Free speech covers religious speech.

[MissileMan]

Everyone twisted it into this. I assumed this whole thread was assumed to refer to a context where chat at all was acceptable.

Of course, if your employer is a total nazi and demands only 100% work related speech at all times, which I highly doubt is ACTUALLY the case of anyone here.

In contexts where chat is acceptable, religious chat is as protected by law as non religious chat. The fact that employers may outlaw religious speech out of litigious fear doesn't make it noble or right, but it is what we must adhere to. Hopefully employers will begin to stick up for what is legal instead of catering to their own fears of litigation from senseless, tyrannical libs.

Employers are legally obligated to provide a safe, secure work environment. Banning highly divisive topics like religion and politics from discussion in the work place makes a great deal of sense. Look how quickly the two previous threads on this subject turned ugly. If it had happened in a face-to-face environment it might well have come to blows. There are a lot of workplaces where something close at hand could be applied lethally. Bottom line, freedom of speech is trumped by the need for a safe, secure workplace.

 

[freeandfun1]

Employers are legally obligated to provide a safe, secure work environment. Banning highly divisive topics like religion and politics from discussion in the work place makes a great deal of sense. Look how quickly the two previous threads on this subject turned ugly. If it had happened in a face-to-face environment it might well have come to blows. There are a lot of workplaces where something close at hand could be applied lethally. Bottom line, freedom of speech is trumped by the need for a safe, secure workplace.

We probably should all remember the old adage that when you meet people for the first time, you should never discuss politics or religion in mixed company.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Employers are legally obligated to provide a safe, secure work environment. Banning highly divisive topics like religion and politics from discussion in the work place makes a great deal of sense. Look how quickly the two previous threads on this subject turned ugly. If it had happened in a face-to-face environment it might well have come to blows. There are a lot of workplaces where something close at hand could be applied lethally. Bottom line, freedom of speech is trumped by the need for a safe, secure workplace.

Freedom of speech is trumped by a safe secure workplace if the employer deems it.

Anyone threatened by religious discussion has a problem.


Religion is only devisive for haters, and the immature. What got us here was a misguided allegiance to a woman.

 

[freeandfun1]

Shattered. I was rereading this and I really do apologize for some of the awfulness I typed in here.

We need more true libs, then we won't turn on each other so much.

Not sure if she will accept it. I PM'd her a loooong time ago apoligizing myself and she hasn't even opened the PM.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

MissileMan, are you saying that if I have a business and I tell my people they can talk about whatever they want, that that should be illegal?

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

Employers are legally obligated to provide a safe, secure work environment. Banning highly divisive topics like religion and politics from discussion in the work place makes a great deal of sense. Look how quickly the two previous threads on this subject turned ugly. If it had happened in a face-to-face environment it might well have come to blows. There are a lot of workplaces where something close at hand could be applied lethally. Bottom line, freedom of speech is trumped by the need for a safe, secure workplace.

In an attempt to not get this started again, I must say that we all
understand this information, and we know we can't do anything about it.
Sorry if this comes off the wrong way, I'm just happy with everyone getting along on this subject. We've exhuasted the arguement.

 

[Said1]

Bottom line, freedom of speech is trumped by the need for a safe, secure workplace.

That's a copout, conversion and conversation are two different things. If people can't see that, they need to work at McDonald's, where nothing is allowed.

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

Not sure if she will accept it. I PM'd her a loooong time ago apoligizing myself and she hasn't even opened the PM.

I can PM her and relay the message to mend things between us all
if you'd like? I hate bad blood between decent people.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Not really. MissileMan is claiming a right where none exists. You do not have a right NOT to hear speech which you deem offensive due to an intolerance. Just because employers have been bullied around by lawyers and whiny libs doesn't mean their cause is actually legally defensible.

 

[MissileMan]

MissileMan, are you saying that if I have a business and I tell my people they can talk about whatever they want, that that should be illegal?

No, but if you have no policies in place to curb divisive rhetoric, you would sure as heck be libel if someone gets injured because of it. Let's say it's a small company...half dozen employees. If all of you attend the same church, for instance, then talk about religion wouldn't be divisive and would therefore be an ok topic for discussion at your company.

 

[MissileMan]

That's a copout, conversion and conversation are two different things. If people can't see that, they need to work at McDonald's, where nothing is allowed.

It's not a cop out, it's common sense.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

It's not a cop out, it's common sense.

No. It's repressive and unamerican.

 

[MissileMan]

No. It's repressive and unamerican.

Freedom of speech is not absolute.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

No, but if you have no policies in place to curb divisive rhetoric, you would sure as heck be libel if someone gets injured because of it. Let's say it's a small company...half dozen employees. If all of you attend the same church, for instance, then talk about religion wouldn't be divisive and would therefore be an ok topic for discussion at your company.

I don't want to live in the grey world you present as rosy.

Adults should be able to converse with people of different opinions.

Where does it end?

" I like cookies"

"Well I like cake"

"ok desserts are a forbidden topic now, back to work."

MM, Your postulates are devoid of sense and constitutional support.

 

[Shattered]

Adults should be able to converse with people with people of different opinions.

Then why can one not converse with you without being called everything under the sun, and then having you state in no uncertain terms that I'm the board whore, and the only reason anyone would dare post against you would be to get a "piece" of me?

In one place, you apologize for some of the things you said.. Not 4 statements later, you chalk it up to mistakes over "misguided allegiance to a woman", again, implying something that's simply not true...

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Freedom of speech is not absolute.

This is not like shouting fire in a theater.

You're biased against religions. You're intolerant and bigoted, and you're trying to pass it off as something noble. It ain't.

 

[freeandfun1]

Then why can one not converse with you without being called everything under the sun, and then having you state in no uncertain terms that I'm the board whore, and the only reason anyone would dare post against you would be to get a "piece" of me?

In one place, you apologize for some of the things you said.. Not 4 statements later, you chalk it up to mistakes over "misguided allegiance to a woman", again, implying something that's simply not true...

Why can't you accept apologies. He apologized, I apologized, yet you come back here and you start it all up again. Next, you will be claiming we jumped on you. Let it be.

 

[MissileMan]

I don't want to live in the grey world you present as rosy.

Adults should be able to converse with people of different opinions.

Where does it end?

" I like cookies"

"Well I like cake"

"ok desserts are a forbidden topic now, back to work."

MM, Your postulates are devoid of sense and constitutional support.

If you can't understand, or refuse to acknowledge the potential divisive difference between religion and snacks, you aren't worth arguing with any further.

 

[JOKER96BRAVO]

Then why can one not converse with you without being called everything under the sun, and then having you state in no uncertain terms that I'm the board whore, and the only reason anyone would dare post against you would be to get a "piece" of me?

In one place, you apologize for some of the things you said.. Not 4 statements later, you chalk it up to mistakes over "misguided allegiance to a woman", again, implying something that's simply not true...

Umm Shattered dear,
This actually was the last thing he said about you...
CLICK HERE

 

[freeandfun1]

If you can't understand, or refuse to acknowledge the potential divisive difference between religion and snacks, you aren't worth arguing with any further.

But his point is valid. I know people that have gotten into fights at work over football teams. Where do you draw the line?

I think that is all he is getting at. I agree with you on the point that if anything becomes divisive, it needs to be stopped. But you can't write a company policy based on "anything". What if two employees don't agree with marketing or sales methods, or how to handle customers? There are too many things that can be divisive. How does an employer protect against them all? They can't. Hence the debate here.