Don't know if anyone seen the case in America about the basketball owner and his racist comments but it raises quite an interesting point - well in my opinion in does.
Basically the owner said some racist things, in private, to his girlfriend - this was recorded and published.
The bottom line was that the owner as been banned from basketball for life and now will be FORCED to sell his club.
Serves him right many might - and have - said BUT as far as I can tell he's never ACTED racist and as always kept his opinions - irrespective of whether you like them or not - private.
There seems to be now a small dissenting minority of opinion questing the sanctions handed out to the 'racist'.
A common theme was a concern that the NBA's decision set a bad precedent, that private comments should not be grounds for public disciplining.
"It's not a First Amendment issue," tweets TruthRevolt's Ben Shapiro. "It's a 'do we want to live in a country where your private thoughts are cause for your destruction' issue."
He continues: "Now that Sterling's head is on a pike, can we can all go back to pretending that we defend privacy and views with which we disagree?"
Conservative radio host and columnist Larry Elder also took to Twitter: "Private thoughts + private recording = force sale of private property!!!"
Dan Calabrese, writing on former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's website, takes issue with the "process" used to punish Mr Sterling.
"The things Sterling said were, he thought, being said in private to a person with whom he had a personal relationship," he writes. "He did not know he was being recorded. It was not his intention to say them for public consumption. But they were leaked, and he is now being banned for the things he said - he thought - in private."
"Are you OK with that?" he asks. "Would you want to pay a price like this for the worst thing you ever said when you thought you were speaking in private?"
Who gets to decide what is "hurtful and offensive" he asks. And why did the investigation only take two days?
"We're getting way too quick in this country to simply bum-rush people out of their livelihoods because of a position they took or a thing they said," he says. "However big a racist jerk Donald Sterling may be, this is dangerous."
Interesting points - are we getting TOO PC for our own well being?
Story here -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27214758
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-27214773
Basically the owner said some racist things, in private, to his girlfriend - this was recorded and published.
The bottom line was that the owner as been banned from basketball for life and now will be FORCED to sell his club.
Serves him right many might - and have - said BUT as far as I can tell he's never ACTED racist and as always kept his opinions - irrespective of whether you like them or not - private.
There seems to be now a small dissenting minority of opinion questing the sanctions handed out to the 'racist'.
A common theme was a concern that the NBA's decision set a bad precedent, that private comments should not be grounds for public disciplining.
"It's not a First Amendment issue," tweets TruthRevolt's Ben Shapiro. "It's a 'do we want to live in a country where your private thoughts are cause for your destruction' issue."
He continues: "Now that Sterling's head is on a pike, can we can all go back to pretending that we defend privacy and views with which we disagree?"
Conservative radio host and columnist Larry Elder also took to Twitter: "Private thoughts + private recording = force sale of private property!!!"
Dan Calabrese, writing on former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain's website, takes issue with the "process" used to punish Mr Sterling.
"The things Sterling said were, he thought, being said in private to a person with whom he had a personal relationship," he writes. "He did not know he was being recorded. It was not his intention to say them for public consumption. But they were leaked, and he is now being banned for the things he said - he thought - in private."
"Are you OK with that?" he asks. "Would you want to pay a price like this for the worst thing you ever said when you thought you were speaking in private?"
Who gets to decide what is "hurtful and offensive" he asks. And why did the investigation only take two days?
"We're getting way too quick in this country to simply bum-rush people out of their livelihoods because of a position they took or a thing they said," he says. "However big a racist jerk Donald Sterling may be, this is dangerous."
Interesting points - are we getting TOO PC for our own well being?
Story here -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27214758
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-echochambers-27214773