"Dunlop, you suck ____!"
"All I can get!"
Posted on 04/20/2016 11:39:26 AM PDT by PROCON
The NHL is investigating the possible use of a homophobic slur by Chicago Blackhawks forward Andrew Shaw during Game 4 of the Western Conference quarterfinals Tuesday night at the United Center.
NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly said in an e-mail to the Tribune on Wednesday, "yes we are looking into it, and no we can't comment on it until that process is complete."
After being assessed an interference penalty late in the Blues’ 4-3 victory, Shaw was yelling at officials while seated in the penalty box and video of the incident appeared to show him using a homophobic slur.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
Remember way back when we had a 1st Amendment?
The first amendment does not cover this situation.
I’m willing to bet this slur is 100% subjective. IOW, a homosexual say or heard the slur and decided to play victim
Welcome to the New America
That’s so gay.
If someone had told you twenty years ago that in the future this would be a news headline you would have never believed it possible.
But it should. This idea of hate speech is nothing more than an employment guarantee for sleazy lawyers that was concocted and designed by sleepy lawyers for that purpose.
Well, that sucks.
I barely remember when people understood that the 1st Amendment deosn’t apply to cases like this.
That’s so gay.
And why is that? When a group of fags ran into a Catholic mass and started throwing condoms at the parishioners, they defended that as free speech. When Andres Serrano produced a picture of a crucifix in urine, that was defended as free speech. When queers parade down public streets with their butts showing through leather chaps and ass-out jeans, that's defended as free speech.
How is this not free speech?
Why, because someone's feelings were hurt?
Or is it because a new protected class of people?
When did “free speech”, however stupid, disappear from the Constitution?
"Dunlop, you suck ____!"
"All I can get!"
Homosexuals just want to be left alone. Right?
“The first amendment does not cover this situation.”
But it should. This idea of hate speech is nothing more than an employment guarantee for sleazy lawyers that was concocted and designed by sleepy lawyers for that purpose.”
No it should not. The Bill of Rights protects us from the government and was never intended to prohibit employers from setting rules and standards for their employees.
Now, do you want the government dictating to private companies the standards they set for employees?
I recall several years ago, a list of NHL players was published who supported homosexuality (though not necessarily gay themselves?). It happened after some NHL coach's or administrator's gay son died.
How do they know he’s afraid of homosexuals?
Maybe he just doesn’t like them?
None of the cases you mention have anything to do with a private company and their setting standards for their employees.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.