837
Christian man sues employer for forcing him to see a Pride flag on his way into work (www.lgbtqnation.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
285 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Department of Public Works employee Eric Batman claims that having to see a Progress Pride flag flying outside the department’s Alhambra, California, headquarters during the month of June effectively forces him to “celebrate, recognize, and solemnize conduct and actions that he views as sin” in conflict with his sincerely held Christian religious beliefs, according to a lawsuit filed in March by anti-LGBTQ+ evangelical nonprofit the Liberty Counsel.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

So are you agreeing with the lawsuit? You think that the lawsuit has merit? The person is offended because of their religious views and therefore the flag must be removed? What about the person who is lgbtq+ and sees the flag as a sign of support for their existence?

Remember, this country was found on the idea of freedom FROM religious persecution. Where people should not live their lives oppressed and told that their world view is wrong because the government (or in the case of historical context the kings or established church views).

https://youtu.be/oYq5a37-ZFE

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    No the lawsuit should have no standing at all. There should be no basis on being allowed to sue for being "religiously offended". But one should be allowed to sue because hate speech like someone is inciting hatred against an ethnic group or gender or other identity.

    My point is that saying "sticks and stones bla bla but words can never hurt me lalala" like the lady in the video - that's wrong because words do turn into stones. And her argument would shut both hypothetical lawsuits down.

    Liberal AntiFa successfully sued the KKK out of existence, but it took a lot of effort because the US has no hate speech laws.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    I agree on your points on hate speech, however, nothing in this case has anything to do with hate speech.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    So the argument against the lawsuit in the video was that speech should be completely free and everyone just has to bear with the insults. That logically means that hate speech also has to be accepted, which is incorrect because that leads to intolerance and fascism. That is why the video is incorrect, because hate speech cannot be tolerated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    The video was just a good illustrative example that people are truly offended very easily and trying to curtail other peoples freedom of speech because they’re offended.

    Play my opinion there’s nothing wrong with being offended it just means that you’re conscious on some level and something bothers you. I also find it ridiculous that we are trying to bubble wrap everything in society and stamping out any form of free speech that is a mild inconvenience to someone.

    That said, I am not a supporter of hate speech, I just think that people have lost any sense of decency and common sense in part to their leaders displaying that it is ok to behave this way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Well I agree that we're seeing some kneejerk reactions to things, and unwillingness to engage or argue with perceived enemies. Like I'm so done talking politely with fascists but it swings both ways. Like that same trained behavior (because it is exhausting and painful) and good vs evil thinking has been redirected e.g. against anyone defending Russia or China or Iran. But strangely the same thing failed in trying to curtail criticism against Palestine.

    But I think part of it is BECAUSE there is no legal recourse against inciting hatred against ethnicity or genders. The US and the US owned social media are very extreme and have totally changed how people talk. Before we didn't have people just constantly dogwhistling about race etc. So because there is no defense the only thing left is being offended. There is no moderation. We are left with impotent rage.

    And of course the lawsuit in OP weaponizes that "freedom of speech" extremism. Tolerance is being sold as intolerance against the intolerant.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •