|
Post by 101ABN on Apr 5, 2014 9:54:23 GMT -8
One could be forgiven for throwing one’s hands up in despair at the sheer audacity of it all. A fortnight ago, as the federal government took to the courts to defend a rule that deliberately burdens the consciences of America’s more religiously devout entrepreneurs, the professional Left adopted the position that companies do not have consciences, griped that a harsh separation of the public and the private spheres was a recipe for the suffering of unpopular or put-upon individuals, and insisted that any links between the activities of an employee and the deeply held beliefs of his boss should be thoroughly shattered. Today, the opposite case is regnant. Defending the appalling hounding of Brendan Eich, progressives seem to have suddenly got the message: reminding critics that there exists no legal right to be the CEO of a non-profit; insisting correctly that this sordid and alarming little affair does not in any way implicate the First Amendment; and acknowledging that, the doctrine of at-will employment being what it is, a man may resign from his job for whatever reason — up to and including harassment. Well, comrades — which is it to be? www.nationalreview.com/article/375091/new-torquemadas-charles-c-w-cooke
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Apr 6, 2014 12:16:11 GMT -8
"Well, comrades — which is it to be?"
It is whatever our lords and masters say it is 101. We, the great unwashed should have no opinions or positions other than the ones dictated to us even if those opinions and positions change from day to day and hour to hour.
Bah.
|
|