26 ms·

>a dude wearing a t-shirt with an upside down pentagram would be protected by the tree speech amendment, while a dude with a t-shirt saying that there are only

>a dude wearing a t-shirt with an upside down pentagram would be protected by the tree speech amendment, while a dude with a t-shirt saying that there are only two genders would be fired on the spot and blacklisted in all major organizations. Probably because one of those two is a religious statement, while another one is a political statement. Which makes sense, given that religious affiliation is a protected group when it comes to employment, while political affiliation/speech typically isn't.

akomtu 6y ago
In other words, if you were a judge and we're presented with a range of offenders wearing tshirts with "two genders", "satan church", "flat earth" and "vaccine hoax" logos, you'd selectively label them as political, religious, unscientific and "dangerous disinformation" and issue sentences accordingly? If that's the case, this isn't different from how the inquisition operated long ago, except that they would praise the flat earth and two genders guys, and execute on the spot the satan worshipper. Freedom of speech is about protecting all viewpoints, including the ones you don't like and even the ones you deem offensive.
- filoleg 6y ago
  > if you were a judge and we're presented with a range of offenders wearing tshirts with "two genders", "satan church", "flat earth" and "vaccine hoax" logos, you'd selectively label them as political, religious, unscientific and "dangerous disinformation" and issue sentences accordingly? No, I would label them all as "political" except the satan church one. Because the satan church tshirt you mentioned doesn't make any kind of a statement aside from signaling belonging to or support of a religious group. However, if the satan church tshirt made an additional statement (after "satan church") like "abortions should be legal", I would count it as a political statement as well. "Flat earth" is just as much of a political statement as "Spherical earth" is (science and validity aside). You can get fired for either without much legal repercussions for the employer. Whether you get fired or not for wearing that tshirt is fully up to how your boss feels about it. To put it simply, "protected class/speech" doesn't mean that you can wrap any statement inside of it and you are protected from getting fired. Especially if that statement you wrapped inside goes directly against another protected class (e.g., if you had a christian church tshirt that said "islam is a fake religion"), then I bet you are gonna get fired extremely fast, and saying "religion is a protected class" won't help you much there.
zepto 6y ago
What about a t-shirt that says ‘the devil told me there are only two genders’?
int_19h 6y ago
Speaking as a Satanist, it's kinda hard to draw a line between religion and politics. For example, one of the seven fundamental tenets that my organization of choice espouses is, "the struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions."
foolinaround 6y ago
If said dude had the bible quotation about there being two genders, will that change the statement from being political to being religion, and prevent him from getting fired? I don't think so.
- klyrs 6y ago
  Galatians 3:28?
- filoleg 6y ago
  >If said dude had the bible quotation about there being two genders, will that change the statement from being political to being religion, and prevent him from getting fired? You raise an interesting point, because I feel like they would be fired for that indeed. What makes it interesting is that it becomes a political message wrapped in a religious statement, and I have zero clue as to how courts would approach that. I think it just could be the case of a simple misconduct that has nothing to do with religious prosecution, because I don't think you would be able to get away with wearing a tshirt with a lot of really explicit and graphic quotes from the old testament at work, despite them having nothing to do with gender or politics (e.g., the example of Ezekiel 23:20 with very explicit content about reproductive anatomy of horses and donkeys comes to mind).
  - foolinaround 6y ago
    Ok, but as this example demonstrates, a person's political views may stem from his religious views, which are protected.
    - filoleg 6y ago
      >Ok, but as this example demonstrates, a person's political views may stem from his religious views, which are protected. Yes, which makes me believe that you are legally protected from being fired for publicly expressing your affiliation with a religious group. However, you are not protected from being fired for expressing political views, regardless of whether they stem from the religion you are affiliated with or some other source. This is just an armchair lawyer level of reasoning on my end here, I have no idea if this is how it actually legally works, but that sort of makes sense. So if someone with the actual knowledge can chime in, that would be appreciated.
akomtu 6y ago
If one can set up a "church of satan" and call it a religious organization with all protections that come with that, someone else can set up a "church of two genders" and also call it a religious organization and then their holy book would be a very protected speech.
- JohnBooty 6y ago
  No. There are some interesting conundrums one might imagine but not the example you give; that's straightforward. You can't be fired simply for belonging to a religion. However, belonging to a religion doesn't legally excuse your other actions such as harassing others based on their religion/sex/whatever. So, you can belong to the Church of Satan, and even tell people that you belong to it -- that's your business. But you can't harass Christians for being Christian. That's their business. Similarly, you can believe there are only two genders and those who transgress those boundaries are wrong. That's your business. But you can't harass coworkers based on those beliefs. That's their business.
  - filoleg 6y ago
    To add on top of that, isn't gender now a protected class when it comes to employment as well? If yes, then it would mean that wearing a "there are only 2 genders" tshirt would essentially count as harassing a protected class based on their belonging to that protected class. Which seems like pretty clear grounds for termination, and no "this is just my religion" excuses are going to help here. Just like wearing a quote from the bible on your tshirt saying that women aren't supposed to hold seniority over men would very certainly get you fired as well, despite that being a part of your religious textbook and you belonging to that protected class.
    - kokanator 6y ago
      First wearing either t-shirt is no way to approach these subjects as they are very nuanced. Dispelling a myth here, the Bible doesn't actually say "women aren't supposed to hold seniority over men". It is true that it has been used in this manner and interpreted by certain organizations as such. Strong lined Complementarianism [0] espouse this belief. However, the conclusion is not supported by the text and context nor by the rest of the Bible. [1] To use a verse already quoted here Galatians 3:28. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus". This verse has everything to do with equality and nothing to do with the topic it was used for elsewhere in this thread. ( read it in context and you will see ). I know I may get flamed/down voted for this but it is extremely important. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism [1] https://almostheretical.com/episodes/authority-over-a-man https://almostheretical.com/episodes/authority-over-a-man
cbnotfromthere 6y ago
"Probably because one of those two is a religious statement, while another one is a political statement." Why would biological facts be considered "political statements"? (assuming gender = biological sex, which is the usual usage from regular talk to identity papers throughout the world).
- shoemakersteve 6y ago
  Judging from the last sentence, it seems like you're aware that the word "gender" as it's used nowadays often doesn't refer to biological sex, especially in the context of gender identity/expression. Setting aside the semantic argument, is there even anyone out there saying "there are more than two genders", and actually mean biological sex? What would they even mean by that? From what I can tell, anyone saying "there are only two genders, it's a biological fact" seems to be deliberately shifting the goalposts for the sole purpose of being inflammatory. Otherwise I'm not really sure I understand. I've never heard of anyone saying they were genderfluid as a result of their chromosomes.
  - cbnotfromthere 6y ago
    Well, I am certainly aware of such usage (gender != sex), however I find it highly tricky because the interchangeable use of the words gender and sex is an established situation for the last 100-200 years (simple example: identity cards / passports / corresponding forms). The whole point of any expression is that (by definition) is subject to the decision (one may say the whims) of the person doing that expressing. On the other hand, sex is set in stone, no psychological change and no surgery can change it. While you may not have heard anyone saying they are gender fluid as a result of their chromosomes, I counter with the fact that one of the most common claim of the genderfluid people and their advocates is that "sex is a spectrum", which has basically the same meaning. Moreover, there are educated university professors which publicly claim Homo sapiens have more than just 2 genders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ij80qmJPhOc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ij80qmJPhOc For the record, I couldn't care less who people have sex with and what sex they believe they belong to

akomtu 6y ago

In other words, if you were a judge and we're presented with a range of offenders wearing tshirts with "two genders", "satan church", "flat earth" and "vaccine hoax" logos, you'd selectively label them as political, religious, unscientific and "dangerous disinformation" and issue sentences accordingly? If that's the case, this isn't different from how the inquisition operated long ago, except that they would praise the flat earth and two genders guys, and execute on the spot the satan worshipper. Freedom of speech is about protecting all viewpoints, including the ones you don't like and even the ones you deem offensive.

filoleg 6y ago
> if you were a judge and we're presented with a range of offenders wearing tshirts with "two genders", "satan church", "flat earth" and "vaccine hoax" logos, you'd selectively label them as political, religious, unscientific and "dangerous disinformation" and issue sentences accordingly? No, I would label them all as "political" except the satan church one. Because the satan church tshirt you mentioned doesn't make any kind of a statement aside from signaling belonging to or support of a religious group. However, if the satan church tshirt made an additional statement (after "satan church") like "abortions should be legal", I would count it as a political statement as well. "Flat earth" is just as much of a political statement as "Spherical earth" is (science and validity aside). You can get fired for either without much legal repercussions for the employer. Whether you get fired or not for wearing that tshirt is fully up to how your boss feels about it. To put it simply, "protected class/speech" doesn't mean that you can wrap any statement inside of it and you are protected from getting fired. Especially if that statement you wrapped inside goes directly against another protected class (e.g., if you had a christian church tshirt that said "islam is a fake religion"), then I bet you are gonna get fired extremely fast, and saying "religion is a protected class" won't help you much there.

zepto 6y ago

What about a t-shirt that says ‘the devil told me there are only two genders’?

int_19h 6y ago

Speaking as a Satanist, it's kinda hard to draw a line between religion and politics. For example, one of the seven fundamental tenets that my organization of choice espouses is, "the struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions."

foolinaround 6y ago

If said dude had the bible quotation about there being two genders, will that change the statement from being political to being religion, and prevent him from getting fired? I don't think so.

klyrs 6y ago
Galatians 3:28?
filoleg 6y ago
>If said dude had the bible quotation about there being two genders, will that change the statement from being political to being religion, and prevent him from getting fired? You raise an interesting point, because I feel like they would be fired for that indeed. What makes it interesting is that it becomes a political message wrapped in a religious statement, and I have zero clue as to how courts would approach that. I think it just could be the case of a simple misconduct that has nothing to do with religious prosecution, because I don't think you would be able to get away with wearing a tshirt with a lot of really explicit and graphic quotes from the old testament at work, despite them having nothing to do with gender or politics (e.g., the example of Ezekiel 23:20 with very explicit content about reproductive anatomy of horses and donkeys comes to mind).
- foolinaround 6y ago
  Ok, but as this example demonstrates, a person's political views may stem from his religious views, which are protected.
  - filoleg 6y ago
    >Ok, but as this example demonstrates, a person's political views may stem from his religious views, which are protected. Yes, which makes me believe that you are legally protected from being fired for publicly expressing your affiliation with a religious group. However, you are not protected from being fired for expressing political views, regardless of whether they stem from the religion you are affiliated with or some other source. This is just an armchair lawyer level of reasoning on my end here, I have no idea if this is how it actually legally works, but that sort of makes sense. So if someone with the actual knowledge can chime in, that would be appreciated.

akomtu 6y ago

If one can set up a "church of satan" and call it a religious organization with all protections that come with that, someone else can set up a "church of two genders" and also call it a religious organization and then their holy book would be a very protected speech.

JohnBooty 6y ago
No. There are some interesting conundrums one might imagine but not the example you give; that's straightforward. You can't be fired simply for belonging to a religion. However, belonging to a religion doesn't legally excuse your other actions such as harassing others based on their religion/sex/whatever. So, you can belong to the Church of Satan, and even tell people that you belong to it -- that's your business. But you can't harass Christians for being Christian. That's their business. Similarly, you can believe there are only two genders and those who transgress those boundaries are wrong. That's your business. But you can't harass coworkers based on those beliefs. That's their business.
- filoleg 6y ago
  To add on top of that, isn't gender now a protected class when it comes to employment as well? If yes, then it would mean that wearing a "there are only 2 genders" tshirt would essentially count as harassing a protected class based on their belonging to that protected class. Which seems like pretty clear grounds for termination, and no "this is just my religion" excuses are going to help here. Just like wearing a quote from the bible on your tshirt saying that women aren't supposed to hold seniority over men would very certainly get you fired as well, despite that being a part of your religious textbook and you belonging to that protected class.
  - kokanator 6y ago
    First wearing either t-shirt is no way to approach these subjects as they are very nuanced. Dispelling a myth here, the Bible doesn't actually say "women aren't supposed to hold seniority over men". It is true that it has been used in this manner and interpreted by certain organizations as such. Strong lined Complementarianism [0] espouse this belief. However, the conclusion is not supported by the text and context nor by the rest of the Bible. [1] To use a verse already quoted here Galatians 3:28. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus". This verse has everything to do with equality and nothing to do with the topic it was used for elsewhere in this thread. ( read it in context and you will see ). I know I may get flamed/down voted for this but it is extremely important. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism [1] https://almostheretical.com/episodes/authority-over-a-man https://almostheretical.com/episodes/authority-over-a-man

cbnotfromthere 6y ago

"Probably because one of those two is a religious statement, while another one is a political statement." Why would biological facts be considered "political statements"? (assuming gender = biological sex, which is the usual usage from regular talk to identity papers throughout the world).

shoemakersteve 6y ago
Judging from the last sentence, it seems like you're aware that the word "gender" as it's used nowadays often doesn't refer to biological sex, especially in the context of gender identity/expression. Setting aside the semantic argument, is there even anyone out there saying "there are more than two genders", and actually mean biological sex? What would they even mean by that? From what I can tell, anyone saying "there are only two genders, it's a biological fact" seems to be deliberately shifting the goalposts for the sole purpose of being inflammatory. Otherwise I'm not really sure I understand. I've never heard of anyone saying they were genderfluid as a result of their chromosomes.
- cbnotfromthere 6y ago
  Well, I am certainly aware of such usage (gender != sex), however I find it highly tricky because the interchangeable use of the words gender and sex is an established situation for the last 100-200 years (simple example: identity cards / passports / corresponding forms). The whole point of any expression is that (by definition) is subject to the decision (one may say the whims) of the person doing that expressing. On the other hand, sex is set in stone, no psychological change and no surgery can change it. While you may not have heard anyone saying they are gender fluid as a result of their chromosomes, I counter with the fact that one of the most common claim of the genderfluid people and their advocates is that "sex is a spectrum", which has basically the same meaning. Moreover, there are educated university professors which publicly claim Homo sapiens have more than just 2 genders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ij80qmJPhOc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ij80qmJPhOc For the record, I couldn't care less who people have sex with and what sex they believe they belong to