4 ms·

I think my discomfort with the idea comes from my inability to know where to draw the line. If I think a person should be fired for a 2020 Trump donation in 202

I think my discomfort with the idea comes from my inability to know where to draw the line. If I think a person should be fired for a 2020 Trump donation in 2020, why would I think that person shouldn't be fired for a 2019 donation or a 2018 one? I don't think a donation should make someone completely unemployable, so I have trouble reconciling "should be fired from whatever their current job is for a thing they did in the last few years" with "shouldn't be excluded for a few years from the job market." That and imagining it the other way around. I'm adamantly pro-choice and have donated to orgs supporting this. From the right wing perspective, I support literal murder. What better justification than that to fire me? The only reason I can think that I shouldn't be fired for being pro-choice is that, well, my worldview is the right one.

baddox 6y ago
It doesn't strike me as much harder than drawing the line for more common reasons to fire someone, like incompetence or inappropriate workplace activity. Those are also continuums, and it's certainly not easy to know where to draw the line, and reasonable people will disagree about where to draw the line in each specific case. But we don't throw up our hands and say you can never be allowed to fire anyone for those reasons. It seems like many people think that "political" actions should enjoy a special protection and that no such actions should ever draw any criticism or consequences. The same attitude is common for actions labelled as "religious." I reject that special status.