A private company cancelling a show =/= limiting free speech.
Hypothetically it could be either owner or member. As I said, it wouldn't be right to do so, so your point is?
The real culprit is twitter. Apparently it sucks the IQ right outta people... 
Cite your specific examples the same.
Generalities and statements made with a broad brush don't get it.
My theatre, my curtain. Nothing wrong with that.
On my very first day of Property class, my professor asked the class "what is property?" After going around for a bit, she finally let us in on the secret: property is about relationships, about who has the right to exercise control. The property owner is the one who gets the final say, good against other comers. That is the fundamental nature of ownership.
All else flows from there.
Its acceptable to the left because the left liberals cannot be racist in their modus operandi.
Oh yeah, she's a comedian, and those comments are protected under the comedian umbrella of the left.
Meanwhile on the right, those comments by a comedian draw the ire of the left. Talk about hypocrisy.
Which is why I made my comment that I just refuse to watch them without advocating they leave the entertainment venue.
then as an owner, or controlling member you would well be in your right to stop that play from happening on your dime. I'm actually in shock that you feel otherwise, I thought this was one of the few things we agree on.
So your rights to speak as you please on your private time must be restricted by your employer?
That's ok?
I think most of us have stated some issues on this forum that our employers may not agree with in their policies. Your OK with firing all of them for doing so?
if they presumably voluntarily signed the same free speech limiting contracts 'll Roseanne signed then yes. Should tridiot be able to talk about his specific patients?
Similar threads
