if christians can make rules against speech when making cakes for people so to can blizzard make rules against speech.
I’ll give you a better hypothetical, since all of yours involve damages to an individual.
What if a person stands on the sidewalk outside of your coffee shop (not on your property) with a sign that says “Briselody’s Coffee Shop Sucks”?
Should you have the right to make them go away? To make them apologize? To make them throw away the sign? And if so, why?
Um what? If I walk into Zales and haul off with 60k of diamond jewelry, it is the store that has to provide the robbery account and the necessary evidence for the case to go forward, for myself to get arrested and prosecuted. If you shoplift and get caught but return the goods, the first thing the cop is going to ask the company is - do you want to move ahead with prosecution? Even though no real damages have been made and the items have been returned. It is absolutely the right of the company to make that decision, or decide the legal proceedings are not worth the time and investment of lawyers and legal fees accrued.
Stakeholders in my post meant the people that the company employs and are dependent on a thriving business for their own financial security. So their entire employee base, sometime outside contractors, secondary manufacturers the accrue parts from, etc.
I don’t know if you remember back in dinosaur year of 1998-2015, but GoodYear tires started producing tires that were no bueno. Firestone also had problems. The government actually had to politely threaten both companies with an action that would institute a federal recall on the tires if the manufacturers refused to pull the products. The companies actually had a calculated number of fatalities they could risk before they thought they’d lose too much profit or get called into a class action lawsuit. The death toll was insane, like 33,000 crashes and I cannot recall, I think 800 was the allowable deaths.
They felt their responsibility to their shareholder and stakeholder/ immediate and peripheral employees, along with their business with big name motor companies Ford, Dodge, various tire stores like Les Schwaab etc. was far more important than consumer safety. If they stopped production of these tires they’d lose their market and multiple companies could suffer financial set backs until enough new tires filled the gaps of the tens of thousands of tires they were pumping out.
So. I don’t have any direct answers to your questions, because I think each situation needs to be looked at individually and in context.
Edit: Here’s an article for context, it’s not got all the drama in the govt. vs. tire battle story but it’s the fastest one I could find for reference: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/07/business/goodyear-tire-recall.html
Not defending anyone but they didn’t make a rule against speech, they exercised their own right to free speech/action, which by definition also protects you from being compelled to an action against your will.
But your hypothetical dodges the issue, since that’s not on my property.
An even better hypothetical, what if the person with the sign is my employee. Should I be barred from firing them?
Are they impeding people from entering the facility?
Ethically, I think you should be barred from firing them for that. Legally, at the moment it depends on what state you’re in.
true, however there are some nations where they legally cannot do things that they can in others as such they have to change rules and stuff to comply with the laws of the nation, for instance china is one example.
The store doesn’t prosecute you, the state does. The store presses charges.
i would do nothing
my customers know the truth and they will get their friends to my shop which gets me more money
but you do have the right to have them remove if they are loitering
Why? They are taking action that directly and negatively affects my business. How in the world can you justify that lol
I don’t give a crap about morally correct because there is no such thing as morally correct.
Morals is just another word for a belief. Beliefs differ from person to person. There is no such thing as correct, just what you live by and what is legal/not.
I wish we could speak our minds about any given topic in a civilized manner to where you wouldn’t get banned… Sadly people go the highly emotional and snobbishly condescending route
Title: Freedom of Speech
“This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden”
10/10 I knew GD wouldn’t disappoint.
The right to prosecute lies entirely with the government because the idea of a crime is that you have committed an offense against society. A lot of times the police will ask whether the store wants to press charges because without their willing involvement, it can be difficult to get statements/footage/etc and you have to subpoena it and they don’t usually want to do that.
In your example though, if you steal $60,000 worth of jewelry, the state will be prosecuting you and if the store says they don’t want to you can be sure the state will be very suspicious of that lol
Really? So an employer should be forced to keep an employee that does not stand behind the product they are selling/creating… and is actively trying to discourage purchase of said product/service?
What planet am I on again?
2 Likes
the issue with the subject freedom of speech is 1 the untied states definition is completely differnt from other nations, and even in the states the rules are differnt depending on the state. california is one of the most restricting when it comes to it.
Oh, yes. I guess I’m being unclear since that’s been pointed out twice in different ways. I said in my original post that the government upholds the company’s right to prosecution. The state/government is the body that moves forward if you do want to prosecute.
The rules he violated are right there in the picture of the email he received.
1 Like
“Yeah, they murdered a bunch of people as part of a cult, but they believed it was the right thing to do, so i guess thats ok.”
I hope I have successfully taken the most extreme (mis)representation I could in an effort to make you appear silly, for clout.
I take it that you both are anti-union, then?