Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
|
I tried to find some specifics in your link. I found none. I did found:
“We do not tolerate actions of hate and disrespect.”
I find it difficult to object to that at a philosophical level, though obviously that is ill defined--and the test is in the defining. I do think it is disturbing to make such a statement without giving some boundaries. So when the article says:"Green did not define, neither in his speech or the written policy underscoring it, what an action of disrespect might be, leaving it widely open to interpretation."
I find that indeed cause for concern. But to assume the rules will be inappropriately interpreted seems a bit premature--just like assuming every time a policeman shoots someone it is unjustified. Wait until the facts are in, no?
I certainly suspect there may be some very all-encompassing interpretation of "disrespect", which would be wrong. The 1st amendment right should be strongly protected.
Just like the first amendment right to not stand for the national anthem.
Leftist Nazis in Lincoln
