Skip to main content

View Diary: Temple Tells Nurses: The Constitution Doesn't Apply to You (259 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  See the pretty pictures? (11+ / 0-)

    Of hands over mouths?

    ELECT BETTER POLITICIANS: NOTIFY DNCC AND INCUMBENTS, WHEN YOU DONATE AND WORK. PRAGMATIC PROGRESSIVES; THE CAT FOR CHANGE.

    by CuriousBoston on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 06:26:38 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The Constitution only applies to governments. (7+ / 0-)

      Temple is a private enterprise... they're simply not bound by the 1st Amendment.

      --Shannon

      "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
      "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

      by Leftie Gunner on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 06:42:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  if this place takes any taxpayer monies (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Knarfc, majii

        or benefits, silencing employees is defiantly a violation of the constitution

        •  really? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          majii, CuriousBoston

          Tell that to everyone in the armed services.  Ya know we can go to the brig for sayin' bad stuff about the CINC.

        •  Not even sure that matters (7+ / 0-)

          The constitution prohibits abridging the freedom speech.  It's clear that freedom preexists any law the government may enact.  Hence, we all have freedom of speech as a consequence of being humans.  That right is what is being denied by Temple.  Leftie Gunner and 1918's arguments are red herrings.

          Now, whether Temple can legally abridge people's freedom of speech is another matter, but that is completely separate from the moral question of whether they should do so.  

          People have a right to freedom of speech.  That right is referenced in the Constitution.  That right is being abridged (perhaps legally) by Temple.  They are despicable, even if they are not criminals.

          To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

          by sneakers563 on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 07:20:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're mixing up truth and truthiness (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Clues, Book of Hearts

            Yes, people have a moral right to freedom of speech.  And they have a legal right to protection against suppression of free speech by the government.  That does not mean that they have a legal right to the protection of free speech against suppression by anyone.  That is why people's comments can be HR'd here and they can be banned for what they say here.

            The arguments you deride aren't red herrings.  These are people who know the law.  If you want the freedom to deride your non-governmental employer, you have to bargain for it.  You have to be willing, very likely, to strike.  That's where we are.

            "So if you don't have any teeth, so what? ... Isn't that why they make applesauce?" -- GOP leader Rush Limbaugh

            by Seneca Doane on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 07:36:05 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Where does the diarist make a legal argument? (0+ / 0-)

              I read the diarist as making a moral argument.  Where does he/she claim that what Temple is doing is illegal?

              Yes, the diarist characterizes Temple's position as "the Constitution doesn't apply to you", but that seems pretty accurate: "The Constitution doesn't apply to you, so go suck it."

              I'm not arguing that Temple is doing something illegal (I thought I was plain on that point).  My problem is with arguments that because it is not illegal, the diarist's complaint is invalid.  That because it's not the government abridging these people's right to free speech, we shouldn't be bothered by it.

              To believe that markets determine value is to believe that milk comes from plastic bottles. Bromley (1985)

              by sneakers563 on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 08:00:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I was responding to comments (0+ / 0-)

                from people who clearly, as reading them will show you, did not get it and don't share the position that you present here.

                "So if you don't have any teeth, so what? ... Isn't that why they make applesauce?" -- GOP leader Rush Limbaugh

                by Seneca Doane on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 09:33:32 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Any argument invoking the Constitution (0+ / 0-)

                is a legal argument by definition.

                The Constitution is a purely legal document. It has no meaning or weight outside the confines of the government that it defines.

                --Shannon

                "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
                "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

                by Leftie Gunner on Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 02:46:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  If you read the diary, you'll see the title is (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              khereva

              a result of a quote by an administrator.  There's no claim that constitutional rights are being violated.  Making that assumption is a knee jerk reaction on your part.

              "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

              by gustynpip on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 09:08:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Commenters were making that claim (0+ / 0-)

                if you'll read the comments, and distinguish my replies to commenters to my reply to the diary itself.  So no, this wasn't knee-jerk.  The diary was fine, I did see where the quote came from, but many commenters didn't get it.  'Kay?

                "So if you don't have any teeth, so what? ... Isn't that why they make applesauce?" -- GOP leader Rush Limbaugh

                by Seneca Doane on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 09:32:39 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh my. A little sensative there, hey? (0+ / 0-)
                  Your post certainly didn't make that clear, and I was responding to your post, not to other commenters.  But sorry for having the audicity of addressing you.

                  "If you trust you are not critical; if you are critical you do not trust" by our own Dauphin

                  by gustynpip on Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 08:53:11 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  On what do you base that belief? (0+ / 0-)

          You know, there is a right answer here, and steering people away from it is not helpful.

          "So if you don't have any teeth, so what? ... Isn't that why they make applesauce?" -- GOP leader Rush Limbaugh

          by Seneca Doane on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 07:32:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It seems like it wasn't only right wingers (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LynneK, Knarfc, CuriousBoston

        who were asleep in high school government class.

        •  How, exactly... (0+ / 0-)

          what provisions of the US Constitution create constraints on the behavior of non-governmental entities? And no, statutes making it a crime to deny someone their civil rights don't count... if those laws didn't exist, the things they prohibit would not be a crime. Only references to the text of the Constitution are acceptable answers.

          --Shannon

          "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
          "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

          by Leftie Gunner on Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 02:49:59 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  The Constitution applies to private enterprises. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JesseCW

        While you are right about the First Amendment ("Congress shall pass no law...."), there are in fact many other portions of the Constitution which apply to private enterprises, just in case anyone was confused by Letfie's overgeneralization.

        -5.63, -8.10. Learn about Duverger's Law.

        by neroden on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 08:32:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Applied directly? (0+ / 0-)

          I can't think of anything in the Constitution that directly limits private behavior.

          --Shannon

          "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
          "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

          by Leftie Gunner on Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 09:02:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  no it isn't (0+ / 0-)

        Temple University is a state-related institution, like Penn State and the University of Pittsburgh.

        grok the "edku" -- edscan's "revelation", 21 January 2009

        by N in Seattle on Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 11:43:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Let's hope (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ludlow, tardis10, CuriousBoston

        That you are not a patient that suffers because of insufficient staffing or any other bad practice that a hospital employs and the nurses that take care of you won't speak out to protect you because if they do, they risk losing their jobs.

        Nurses are the ones that protect the patient.  Let's keep that way.

        •  Oh, don't mistake me... (0+ / 0-)

          I think what Temple is doing here is reprehensible.

          But it in no sense violates the Constitution.

          I can reject an argument while agreeing with its conclusion or purpose.

          --Shannon

          "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
          "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

          by Leftie Gunner on Thu Apr 01, 2010 at 02:51:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site