3 ms·

I would not support members of the WBC losing their jobs even if they protest (legally) with vulgarities outside of their jobs. They are indeed protected under

I would not support members of the WBC losing their jobs even if they protest (legally) with vulgarities outside of their jobs. They are indeed protected under their religious class. If this former Citi employee can successfully argue before a court that his views are the result of a sincere religious belief then I believe he should get his job back. Seems a bit weird that I would support the WBC not losing their jobs but not the former Citi employee right? Well, as a mature adult I recognize that there are limits to freedom of association. The limits are imperfect, but are still much better than the alternative of not having them. Even if I want the WBC to lose their jobs I know I shouldn't support that because they have the right to their sincerely held religious beliefs. Just as how the limits OF freedom of association are imperfect (and force us to tolerate awful people) so too are the limits ON freedom of association imperfect (and will ensnare less than guilty people). We go through a trial every time we meet with or interact with a person. They judge us on our facial expression, the way we carry ourselves, the way we speak, and what we say. You could be the perfect candidate for a job but if they don't like your resting face your application can be thrown out. Too many people have grown too comfortable venting on the internet expecting there will never be consequences for their posts. So comfortable in fact that if anyone dare say they don't want to work with you or interact with you there are accusations of persecution and analogies of persecutions past (or at least a slippery slope fallacy argument that it is coming).

kls 6y ago
If this former Citi employee can successfully argue before a court that his views are the result of a sincere religious belief then I believe he should get his job back. To be clear on my position, I am not advocating for the government to step in here or even that he should be able to seek legal recourse. I am merely lamenting the fact that we as a society yield more to emotion and reaction rather than trying to instill principals in ourselves that are applied evenhandedly. I am not advocation that we regulate companies abilities to dissociate with employees, just noting that it's a shitty thing to be fired for your personal life and it was shitty when it was done to people of a different cloth in the past. Too many people have grown too comfortable venting on the internet expecting there will never be consequences for their posts. So comfortable in fact that if anyone dare say they don't want to work with you or interact with you there are accusations of persecution and analogies of persecutions past (or at least a slippery slope fallacy argument that it is coming). I don't disagree with you here, I think with the exception of a few pockets of the internet online discourse is leading a net loss of humanity. I think the general population feels free to just hang it all out there when they are not face to face and that is an issue. Before all of this people did tend to self censure a bit in front of polite company, if you will. I differ a little on the not want to work with you part, and I think that is the sticking point. If they are not bringing it to work and the work discourse never leads to those subjects. I don't think it is the purview of another person to decide that they should not be employed because they don't feel like working with them. Now I will give you that this is a nuanced conversation and there are a lot of issues such as if a person is actively advocation for violence, but in my view that is the point where a idea or belief that someone hold starts to move towards being the planning of crime. I hold this stance across the board, if ISIS calls for Jihad is no different to me that if a QAnon member calls for a race war or if Antifa/Proud Boys calls for rioting.
kls 6y ago
Also wanted to note that I find this to be a well thought out rebuttal.

kls 6y ago

If this former Citi employee can successfully argue before a court that his views are the result of a sincere religious belief then I believe he should get his job back. To be clear on my position, I am not advocating for the government to step in here or even that he should be able to seek legal recourse. I am merely lamenting the fact that we as a society yield more to emotion and reaction rather than trying to instill principals in ourselves that are applied evenhandedly. I am not advocation that we regulate companies abilities to dissociate with employees, just noting that it's a shitty thing to be fired for your personal life and it was shitty when it was done to people of a different cloth in the past. Too many people have grown too comfortable venting on the internet expecting there will never be consequences for their posts. So comfortable in fact that if anyone dare say they don't want to work with you or interact with you there are accusations of persecution and analogies of persecutions past (or at least a slippery slope fallacy argument that it is coming). I don't disagree with you here, I think with the exception of a few pockets of the internet online discourse is leading a net loss of humanity. I think the general population feels free to just hang it all out there when they are not face to face and that is an issue. Before all of this people did tend to self censure a bit in front of polite company, if you will. I differ a little on the not want to work with you part, and I think that is the sticking point. If they are not bringing it to work and the work discourse never leads to those subjects. I don't think it is the purview of another person to decide that they should not be employed because they don't feel like working with them. Now I will give you that this is a nuanced conversation and there are a lot of issues such as if a person is actively advocation for violence, but in my view that is the point where a idea or belief that someone hold starts to move towards being the planning of crime. I hold this stance across the board, if ISIS calls for Jihad is no different to me that if a QAnon member calls for a race war or if Antifa/Proud Boys calls for rioting.

kls 6y ago

Also wanted to note that I find this to be a well thought out rebuttal.