newtboy said:

Interesting.
I'll be consistent and say yes, it's "fair" that she lost her job, as it's clear that her employers have an often stated interest in her reproductive system and firm rules on how it may or may not be altered, as a part of their faith, and properly following that faith is essential for being a good teacher...in their eyes. That means that having artificial insemination makes her a bad roll model, and being a near perfect roll model is a major part of the job.
EDIT: I wonder who ratted her out? She DID have a right to keep her personal medical information private, and those with access have a legal obligation to keep it private as well, so she DID get ratted on.

Also interesting was your comment/position there, which seemed to mirror mine here. In part, you said....
" Freedom cuts both ways, you're free to do what you want..but if you don't act within some semblance of societal norms and what is considered decent, no one is going to want to be around you or work with you. "
The business not wanting to work with him is what happened here, but now you seem to take issue with that, and you take serious issue with others boycotting the company (which didn't actually happen here, but you've been complaining that it did) while back then you seemed to be celebrating it. What changed besides the reason someone lost their job?

enoch said:

yeah..i am with @VoodooV on this one.

the man was not working.
was not wearing any company logos or identification,yet loses his job.

for what?
being an insensitive racist idiot?

public shaming?
all for it,and it might even change a few hearts and minds.inject a little empathy in an otherwise rigid and narrow worldview.

losing his job?
eeeeeeh..i think some people are taking the social warrior thing a tad too far,and are not being far sighted in their execution.

sure..we can hate on this racist asshole and ridicule him for his idiocy,but what happens when the PC police find something that YOU do offensive or inappropriate?

would you still be as confident in losing your livelihood?

i have been following this case in canada where this graphic designer is facing 6 months in jail for criticizing and disagreeing with two feminists.these women are trying to make the case that his criticisms,in the form of tweets,constitutes harrassment.

he lost his job.
is 80k in the hole,and the case has been ongoing for three years.

so there is already a frightening amount of this PC police,social warrior fascism having actually consequences.

so where do we draw the line?
who is going to arbitrarily monitor that line?
who decides what is offensive and what is not?

you start going down this road and that line will become more and more blurred until the first amendment is toast.

i am finding it more and more disturbing that people are beginning to think that being offended somehow equates to a right.that their little world,their minute and tiny habitat should be protected from offensive language.

unless you are ok with destroying peoples lives for being an idiot or an asshole.

social warriors:morality police concerned with their own little habitat,but they have your best interest as well.

oh goodie....

newtboy said:

It seems you are under the mistaken assumption that they bowed to public pressure by PC warriors and fired him. Read the description, the company itself was disgusted, and has a policy of being intolerant of hate speech by their employees. Do you feel the company has no right to fire him for public statements and actions outside work that run 100% contrary to the company policy?
Where do you draw the line? What if he was advocating for the legalization of sex with prepubescent children? Should they still ignore it if he only does it outside work? If that line is up to the company to decide, what's the issue here?

newtboy said:

If you have a job where the company owner is not an unapologetic racist, it's probably a good idea to not be a stupid racist on camera, lest you end up permanently unemployed and unemployable like this guy.
Ironic that he's now the one actually taking MY tax dollars to support his unemployable racism and stupidity.
I think, for numerous reasons, this qualifies as *fail

newtboy said:

I'm not pleased to see this kind of hate-mongering xenophobic propaganda posted here.
I saw a tv 'news' piece about the neo-Nazi 'Democrat' party in Sweden just 2 days ago, I think the guy at :41 may have been part of the group being interviewed.

The producers also have terrible math skills it seem, as they claim Sweden has fewer rapes than S Africa, which they list as 53.2 out of 100000, or .0532%, but they also say out of 100000 women in Sweden, 25000 will be raped (25%, or 1 in 4). 25% is greater than .0532% , so how is South Africa the worst and Sweden the second worst when Sweden allegedly has 500 times more rapes per person?

bobknight33 said:

True as true can be.

Muslims are religion of rape and murder. Its been going on since the beginning their religion.

So from you point of view Muslims are a nice bunch of people.

Mordhaus said:

Because the person talking is, like...reaaaally happy.

Mordhaus said:

*happy *quality

The Obama one is fake. They used CGI and comped in the skateboard.

No question Deadpool kicked his ass.