom.

It's not that we agree with Nazis and it's not that we support them. We aren't interested in protecting them. It's freedom of speech we are protecting. We just want them to go away. We wonder why y'all don't want your extremists to go away.

"Freedom is speech" is an illusion. Harassment and intimidation is illegal.

You should read the piece written by members of the Charlottesville Jewish Synagogue who were at Shabbat on Friday night during the torch light parade. The marchers passed by the Synagogue shouting nastiness at the worshippers. They didn't feel very free hearing that. They were terrorized.

I find genitalia hats very offensive, and am frightened by mobs chanting, "Pigs in a blanket, fry'em like bacon." Blocking entrances and exits is specified as harassment in the law. I'm perfectly fine with equal application of the law to ALL.

Protests have never been classified as terrorism or harassment, not in the 60's when violence abounded and not today. I do not want to lose my freedoms, so I protect them. You don't get to choose who gets free speech or not. Antifa, behind their masks and body armor, certainly intimidate and frighten people. I would hope you want them prohibited from assembling in large, loud, masked, armed groups. They are much more terrifying.

My best guess is that if you are not chanting anti-jewish slogans, waving a swastika, or wearing white supremacy symbols, they won't bother you at all..

You'd be wrong. They even attack reporters

ANTIFA on Assaulting Local CBS Reporter At Richmond Rally: He Was Out Of Line

Jake Tapper: Antifa protesters have attacked several journalists - Hot Air

and the cops protecting their free speech rights

Portland Police Chief Says Antifa Protesters Used Slingshot to Launch Urine and Feces-Filled Balloons at Riot Cops

and this is certainly intimidating, offensive hate speech directed at random guy wearing a USA hat (not MAGA or Trump, simply USA



These people aren't wearing swasticas, and are flying the US flag. Do you not consider this intimidation or harassment?

Portland Showdown in Photos

Antifa doubles down on hate speech and violence against anyone who disagrees with them. No Confederate flags required. They admit it openly and say the victims deserve it. You can pretend they are good guys but video after video after video proves they are a violent, militant hate group. We are not blind. We have NOT always been at war with Eastasia! No matter how many times you repeat the lie, it's still a lie.

 

[Vastator]

I live in Louisiana. I can dismiss someone because they are wearing purple.

You can still get sued.

It would get thrown out.

Depends on the circumstances. But that's irrelevant to the issue of this guy at the protest. He could sue. He'd probably win. As long as he wasn't wearing company clothes, doing it on company property, or disemminating these views on company time; he has the right to assemble, and the right to free speech. And he also has freedom of religion, which could certainly be brought to bear against his employer. Civil rights protect this guy against being discriminated against for his beliefs, and legally excersizing his rights.
And no states right to work laws will shelter a company from a civil rights suit.

You can fire him without telling him the reason and no lawsuit.

Sure, but it sounds like they made the reason quite clear.

And if the employer can be quoted as saying as much... He might as well start writing the check now...

 

[OnePercenter]

AS much as I hate NAZIs and racists, they do have a right to march and speak without being assaulted, but they are abhorrent, and should only be allowed to do that if the police can properly control the event. I give them the same status as the Westboro baptist church picketing funerals. I will never assault them. I just hope that god strikes them all dead with lightning. And, if Trump wants to paint them with the same brush as the counter protesters, I feel pretty much the same way about him.

The important question is whether an identified terrorist organization have a right to march and speak.

Neo-Nazi groups, white supremacist groups, and the Westboro baptist church ARE, by definition, terrorist organizations.

Terrorist: a person or organization who uses unlawful violence and/or intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

 

[L.K.Eder]

that is a a tragedy. the 1st amendment guarantees job security.

 

[dblack]

that is a a tragedy. the 1st amendment guarantees job security.

? Wtf?