> Should your coworkers care or not? Or are you allowed to have any political views as long as you don't participate in the democratical process? :) If think y

> Should your coworkers care or not? Or are you allowed to have any political views as long as you don't participate in the democratical process? :) If think your political views involve taking the rights away from your coworkers or even causing them to feel unsafe I think they have the right to care? If I'm your coworker and I want to take away your rights, I think you'd want to care about that right? You're not just going to sit on you ass like a chump and do nothing. > But it was pro and against same sex civic partnership if it makes any difference for you. Why would someone be against same sex civic partnership? If you're not homosexual, it doesn't impact you at all. > Especially with today's highly polarized political climate where „terrible ideas“ label is attached very easily. And yet terrible ideas seem more common these days than ever. > IMO it's closer to mob rule forcing employers or university administration act in one way or another. What's the difference between a peaceful mob and a protest? People getting together to affect change is a "mob" if you don't like why they're saying and a "protest" if you do. > refusing employment or forbidding on-campus speech for such opinions feels a wee authoritarian. Sure, and you know what is also authoritarian? Authoritarians sharing authoritarian ideas, convincing others, and implementing. If you're tolerant of intolerance than you up with nothing but intolerance and you achieve authoritarianism that way. It's not like there's no historical precedent for this. "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" > There's a very very fine line between employers/universities rights and society forcing dominant narrative and sanitising public discourse. Yes there is a fine line. I'm accepting of that fine line but you want to just eliminate it. It's not that you for for free speech rights, it's just that you want one group to have them and another group to be restricted from having them. You accept that speech is important but you don't grasp why -- because it's meant to accomplish something. Speech is powerful, useful, and even dangerous. > Would you like to be fired if some idea you hold would be seen as „terrible“ by your employer (or a mob forces them to act so)? I'm willing to accept that. I believe my own political ideas are open and accepting enough that my coworkers and employers wouldn't care. And if they did care, then I wouldn't want to be employed by them. > Given how what is acceptable changed in the past decade or two, who knows how it will change in next few decades. The only constant in life is change.