- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Dave Rubin, alleged free speech champion, has a dramatic about face
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:00 pm
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:00 pm
LINK
quote:
I have been a fan of Rubin’s. I even wrote this friendly critique of his show, The Rubin Report, not too long ago. He has had many great episodes that raise several enlightened points about political correctness and what one might call “the regressive left.” He has often correctly indicated that free speech does not begin and end with the First Amendment. This tweet of his, however, which is in defense of the NFL’s decision to fine protesters, seems to fly in the face of everything else he had said and advocated.
quote:
If Rubin wants to remain intellectually honest, he needs to defend free speech universally, even that of offensive liberals like Kaepernick and his colleagues in the NFL. It is not enough to gurgle a platitude about how the First Amendment does not apply to the NFL. The First Amendment may very well not apply, but the broader concept of free speech, as a value, still does. If you ever think that it is acceptable to ruin a person’s career because you do not like their political views, then you are part of the problem.
The lines here should not be blurry, and if Rubin cannot commit to this tenet without equivocation or duplicity, then he is going to be looking at one less fan and has no place in the IDW.
42
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:01 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Lol.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:02 pm to Draconian Sanctions
You do have free speech but if you emoloyer in this case the NFL placed restrictions they can simply quit
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:03 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Free speech has not been stifled. It has never been free of repercussions, however. It has always come at a cost.
Isn't it the progs who always say that words can hurt?
Isn't it the progs who always say that words can hurt?
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:03 pm to Skip Winkman
quote:
You do have free speech but if you emoloyer in this case the NFL placed restrictions they can simply quit
Surely you feel the same about James Daramore, right?
How about YouTube demonetization?
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:03 pm to Draconian Sanctions
A business has a right to dictate how its employees behave/what they say while representing said business.
If the players don’t like it, they should quit and get a factory job.
Free speech advocates can eat cock on this one.
If the players don’t like it, they should quit and get a factory job.
Free speech advocates can eat cock on this one.
This post was edited on 5/24/18 at 9:57 pm
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:03 pm to Draconian Sanctions
NFL is a private organization. They can do as they wish. If I were Roger Goodell, I'd do what makes me the most money. You don't have freedom in the workplace. You're your boss' bitch.
These players can go on the news and protest on their own time, just don't do it when you're on the clock.
These players can go on the news and protest on their own time, just don't do it when you're on the clock.
This post was edited on 5/24/18 at 6:04 pm
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:06 pm to Eli Goldfinger
#1 I guess you ignored this part:
#2 If your position is that free speech stops where the 1st Amendment ends, and you're consistent in that position, that's fine. But if you only apply your principles to certain groups depending on whether or not you like their political opinions, you should expect to be called out for being an intellectually dishonest fraud. Which is exactly what Dave is.
quote:
It is not enough to gurgle a platitude about how the First Amendment does not apply to the NFL. The First Amendment may very well not apply, but the broader concept of free speech, as a value, still does. If you ever think that it is acceptable to ruin a person’s career because you do not like their political views, then you are part of the problem.
#2 If your position is that free speech stops where the 1st Amendment ends, and you're consistent in that position, that's fine. But if you only apply your principles to certain groups depending on whether or not you like their political opinions, you should expect to be called out for being an intellectually dishonest fraud. Which is exactly what Dave is.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:08 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
just don't do it when you're on the clock
Or in any capacity when representing your employer.
Nobody would gaf about these clowns if they weren’t in the nfl.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:08 pm to Draconian Sanctions
I think the entire thing is idiotic, but THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FREE SPEECH.
Jesus people read the goddamn Bill of Rights.
Jesus people read the goddamn Bill of Rights.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:09 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:Has Rubin ever opposed a private organization banning or suppressing conservative speech?
#2 If your position is that free speech stops where the 1st Amendment ends, and you're consistent in that position, that's fine. But if you only apply your principles to certain groups depending on whether or not you like their political opinions, you should expect to be called out for being an intellectually dishonest fraud. Which is exactly what Dave is.
If that happened, then this writes has a leg to stand on.
If not, well, his stance is worthless.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:09 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Has Rubin ever opposed a private organization banning or suppressing conservative speech?
It's been his #1 issue for over a year
He even had a full sit down with James Damore after he was fired by Google. Somehow I doubt any kneeling player will be invited.
This post was edited on 5/24/18 at 6:10 pm
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:10 pm to Draconian Sanctions
Never heard of Dave.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:10 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:Really?
It's been his #1 issue for over a year
What organization?
I don’t follow Rubin. I don’t even know who he is.
quote:Ah, then, if Rubin doesn’t oppose this, he is a hypocrite.
He even had a full sit down with James Damore after he was fired by Google. Somehow I doubt any kneeling player will be invited.
This post was edited on 5/24/18 at 6:11 pm
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:11 pm to Jcorye1
quote:
I think the entire thing is idiotic, but THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FREE SPEECH.
Jesus people read the goddamn Bill of Rights.
some of you really don't like to read even when i pick out a portion and quote it for you in the OP and then again later in the thread
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:12 pm to Scruffy
quote:
Really?
What organization?
Mostly Silicon Valley. He is very concerned with what he sees as leftist authoritarianism from Google, YouTube, etc.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:16 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:As private businesses, I agree.
Mostly Silicon Valley. He is very concerned with what he sees as leftist authoritarianism from Google, YouTube, etc.
They can do whatever they want.
As social entities, it is a bit more complicated, IMO.
Humanity has never had access to information sources like Google and YouTube before, resulting in what has essentially become monopolies.
As businesses, I agree that they should have full control and their politics are their own.
As internet access points, I disagree that they should have such control and condemn any suppression of ideas or political stances.
We are in a new territory with these entities and I don’t know how to address it.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:17 pm to Scruffy
quote:
James Damore after he was fired by Google
An internal company memo is not equivalent to a public display on company time.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:18 pm to Draconian Sanctions
What is it about you people that don't understand free speech vs. legal business decisions?
Should people that work at Target be able to drop F bombs and talk about every lewd thing that comes to mind in front of customers and not be able to be reprimanded for it?
Rubin is saying that private businesses should be able to make their own decisions and they should pay for those decisions. I don't understand why this is such a hard concept for you people.
Should people that work at Target be able to drop F bombs and talk about every lewd thing that comes to mind in front of customers and not be able to be reprimanded for it?
Rubin is saying that private businesses should be able to make their own decisions and they should pay for those decisions. I don't understand why this is such a hard concept for you people.
Posted on 5/24/18 at 6:19 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
What is it about you people that don't understand free speech vs. legal business decisions?
HOLY shite READ THE frickING QUOTED SECTIONS
This post was edited on 5/24/18 at 6:19 pm
Page 1 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News