Anything THEY want to wear is “free speech” Anything YOU want to wear is “offensive”…
With a few victories under their belt, these “social justice” bullies are getting bolder. And now they’ve got the backing of the American Government.
With their chronic accusations of “racism” and their endless complaints of “being offended”, they have convinced the US Equal Employment Opportunity Division to be the hatchet-man (hatchet-person?) for their crusade against history.
Now the “Don’t Tread On Me” Flag has been tagged with racist overtones, and will be treated the same way as the Confederate flag has been.
The power of the FEDERAL government will protect precious snowflakes from having to even look at these symbols in the workplace.
Eugene Volokh of the Washington Post Breaks down the implications:
Instead, this is a case about the rules that all employers, public or private, must follow, on pain of massive legal liability. The harassment law rules (which, as I noted, are the same for private employers as for the federal government) are imposed by the government acting as sovereign — the area where the First Amendment should provide the most protection — not just the government acting as employer.
Shelton D.’s objection was apparently just to the wearing of the flag, and the ideology that he thinks has become associated with the flag. And the claim that the EEOC is allowing to go forward is simply that the cap, in some social or workplace “context” would be reasonably seen as conveying a racially offensive message.
Let’s think about how this plays out in the workplace. Imagine that you are a reasonable employer. You don’t want to restrict employee speech any more than is necessary, but you also don’t want to face the risk of legal liability for allowing speech that the government might label “harassing.” An employee comes to you, complaining that a coworker’s wearing a “Don’t Tread on Me” cap — or having an “All Lives Matter” bumper sticker on a car parked in the employee lot, or “Stop Illegal Immigration” sign on the coworker’s cubicle wall — constitutes legally actionable “hostile environment harassment,” in violation of federal employment law. The employee claims that in “the specific context” (perhaps based on what has been in the news, or based on what other employees have been saying in lunchroom conversations), this speech is “racially tinged” or “racially insensitive.”
Read the rest: Washington Post
Now you don’t even have to PROVE intent. You just need to whine. And then you win.
(Or, more accurately, we ALL lose.)
Share if you will wear whatever you damn well please