• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

School's speech pathologist fired for refusing to sign pro-Israel pledge

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
A round about way to exclude Muslims in general and other anti-Israeli groups from acquiring gainful employment in the public sector.

Is this supposed to be viewed as some kind of patriotic thingy where our nation will stand with Israel's right to exist in an otherwise Arabic/Muslim region of the world?

Is this also an antiquated vestige of a time when Israel was at actual war with its non-Jewish neighbors (besides the occupied territories of course) that needs to be done away with?
 
1sikbITCH said:
Maryland has this too. The laws say that the Company cannot engage in boycotts. Doesn't say employees or individuals can be barred from boycotting. However, as long as Texas is an at-will state this teacher can be fired for any reason at all as long as she was not fired for being in a protected class (age, race, disabled, gender, religion). She can still boycott. She just can't work for them.
Click to expand...

Could they fire someone if they were black? As you say, no, but this is not a private corporation, this is a government entity who can't fire blacks and would be violating the First.
 
I didn't see this in the thread so far but evidently the Feds are trying to push this through as well.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...t-roils-democrats-in-year-end-spending-debate

We all see the danger to the 1A that this brings. On the other hand the supporters of the bill state this is in response to the BDS:

The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement works to end international support for Israel's oppression of Palestinians and pressure Israel to comply with international law.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Could they fire someone if they were black? As you say, no, but this is not a private corporation, this is a government entity who can't fire blacks and would be violating the First.
Click to expand...

Yes they can fire black people. They just can't be found to have fired them for being black. Simple as that. Just find another reason.
 
1sikbITCH said:
I didn't see this in the thread so far but evidently the Feds are trying to push this through as well.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...t-roils-democrats-in-year-end-spending-debate

We all see the danger to the 1A that this brings. On the other hand the supporters of the bill state this is in response to the BDS:

The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement works to end international support for Israel's oppression of Palestinians and pressure Israel to comply with international law.
Click to expand...

I wonder what evidence there is for foreign entities forcing US companies to boycott anything.
 
1sikbITCH said:
Yes they can fire black people. They just can't be found to have fired them for being black. Simple as that. Just find another reason.
Click to expand...

I gave you one. They are a government agency mandating a violation of first amendment rights. As "the government" is very limited in these actions I would hope, expect really, that this is found unconstitutional. Even if it is then the threat should not have been made anyway. Blacks have rights, and government institutions do not have unlimited license to take away the Constitutional protections of them or anyone lightly.
 
How does this even work on an individual level?
How do they know that you're not buying an Israeli product because of a boycott or just choice?
Do you have to prove that you buy a certain amount of Israeli products a year?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pmv
WelshBloke said:
How does this even work on an individual level?
How do they know that you're not buying an Israeli product because of a boycott or just choice?
Do you have to prove that you buy a certain amount of Israeli products a year?
Click to expand...
This is the argument supporting that the law is a violation of the first amendment. The law requires no modification of conduct, only of speech.
 
1sikbITCH said:
Maryland has this too. The laws say that the Company cannot engage in boycotts. Doesn't say employees or individuals can be barred from boycotting. However, as long as Texas is an at-will state this teacher can be fired for any reason at all as long as she was not fired for being in a protected class (age, race, disabled, gender, religion). She can still boycott. She just can't work for them.
Click to expand...
Imagine the outrage if an employer started a rule you can't own a gun if you work for them. The right wing shitstorm would be massive.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
I gave you one. They are a government agency mandating a violation of first amendment rights. As "the government" is very limited in these actions I would hope, expect really, that this is found unconstitutional. Even if it is then the threat should not have been made anyway. Blacks have rights, and government institutions do not have unlimited license to take away the Constitutional protections of them or anyone lightly.
Click to expand...

No I mean if they want to discriminate, they have to find another reason to fire them other than their class. Many employers demand and get your social media passwords too as a condition of employment. If they don't like what your Facebook page says they can fire you. The First Amendment does not automatically protect your job.

I personally would refuse to work in that sort of restricted environment but to my knowledge no court has ever ruled it illegal.
 
I'm largely on the pro-Israel side of this ongoing debate, but this pledge and, especially, the proposed law against boycotting, are outrageously undemocratic. Just read an article saying that Sanders and Feinstein are coming out against it, which is encouraging.
 
interchange said:
Israel is definitely very transactional and will exploit any advantage given.
Click to expand...

They're actively trying to create the advantage themselves. They are and have been acting a lot like Russia has for awhile now. In some aspects, I actually think they were doing it before Russia (and the Russians just followed their method - buddying up to our politicians was a big one I think).
 
1sikbITCH said:
The First Amendment does not automatically protect your job.
Click to expand...

That's certainly correct and employees can be fired for cause if they abuse their speech, however, I see this a fundamentally different issue in that it restricts the Constitutionally permissible expression of political speech, done by the government, not a private employer.

I can't see how this would stand up in court and I hope a case is forthcoming. This is an ACLU kind of thing.
 
darkswordsman17 said:
They're actively trying to create the advantage themselves. They are and have been acting a lot like Russia has for awhile now. In some aspects, I actually think they were doing it before Russia (and the Russians just followed their method - buddying up to our politicians was a big one I think).
Click to expand...

Hasbara trolls. All the other tumult in the world turns the public gaze away from Bibi turning more to the dark side all the time.
 
woolfe9998 said:
Oh right, there is no "debate" and never has been. You're just always right. Arrogant ass.

You want to argue with me on this. Not taking your bait. I've stated my position on this anti-boycott law. That is all.
Click to expand...

Fuck you. There are a number of different debates WRT Israel and I was wondering which one you were referring to.
 
The religious republican right has long felt that they are the only ones that should be allowed to boycott anything, so this news scans I guess. No other group approves of using them so much, yet shits themselves when they are on the receiving end.

Snowflakes, trying to curb the freedom and speech of others. It's disgusting, and just one more reason why this country needs to rid itself of these fools.
 
mikeymikec said:
I wonder what evidence there is for foreign entities forcing US companies to boycott anything.
Click to expand...

There's lots of evidence though of the US government forcing foreign companies to not trade with Iran. They probably assume that other countries and entities are as bad as them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top