I used to think it would be a neat place to visit....but I wouldn't set foot in that state now. Can better spend my $$ elsewhere.

They don't like being challenged and called out on their white privilege. They are idiots though. They just got him MORE recognition and hopefully that will get more people talking about the reasons Kaepernick took a knee in the first place.

state....................they are still owned by the Kochs' and now FoxxCON...........................


When the democrats take back the courts and the legislature, they should pass a bill removing all things walker and company.......................I know its spiteful........................but you know what fuck it....................he and the Koch's are not role models..............................

He should be proud of it.

There was no price to pay for FREE speech.

This is no longer a democracy. Never really has been a democracy. It's all a lie. That's why that liar trump is president. Lies are what make America great. The truth would expose us for what we truly are.

And great that isn't.

That's all the First Amendment really says regarding speech. You can say what you like (with narrow exceptions like threatening violence) and the government can't punish you for it.

Otherwise, though, there may well be consequences from other quarters for the things you say. Freedom of speech has never meant that you can say whatever you want with zero consequences.

By definition, isn't freedom of speech if or when there are "consequences".

Particularly when those consequences aren't equally enforced. Like today.

The government can't toss you in jail because you criticize Trump. Or it couldn't toss conservatives in jail when they criticized Obama. Congress shall make no law, etc. etc. That doesn't mean that your speech won't have other consequences from other quarters.

By your definition of "freedom of speech," a person who is fired because they made a racist comment is having their freedom of speech illegally abridged by their employer. Somehow I doubt that you get this up in arms about freedom of speech when a racist loses their job because of their views. Don't they have the freedom to say whatever they want without consequences? Or do you only object to consequences for speech you agree with?

I don't have total freedom of speech at my job. When I'm at work, on the clock, that's my employer's time. I don't have the freedom to do or say whatever I like at work. I can't stop working, jump up on my desk, and launch into a 30-minute speech about how the Trump Administration is a farce. I can't walk up to my boss and call him an asshole and expect zero consequences. In neither of those instances can the government punish me, but in both my employer can punish me. The same is true for the NFL.

Your definition of freedom of speech is, to be quite frank, ludicrous. There have always been consequences for speech.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States#First_Amendment_ratification

Modern view

"As a result of the jurisprudence of the Warren Court in the mid-to-late 20th century, the Court has moved towards a baseline default rule under which freedom of speech is generally presumed to be protected, unless a specific exception applies. Therefore, apart from certain narrow exceptions, the government normally cannot regulate the content of speech. In 1971, in Cohen v. California, Justice John Marshall Harlan II, citing Whitney v. California, emphasized that the First Amendment operates to protect the inviolability of "a marketplace of ideas", while Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall cogently explained in 1972 that:

[A]bove all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content. [Citations.] To permit the continued building of our politics and culture, and to assure self-fulfillment for each individual, our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship. The essence of this forbidden censorship is content control. Any restriction on expressive activity because of its content would completely undercut the 'profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open.' [Citation.][15]"

Colin Kapernick did not participate in any form of specific exception.

And another PS - federal law, and The Constitution, pertain to and supersede any "other quarters" - such as the blatantly racist NFL which has no problem destroying the brains of its players but just can't seem to allow them to exercise their CONSTITUTIONAL free speech rights - without fear of reprisal - which is paying a price for free speech.

It's not free if you have to pay for it. I'm really surprised I have to say that.

Well, today, I'm not as surprised as I used to be.

To exercise his religious beliefs he's a religious hero.

When Colin Kapernick takes a knee to exercise his moral beliefs he's banned from the NFL.

Who gets to decide what free speech is in cases like this? The answer is; NO ONE gets to decide. It's already been decided and all they're doing is bastardizing free speech to limit ideas they don't agree with.

And free speech views that claim there's price to pay support that.

That's not free speech.

Modern Republicans can't help showing their racism.

Our president chose to insert himself into private business and private citizens’ freedom of speech, for purely racist reasons.