tuscl

End Of Freedom Of Speech?

Wednesday, April 30, 2014 4:38 AM
Is this(Donald Sterling) the beginning of the end? If you can't speak freely in your own home, where can you speak freely? How is this going to effect smack talk and lover room talk? Is this going to spill in over to ther aspects of life-music, movies, Internet, etc?

41 comments

  • SlickSpic
    •
    10 years ago
    That's locker room, not lover room.
  • tumblingdice
    •
    10 years ago
    Slick, I see your point and this will weigh heavy.I just don't see how a man smart enough to become a billionaire could say something so stupid,kinda reminds me of Shadowbrat.
  • rockstar666
    •
    10 years ago
    The Constitution says the COVERNMENT can't restrict speech. The government. Private clubs like the NBA require you to agree to certain things to join. I'm sad when people confuse the government with private businesses.
  • SlickSpic
    •
    10 years ago
    @Rockstar-There are private institutions that have tried to restrict the 2nd Ammendment yet many of these restrictions have been struck down in courts of law.
  • grand1511
    •
    10 years ago
    You are always free to say anything you want. The rest of society is also free to react how it feels is appropriate for whatever you say. Free speech does not equal consequent-free speech.
  • tumblingdice
    •
    10 years ago
    All strippers are whores.
  • skibum609
    •
    10 years ago
    There are limits to how much censorship even a private entity can enact. It is my understanding that the fine limit under the owner's agreement is 1 million dollars and that no lifetime ban can be enacted. Expect a lawsuit from Sterling against the NBA, which failed to even acknowledge the blatantly racist tweets made by the ban's supports. The idea a despicable criminal bigot like Al Sharpton has a say and support from the racist Obama makes me want Sterling to win the suit. Until we hold minorities to the same standards as whites in this country it remains all bullshit to me. Then again the NBA is by far the worst pro sports product.
  • Prim0
    •
    10 years ago
    I would only give a shit if this had been done by the government. The NBA is private and has its own rules. Whatever they decide to do with him is fine by me.
  • Hard4Dancers
    •
    10 years ago
    In my mind those are two separate issues. I don't give a fuck if he was taped in an igloo in the middle of Antarctica. It'll never be right and the NBA did the right thing. If you don't want to deal with issues that could arise from making racist comments...then don't make racist comments. Sterling has the freedom to say what he wants but he also has the freedom to face the consequences of saying what he wants.
  • GoVikings
    •
    10 years ago
    The last two posters before me summed it up quite well. The NBA is a private organization, therefore they reserve the right to punish this guy the way they see fit.
  • rockstar666
    •
    10 years ago
    All the NBA would have to prove in court if challenged is his speech was detrimental to the Clippers and the NBA. People can still say what they want without government censorship but that doesn't mean your agreement with the NBA can't restrict speech. In light of all the sponsors who pulled out, that's a slam dunk to prove harm from his speech.
  • deogol
    •
    10 years ago
    Anyone else see something wrong with a private organization having more rights than the government? I mean, it could say "Saying n*gger will get you shot." Hey, you agreed to it when you joined so stand proud at the execution wall! Where is the line?
  • dallas702
    •
    10 years ago
    I tend to agree with Slick on this. Other posters are correct this is NOT a "constitutional freedom of speech" issue. The government should have no say whatsoever in this matter. (Even though Obama did - again - speak out of turn.) But in a very real and practical sense, people ARE now constrained in what they are allowed to say. Anyone who fails to meet the "politically correct" standard is attacked in many vicious ways. Words have consequences, but the reaction recently appears to be so extreme as to stifle speech and create an atmosphere of PC bullying. Paula Dean admitted to using the "N" word - OVER 20 YEARS AGO - and is treated like a rabid dog. The old rancher in Nevada, Bundy, says some really stupid things "wondering if Blacks might have been happier picking cotton" than sitting unemployed on a project stoop - and the media goes into a frenzy, stopping just short of demanding a lynching. And an 80 y/o Billionaire (up for a NAACP lifetime achievement award) asks his girlfriend in a private phone conversation, not to publicly hang around with Blacks - and he is banned from the NBA for life and fined $2.5 million. His remarks place him exactly in the frame of reference of anyone (of any race) born in the 20s, 30s or 40s. Personally, I think the Clipper's owner has acted like a desperate PL with this mistress for years. Buying her several cars worth millions, and a condo, and "X", and "Y", and begging her not to date Blacks. He should face some consequences. $2.5 million? Forced sale of the club? Lifetime ban? That all sounds very PC police to me.
  • rockstar666
    •
    10 years ago
    I respect people's rights to say what they want, but this is no witch hunt. Any corporation that openly supports bigotry in any of its myriad of faces is one I would not associate myself with. The press is not the bad guy here.
  • Timbuck12
    •
    10 years ago
    Rockstar and Grand are 100% spot-on. The Constitution protects free speech in the sense of criminal/gov't prosecution. It doesn't mean you can say whatever the hell you want and face no consequences for it. Sterling isn't being criminally prosecuted for what he said. His free speech rights haven't been violated in any way.
  • jackslash
    •
    10 years ago
    The NBA has no problem fining or disciplining players who do or say wrong things. Why can't the NBA discipline an owner?
  • steve229
    •
    10 years ago
    The NBA constitution is now online: [view link] Article 14 covers Procedure for Termination, which basically is a hearing before the Board of Governors (Owners) where “Strict rules of evidence shall not apply, and all relevant and material evidence submitted prior to and at the hearing may be received and considered.” Seems like it will be tough for Sterling to sue afterwards, since it also says “The decisions of the Association made in accordance with the foregoing procedure shall be final, binding, and conclusive, and each Member and Owner waives any and all recourse to any court of law to review any such decision”.
  • Papi_Chulo
    •
    10 years ago
    What Sterling said is not right – but to me the punishment does not fit the crime – he broke no laws and people are calling for his head and want to take his business away from him which is borderline f’ing communism. As others have said – he should suffer consequences for his actions (e.g. sponsors and fans can choose not to support his team) - but again – he broke no law and having his business taken away from him is like calling for his head to be served on a platter. Many of these folks that call for acceptance and proper treatment of others seem to have no qualms about going for the jugular of those that do not agree w/ their particular view.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    10 years ago
    @SlickSpic: "There are private institutions that have tried to restrict the 2nd Ammendment" Example(s) of what you mean with this one? "Restricting the 2nd Ammendment[sic]" is kind of vague.
  • jester214
    •
    10 years ago
    The really sad thing is her own criminal activity is being ignored.
  • jester214
    •
    10 years ago
    I guess the sad reality is that in this age we all should assume everything we say out loud is being recorded.
  • ilbbaicnl
    •
    10 years ago
    The owners, players and other team staff have agreed to be subject to the rules of the NBA, and the sanctions for violating the rules.
  • motorhead
    •
    10 years ago
    What I don't get is that for years everyone turned a blind eye to his overt racism of not renting apartments to blacks. EX-commish David Stern should be fried for this.
  • jester214
    •
    10 years ago
    Pretty sure the Federal government didn't turn a blind eye, which is why he forked over millions. Not sure how much the NBA could do since he settled.
  • gatorfan
    •
    10 years ago
    End of rich motherfuckers talking racist for sure.
  • minnow
    •
    10 years ago
    I watched YT ~ 9 minute segment. What I'm getting is that "Ms. Multiracial GF" taped conversation (not sure if it was phone call or face to face). The premise that what happens in intimate conversation stays there just got thrown out the window. In the sense that someone must adopt the stance of "don't say anything that you don't mind being released to general public on tape because it just might be"- that could be construed as putting a damper on freedom of speech. Which leads me to agreeing with several posters in that nobody clamped down on Mr. Sterling saying what he thought, but on the flip side, there's no freedom from consequences. Given that NBA is a big time entertainment venue where image rises and sets on the sun and the universe, NBA Commisioner had little choice but to act as he did in sanctioning Mr. Sterling. Comment by some that punishment was out of proportion to "crime" has some merit. Regardless of how one may view a racist being in a key executive position, the actual harm done pales in comparison to corporate/financial malefactors (How many $$ did Mr. Sterling swindle retirees out of, did Mr. Sterling cause a countries financial system to collapse), or did he send anyone to the gas chambers ? Whatever, I don't think Mr. Sterling will be crying too hard on the way to the bank.
  • SlickSpic
    •
    10 years ago
    @Dallas-private businesses that now must allow concealed carry where before they didn't.
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    10 years ago
    Must they allow it, as in no option at all? I ask that because here in Kentucky, one if the provisions of the Concealed Carry law is that businesses can have and post no weapons policies, but if they catch somebody with a weapon, the most they can do is ask them to leave. If the CCW holder refuses, *then* they can have them arrested on a trespassing charge.
  • Fanky
    •
    10 years ago
    If I was the NBA commissioner I would have done the same
  • dallas702
    •
    10 years ago
    @Slick, I think you were responding to GMD's question, "@Dallas-private businesses that now must allow concealed carry where before they didn't." but GMD did respond correctly for KY. In GA, conceal carry will be legal - when the individual property owner says so - in bars and restaurants after 7/1, but failure to heed signs that say "no" can result in a ticket and a fine. In Florida CC laws are also changing but fines may be part of the plan. An excellent example of "private institutions that have tried to restrict the 2nd Amendment," are all of the Bloomberg anti-gun groups he has funded, like the Mayors for gun grabbing, Mothers for gun grabbing and more recently, Everytown gun grabbers which he promises to fund with $50 Million. (think of all the lapdances and VIPs that could have bought!)
  • deogol
    •
    10 years ago
    "End of rich motherfuckers talking racist for sure." In their own home and private conversations.
  • skibum609
    •
    10 years ago
    What is hysterical in this situation is the virulent black racism that people are afraid to mention. Black entertainers going on twitter and calling Sterling and others Crackers and rednecks. Hey if my southern buddies call me a redneck I take it as a compliment, my peers here in Boston? Humor. A black person? They're racists and I respond. Al Sharpton is a Jew hating racist. Barrack Obama is a Jew hating racist. Donald Sterling is just like them and then call all burn in hell together. Sue the NBA Donald because making someone give up their First Amendment rights in order to work somewhere3, join somewhere or own something is in fact Unconstitutional. How do I know this? Well even Pls like myself learn something when they practice law for 32 years.
  • rockstar666
    •
    10 years ago
    Well, I see racism in the 21st century is alive and well. First Amendment rights? Really?
  • Prim0
    •
    10 years ago
    C'mon now....racism exists in every group. Blacks judge whites, chinese judge koreans, nobody likes mexicans. :) The problem is that some groups get away with it and others don't. Either everyone should be able to talk shit or nobody should. I hate seeing young black kids calling each other nigger when we all know the sacrifices made by older blacks get rid of the term and look for equality. Bill Cosby caught all kinds of shit for his comments on how young blacks are acting irresponsibly. I'm all for looking at people individually and judging them on their actions. (Stereotypes do exist for a reason though). As far as the NBA vs Government and what they are allowed to do. It's kind of like a Neighborhood Association. You think you can do what you want with your house because you own it, but the association can limit you much more than the government could (limiting colors, landscaping, etc.) And you can't call me racist because I'm a minority :p
  • Tiredtraveler
    •
    10 years ago
    Jabbar had the right of it. The the cunt who taped it needs to be sued and prosecuted because taping without permission is against the law and she clearly baited him. The nba knew he was a racist years ago and did nothing.
  • SlickSpic
    •
    10 years ago
    What I wanted to know is if this situation might effect our freedom of speech in the future. Throughout history, the powers that be have always limited the freedom, knowledge, and abilities of the masses. Books, movies, and music have been banned. For the record, fuck Donald Sterling. He's been a racist prick for years. If he was half as smart as he is rich, he'd if known not to talk on the phone. He must've seen Goodfellas. Paulie hated phones.
  • motorhead
    •
    10 years ago
    I briefly heard this - but from only one source (ESPN radio)- and have not heard it since. He KNEW he was being recorded because he was recording all his conversations for a future book of his memoirs. If this is true, does it put it in a different light?
  • Tiredtraveler
    •
    10 years ago
    It's not ok for this guy to say what he said but it's ok for Dirty Harry Reid to call people a racist bigot for disagreeing with his politics. and sick the IRS on them. I guess as long as you tow the party line and agree with the powers that be you will be ok as long as you are not in their way to absolute power. There is the old saying: I did not say anything when they went after the Jews because I am not Jewish I did not say anything when they went after the Evangelicals because I am not Evangelical I did not say anything when they went after the Catholics because I am not Catholic Why didn't anyone say anything when they came after me? No one was left! If you think you are safe because you agree with the power mongers, think again because in order to stay in power they must have victims to take form and once the makers are gone the takers will turn on their own. Politicians are actually the oldest profession and way less honest that the worst ROB. Virtually all politicians from the beginning of time have sought to subjugate the people that they supposedly govern. Our government was set up to prevent this from occurring. The First 10 amendments (the Bill of Rights) are to protect us from the government and they are trying to subvert the first and second. Government should fear the people not the other way around. I have noticed an alarming trend in government growth ever since the constitution was removed from the class room. When I went to school the teacher said it was "subject to interpretation" . When I later actually re4ad the document in college I found little that needed to be interpreted and the language very clear and specific. It is little wonder that the federal government promotes illiteracy under the guise of diversity. A stupid population is easier to deceive, refer to our resident gun control nut.
  • nickifree
    •
    10 years ago
    If someone taped me making anti-Semitic remarks against my Jewish boss, should I claim freedom of speech protection- even if I made the remarks in my own home? In another real case, a pizza delivery guy spewed racist insults after delivering a pizza to a black customer. He unknowing had redialed that customer on his cell phone while driving back. The customer heard and recorded the whole rant. Now this driver was in the privacy of his own vehicle when he made the comments. But you can't believe he had protections against not being fired becaue of that.
  • ilbbaicnl
    •
    10 years ago
    It's this type of case that separates the true thinking conservatives from the angry white losers. While I don't agree with conservatism through and through, it does have some important truths. Like you are only entitled to what you earn. Freedom is really the only thing you are entitled to from birth, and that is because others earned it for you, to whom you should be eternally grateful. Sterling is a deceitful fuckwad. Professional sport are for all races, and Sterling committed to support that when he became a team owner. He is not entitled to talk shit about black people and still keep his team. Actions have consequences. His supporters are loser white guys, who pine for the days when loser white people could talk shit about other races to feel better about their own uselessness.
  • Fanky
    •
    10 years ago
    +1
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion