Pretty trivial workaround: TWC and Comcast would just take the money that they save by not lobbying and pay it to their CxOs. Of course there won't be any express expectation that they use the money for political speech.

Thanks for that. I didn't know it was illegal in CA. I'll have to check with our branch out there, because I'm pretty sure they still random test.

Back to the Disney thing, I would think that the character actors would fall under a "think of the children" sort of thing. Can you imagine, "Mommy, why does Mickey smell funny like Uncle Jack?" The funny thing is, I'm actually in favor of companies (or governments, for that matter) requiring immunizations, allowing for medical exemptions.

Are you sure that was bread? It might have been more chicken.

Citation needed. Prove to me that recreation pot use on the weekend is somehow a "public safety" issue for the guy sweeping the floor at the Magic Kingdom. Now vaccinations, on the other hand, really are a public safety issue because the public is harmed by a lack of herd immunity. Just look at the current situation.

No, I'm pretty sure he had it right. These days you're guilty until proven innocent in both types of trials. Hell, you may not even see a courtroom, if your "crime" fits the narrative of the day. The press will make your life hell anyway. Terrorism, sexual assault, drugs.

Nearly all companies worth working for have drug testing requirements. So it's not as easy as "you don't have to work for them." You effectively can't work for anybody in entire swaths of industry for doing something that is so harmless, several states have decided to legalize it. Do companies check to make sure you aren't violating other laws? Certainly. Do they make you prove your innocence on a quarterly basis? Of course not. That only happens with drug use.

Some employers even have you sign agreements not to drink in public, drive 5 mph under the speed limit, stay under a certain weight, or my personal favorite-- back in to all parking spots. Let's not forget some companies (e.g. church schools) still fire people for being gay. My employer doesn't allow me to post negative comments about my company on forums. Should this shit be legal?

Seems to me that if a person is doing their job well, that a company shouldn't have the right to fire them. I live in an "at will" state. We can fire somebody because the sky is cloudy, and they can't do anything about it. That seems pretty fucked up to me.

Gee, I don't know. I ain't never seen a fifteenth of whiskey.

It's David fucking Duke. You can't be a politician from Louisiana and NOT know who he is. How do you go speak at a group and not do even a little bit of research on what they stand for? He may not be a neo-Nazi, but he's completely ignorant when it comes to political appearances. How does a guy like that make it to a leadership position in the Republican party?

Just ask yourself: WWJU? Who Would Jesus Unfriend? Evangelical Christians who unfriend non-believers certainly haven't read the gospel they claim to want to preach. Matthew 9:13 / Mark 2:17 / Luke 5:32. I don't think John has that exact story, but there are several other examples.

Holy shit. What state do you live in?

This. Bad text re-flow is simply inexcusable. The stupid subscribe ads make the site completely unusable, to boot.

Don't be naive, you know damn well that it doesn't stop at "talking to congressional representatives." The founding fathers never meant for the right to petition to translate into "The right for multibillion dollar international conglomerates to take congressmen on luxurious junkets where they can be educated on the need to propose and pass legislation that has been helpfully written by ALEC." Lobbying firms don't just petition. They bribe. They cajole. They threaten. If it was as simple as petitioning government, why would they need 8 or 9 figure annual budgets? And don't even get me started on SuperPACs.

Not true. There have been people working on this problem for over a decade; it has not been proven impossible. In fact there are several promising solutions that provide both an audit trail and secrecy. And you left off a third thing, no way to prove to a third party who you voted for.

Is that really so different from "I don't want to get get shot at or firebombed by fans of the prophet." Using violence or threats of violence to curb unwanted speech is an age-old phenomenon. I am surprised that people are just now getting rankled about it.

I'm a little befuddled by your conflation of European free speech curbing and the run-up to WWII. Keep in mind that most of the press during WWII was very right-wing and pro-fascist. And not just in Germany. There were several US and British newspapers that saw nothing wrong with Brownshirts destroying the godless communists and social democrats. In fact, it was common for the pro-fascists to hide behind free speech laws when "marching." They would claim it was just a legal protest against social democrats (and Jews). But that's a little off-topic and lot Godwin.

Funny, that's the same sentence I hear from Dice with that beta link.