First thing to remember is that this is not someone who lost their job, it's a boss being rejected by his employees. That is a very special and unusual kind of situation, where normal power relationships are inverted. You can't really say the person in question is being oppressed here.

So if a company rejected their boss for agreeing with same-sex marriage, if the rest of the company was by and whole against it, I wouldn't be happy about it, but I would not claim they had done anything morally wrong (beyond to whatever extent I think holding such an opinion is morally wrong).

So what you're saying is, nobody has ever had freedom of speech?

Thanks for clearing that up.

This is not a freedom which exists, especially since it makes no sense at all.

He did not.

Or, you know, you could just turn off Gatekeeper if you don't like it.

No. Coming up on ten years ago, dude. Time to move on.

You realise you are stating wild theories with zero evidence as if they were facts?

It does seem to. This isn't exactly an isolated incident.

No, what's funny is you trying to deny the massive overlap between those groups.

Yes, that's the kind of sociopathy I was talking about, thanks for the example.

Yes, that's the kind of sociopathy I am talking about, thanks for the example.

That would make sense if it was big companies who use that word, but it isn't.

You realise that the people here who can actually "report all movement" are Uber?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ka...

And they're not really very concerned about privacy either when it suits them:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-j...

Not at all strange. They are sociopathic libertarian company devoted to "disruption", which is generally code for "we break the law if it gets in the way of us making money and we think we can get away with it".

No, it doesn't. At all. It means exactly what you are talking about.

Do you realise at all that people die in wars?

Like, people who are not Kim Jong-Un?