Sandy's Dandy ft. Dave Cameron & Ian Mendes | Coming in Hot LIVE - April 8th
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 04. 2024
- Jake Sanderson’s first career overtime winner ends Ottawa’s 3 game losing streak. Ian Mendes stops by to discuss Claude Giroux’s Masterton nomination and Shane Pinto contract negotiations. And it’s been a tough few days, the boys will address Bobby’s departure from the show.
🚨 Please LIKE 👍🏼 & SUBSCRIBE! 🚨
Thanks to our Partners:
🚨 Betway: www.Betway.ca
🚨 BEI: bonnechereexcavating.com
🚨 BEI Homes: www.bonnecherehomes.com
🚨 Doordash: www.doordash.com/en-CA - Code NATION25
🚨 Wendy's: www.wendys.com/en-ca
🚨 Douglas Mattress: www.douglas.ca/CIH
🚨 AG1: www.drinkAG1.com/CIH
______________________________________________________________________
Watch Coming In Hot with Brent Wallace, Jason York, & Bobby Ryan
📺 Subscribe on CZcams: @ComingInHotWithWallaceAndRyan
______________________________________________________________________
🐦 Follow on Twitter & Instagram:
@ComingInHotSens @localpodcaster @jasonyork33 - Sport
I thought Yorkies comments on the Bobby situation were top class. Glad he is sticking through it, you guys will come back better.
Would really enjoy hearing from Jamie Baker on this podcast…good guy, former Sen and pro player with a long broadcasting career…he has a ton of high level insight and is also very articulate…Would be a great recurring guest
Don’t we live in an opinion based world? Even the news is opinion based. People are allowed to express opinions sorry for the loss Bobby was awesome
Best thing I ever did was delete Twitter/X. My mental health has improved tremendously.
This is a great show! Love the honesty and class in dealing with a very difficult situation.
Thank you Aline
It is weird knowing Bobby won't be back😢I really enjoyed you as a trio, but times change, so onward and forward as a dynamic duo. Cheers to more episodes 🎉
Bring back Bobby
Bobby or no Bobby, I always look forward to the show. I hope people continue to tune in and not blame you guys for Bobby being let go. Keep up the great work.
Ian Mendes would definitely be a great host to replace Bobby Ryan on the coming in hot show
You guys rock!! Keep up the great work!!
Regardless of differing opinions, it’s still important to reach out and change through patience and understanding.
I may not agree with what Bobby has said but I’ll still support him on his journey of recovery.
Never forget the individual battles we face everyday and to reach out to all our friends, regardless of creed.
Well said Yorkie about the whole situation
What's going on with Bobby
He made some comments about womens basketball/sports on twitter. He said Nothing that was overly offensive. Dont see why he had to leave
@@BoloHawkerrubbish
Bobby Ryan: $83 million in career earnings. Brent Wallace: Working for a living. They come at this podcast from two different spheres of reality.
Rough scenario for you guys. This is a fantastic show, thank you Wally and Yorkie for being bright spots in a dark Sens era
We should send Goldfish to the Sponsors
if your sponsors are telling you guys to let bobby ryan go, maybe think about new sponsors !! good luck going forward, but now you will be labelled like the rest of the weak podcasters.. again, too bad you wouldnt defend his comments.. which were true comments !! i really feel if the shoe was on the other foot, and brent or jason were in hot water, i feel bobby would stand behind you guys 100%
Yan count my view as a support for Bobby, weak sponsors. Was a viewer from the Methot days and looking back you can tell he bit his tongue a lot. Locked On Senators when he is on it seems he speaks his mind more. Locked On Senators will get my support going forward. GSG
Great show!
Disappointing situation. Not easy for anyone involved, but I'm still wishing you all the best. Keep the show going, keep up the good work. The true fans of the show will keep watching.
Thanks DC. Not ideal. We love the show and interacting with the fans. We will keep the show going and look to add to it.
Great show guys. Keep it coming!
Well said Brent! I’m sure this has been difficult for you. Love the show. Take care of yourself!
Wait where’s Bobby? Coming in, Not!
Was my favorite sens podcast watched and listened in when i was the road... Oh well time to find another
Sponsors/Corporations are surprisingly afraid of free speech. I don’t know what was said, but I think it would have been better to have a conversation that maybe we could all grow from. Seems like the move should have been to create a Patreon and keep Bobby
Bobby was posting about women's sports with the implication being that maybe people were exaggerating how popular they are. This was in the context of the NCAA Women's Basketball tournament, which has apparently been pretty interesting. I heard Bill Simmons talking about it, and then read a long and enjoyable ESPN piece on Caitlin Clark. But I was fine with Bobby basically poking a bit of a hole in some of the hyperbole "EVERYONE is watching (NCAA Women's tournament)". No they're not.
But social media can be a shitstorm. And Bobby ended up eventually making a comment about pretending that women's sports are a thing. Ouch.
@@PeterDrake I think longer form conversation, maybe a podcast would be helpful for discussing then a comment thread or twitter. I dont enjoy basketball, I havent watched the march madness. Cricket is the biggest sport in the world, how many of us in Canada can name 5 cricket players? 20 years ago no one in North America cared about professional soccer. Interest is transitional. Bobby might not be a fan of Womens Basketball, but shouldnt the proper response be giving reasons to why his is missing out and not trying to make sure he is not employed. If someone is not a Sens fan, I will understand currently, but I will give them 101 reasons on why they should cheer for the team. I know Wayne Simmonds, never heard of Bill Simmons
They aren’t afraid of free speech. They just don’t want their brands associated with what might be considered unpopular opinions/people who show poor judgement. This isn’t a new thing just much more public now that social media exists
@@carbb5760 you should watch Norm Mcdonald do ad reads for the Man Grate.
@@carbb5760 Sponsors pay for the right to be associated with the thing that is getting your attention, they dont have the right to dictate the conversation
Miss Bobby but you guys will do well moving forward. Have Dave Cameron on more, good voice
Pure class by Wallace & York. The show will preserve and be great.
This is utter garbage that bobby had to leave
Listening to this on my way to work and at first I thought it started off as a joke with Bobby not being there only to be saddened to realize it was no joke at all. I don’t know everything he said, I deleted X a long time ago, but I’m standing by him regardless. Even if I likely don’t agree with him, it doesn’t mean he’s a bad person. It’s not like he kicked a homeless child in the face or anything like that.
Some things may be better left unsaid but it shouldn’t have to result in being dumped on. Just the way the world is I suppose.
Best wishes Bobby, take care of yourself and your family.
And keep doing what you’re doing Wally and Yorky. The show is great and I’m eager to see if you do bring another person on board. Maybe a former goaltender?????
Bobby was great, but gave off a " i dont give a f"k" attitude. Wearing sandels at the All-Star Game, doing odd things while on camera.. This show will be better off.
Thanks Bobby for the great insight
Disappointing situation of course. There’s really not a good way to handle it unfortunately. Bobby will be missed of course but it’s not the end of the world, he probably shouldn’t have chosen that hill to die on. Wally hopefully you can keep the podcast going
Woman's sports are boring.
Coming in soft. Stay woke! #teambobby
Sucks Bobby is gone but there is no doubt in my mind Wally and York will continue to do an amazing job. I look forward to every episode, thanks for entertaining me after a shitty day of work gentlement! Maybe Dany Heatley wants something to do? lol
Really soft for letting Bobby go like that. Lost a lot of respect for the podcast tbh 😢
It’s a shame we have to tiptoe through this world, people are offended to easily these days. I see nothing wrong expressing your thoughts or feelings, just keep it clean. Bobby will survive
Bobby was a real one.... the only one who brought the hot takes and now he's gone..... might wanna rebrand the podcast to "coming in slightly room temp"
Can’t believe you dumped your pal over a personal opinion. What a joke.
Couldn't Bobby just have taken a leave of absence to let this die down?
It's pretty obvious he was adament on not apologizing because he falt like he said nothing wrong. It's stubborness really
Bobby who?
well time to get Ian Mendes full time
Time for rotating guest hosts?
I’ll keep watching I didn’t read anything what he said to be fair but my math is you lost 20 subs ….
Will see how many more you lose but I’m staying .
All the best to Bobby and your pod cast .
People need to chill in the comments. I listen because I'm a Sens fan and I like to know what's going down with the team. I don't really care either way about Bobby's comments (and yes, you are allowed to just not have an opinion).
Also, unrelated Dave Cameron is just a solid coach. Good hockey mind.
I loved your podcast and still do. It sucks Bobby parted ways, and ya everyone has sides and their own opinions, that's what makes shows like this great. Everyone can voice their opinions freely, and respectively, even if people don't agree with it. To let us get our opinions out, even vent a bit. It's been a really rough ride for this team, so to do what you guys do, I thank you. Business decisions is business decision, but tomorrow is a new day.
Bobby didn’t express his opinions on this show. He tweeted comments on another platform. You state “everyone can voice their opinions freely, and respectively, even if people don’t agree with it.” Not really. He was dropped because the sponsors didn’t like his opinion, among other reasons. So he really wasn’t free to voice, since it cost him his place on this podcast. I’m not saying I agree with any of this but voicing opinions these days can cost. Cancel culture at its finest.
@@joeimbesi5361facts
@@joeimbesi5361 Of course voicing sexist or racist opinions can cost jobs, talk to any HR department. How did he not know that?! He'll be fine, lol.
@joeimbesi5361 well I don't dig behind the scenes of much except this hockey team. I get your point about if his opinion wasn't liked by the sponsors, unless it was said in a way that was bad enough, but its not my podcast to decide that. If that was the case of what happened, I do get your point.
@@pa-mo That's just bullshit because you can be a woman and say whatever you want against men and not get canceled , you can be black and say whatever you want against white people (they don't get canceled) so it's not about being racist or sexist it just depends on who.. It's hypocrisy.
i was almost going to stop watching this podcast since i though bobby ryan was so indifferent. good job holding onto principles. cant be easy
Bobby got don cherry’d
When you care more about your sponsors than your fan base #BBB
Not really. A lot of the fan base actually wants the host to support women's sports. We're fine with Brent and Yorkie, but yes it would be nice to bring in another player.
@@pa-mo yes women’s sports are great… I come from the tennis world where we been doing that. Doesn’t mean Bobby should be fired for having a diff opinion. Yes he’s dumb for voicing it on twitter, yes his opinion is dumb, but firing him is even more brain dead
@@pa-mo Prove that, most of the fan base are men. Most woman don't support woman's sports. You are talking out of your ass.
@@pa-mo has anyone asked Bobby his opinion on womens hockey, pretty sure it would be different. Not all sports are equal.
@@wyattbaldwin I think his initial point was that women's sports are never really supported well by lots of fans and $'s (even though the media tries to pump it up), but then it went weirdly sideways from there.
Such great chemistry with Bobby, Yorky & Wally. It’s a shame, True fans stand with Bobby.
"True fans"? So you have the power to decide that? And anyone who disagrees with you isn't a true fan? Wow.
I'm sad Bobby has left the show. I really enjoyed his insights about hockey. I didn't enjoy his political views (which thankfully didn't surface much on a hockey show). I hope there is some way he can return at some point. But what do I know. Apparently I'm not a true fan.
@@PeterDrake Totally agree with you Peter. If you don't have anything nice to say, keep your mouth closed. Picking a fight on the internet for no reason is a fool's errand. Cheers
@@PeterDrake You got triggered by that.
Justice for Bobby
Should have stood by your friend. But greed always wins I guess.
The sponsors pay for the show. Are you suggesting they should have just cancelled the podcast?
@@PeterDrake Sponsors also dont fund womens sports or athletes at the same level as men
Getting kicked off a show for stating his opinion on social media.... Ridiculous. RIP Coming in Hot. Ill be watching some other Sens podcast.
Imagine having consequences for what you say.
Don’t agree with Bobby, but you can’t be messing with ppls lives over bad opinions
Also every other sens pod sucks lmao
@Javier-ox8ui you think this is gonna mess up Bobby's life hahaha you're delusional
@@shaynejohnson7899 The buzz phrase they teach in the indoctrination brainwashing camps makes zero sense. God given human rights and freedoms. You can forfeit yours but I won't. #brainwashed #government #schools #universities
“In order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive”. -Jordan B. Peterson.
Snowflakes another ron mclean stand by your friend
What a joke. Bobby made the pod
I'm pretty sure Brent made the show.
@daniellussier211 I meant he made it as in made it entertaining and worth watching
@@j4lippa105 hahahahaha
Pod 50% less entertaining without Bobby
@@DirtyMoneyHipHop Im totally against Bobby… I think his opinion is braindead. Still doesn’t warrant taking him off the show
Lame as hell, should've stood by your guy, what an overreaction for such an innocuous joke. Glad your sponsors are happy.
Turning your back on a so-called friend for the sake of profit is pathetic.
Weirdly enough, all the people complaining about 'cancel culture' are now refusing to watch the show... and they don't see the irony.
i watched every COMING IN HOT , but this will be my last 1.. bobby ryan did nothing wrong.. i thought this was a team between you 3 !!! i guess another podcast doomed with all the hurt feelings.. i enjoyed watching, but my support is with bobby ryan.. too bad brent and jason would not stand up for a team mate..
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
Maybe get new sponsors instead of firing the guy that made the podcast good
Why ‘Freedom of Speech’ vs. ‘Freedom from Consequences’ Doesn’t Make Sense
In recent debates about freedom of speech and censorship, it is often claimed that “freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.” You can say what you want, it is argued, but that doesn’t protect you from facing the consequences of your actions.
As George Takei put it a few years ago:
“‘Freedom of speech’ does not mean you get to say whatever you want without consequences. It simply means the government can’t stop you from saying it.”
It sounds persuasive. But a closer look reveals it is deeply flawed. Why?
Because it is literally impossible to have freedom of speech without freedom from consequences.
You Can Say What You Want, But…
Censorship
Imagine you are employed at an IT company, and your boss doesn’t believe in climate change. He says to you, “You are free to say whatever you like here, but if you ever talk about climate change, you’ll be fired.”
A few weeks later, you mention it in passing, and you lose your job.
Is your freedom of speech being protected? Of course not. Freedom of speech is not about letting people physically utter words. It is about protecting them from consequences that are imposed in order to control or restrict what can and can’t be spoken about.
In this scenario, it would be nonsensical to say that your freedom of speech was protected, but you simply weren’t protected from the consequences of what you said.
Freedom From Consequences
If you’re not yet convinced, apply the same logic to ‘freedom of expression’ or ‘freedom of religion’ and you quickly see how it falls apart.
Freedom of expression: you can write comics about whatever you like, but we’ll shoot you if you write something that offends us.
Freedom of religion: you can practice your religion if you like, but just be aware that we’ll kill you if you do. Remember, ‘freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from consequences!’
That’s completely ludicrous.
Or, “You’re free to insult Islam on your blog, but we’ll imprison and whip you if you do.” That’s what we call a textbook violation of freedom of speech, precisely because it imposed consequences in order to restrict and control what people can and can’t say.
By definition, freedom of speech must include freedom from consequences.
Freedom From All Consequences?
At this point, someone might object, “But freedom of speech doesn’t protect you from all the consequences of your actions!”
And yes, that’s true. Freedom of speech doesn’t protect us from the natural consequences of what we say. If you speak rudely, people won’t like you. That’s just a natural consequence, and the law won’t protect you from it!
But freedom of speech is about protecting people from the kind of consequences that are imposed in order to restrict, control, or manipulate what people can and can’t talk about.
It’s not talking about natural consequences, it’s talking about things like expelling people from a University because of something they said on a private Facebook account. It’s enforcing what ideas can and can’t be spoken about.
In those situations, ‘freedom of speech’ must mean ‘freedom from consequences.’
Different Kinds of Consequences
The confusion around this ‘freedom from consequences’ idea stems from a failure to distinguish between the (1) natural consequences of an action and (2) artificial consequences that are imposed with the purpose of restricting or controlling what people say.
In the former category (1), if your speech breaks the code of conduct at your workplace, they have perfectly legitimate grounds to fire you without violating your freedom of speech.
In the latter category (2), if an employer fires you because they disagree with something you said on some political topic unrelated to your work, they have violated your freedom of speech.
So yes, of course freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from natural consequences. But it intrinsically and categorically must mean freedom from consequences imposed to restrict or penalise people simply for holding and expressing ideas.
Now, to be clear, freedom of speech is not an unlimited and unrestricted right. Some kinds of speech are (rightfully) illegal, such as defamation and hate speech.
So by all means, if someone is breaking the law by their speech, they must face the consequences.
But if you simply disagree with or are offended by what someone says, then denying them a platform or imposing other consequences to punish them is denying their freedom of speech.
Asking The Right Questions
When it comes to the debate around censorship, the question is, what kinds of speech should be allowed, and which should not? What kinds of speech do we want to protect, and which do we not? What kinds of speech should be illegal, and which should not?
Those are complicated questions, and I don’t presume to have the answers to them. But they are the right questions to be asking.
So can we please do away with the nonsense about ‘freedom from consequences’?
Bang on.
No...we can not do away with "freedom from consequences" for action leads to reactions.
Whoa. No everything you do has some type of consequence or reaction. The mental gymnastics here are absolutely wild. This situation is incredibly simple, a business has decided to advertise on this platform. If they don’t like what people are saying on the platform and don’t want their business associated with that they can stop sponsoring the content. It’s not censorship is just business
@@carbb5760 Newtons 3rd Law, Thermodynamics and Butterfly Effect.
@@DocSportello1970 An irrelevant conclusion, also known as ignoratio elenchi (Latin for 'ignoring refutation') or missing the point, is the informal fallacy of presenting an argument whose conclusion fails to address the issue in question. It falls into the broad class of relevance fallacies.
Very disappointing.Fired for being honest. Society is messed.
No, they agreed to stop working together because he kept posting stuff that was sexist and he wouldn't apologize. His views are his views, but he became a liability to the show and sponsors and most fans, with his many drunken anti-women comments!
I watch Sens games. I love the men's juniour hockey tournament every year. I'll watch the men's international hockey tournaments. I'll watch curling and loved Rachel winning gold in Nova Scotia. I might watch and cheer for Canada in a women's gold medal hockey game in the Olympics. I like figure skating. Given a choice between watching men's or women's tennis I think the women's game is more entertaining. Lots of volleys as opposed to just the power serve and top women will earn way more in their careers than McDavid ever will. Are they better than the men? Not even close. Maybe Serena Williams would break into the top one thousand rankings playing against men.
I myself don't watch cage fighting but apparently the top money earner is a woman because she generates top revenue. Could she beat any of the better men? Not a chance. She'd get smoked but it doesn't matter because people like to watch her fight.
So basically I'm not really a big sports fan but I do know that men's soccer in the US generated somewhere around a billion dollars in revenue while women's soccer generated around 150 million dollars in revenue yet I'm being asked to believe that they are equally as popular. I don't have to believe it but if somebody in the public eye dared point out that absurdity they'd be gone. Same story for women's basketball.
If I've seen little bits of PWHL play. Can't help it because of the massive PR campaign behind it. I guess that if you watch women's soccer you might want to watch women's hockey.
Women know the truth. Go take a look at sports like pole vaulting or the high jump. Men don't compete in these sports wearing speedos but take a look at what the women are wearing. Occasionally you'll see one of them dressed normally but overall they know they need to use sex to sell their game.
When I was a little kid I liked to read comic books - Superman, Batman, Aquaman, etc. When I turned 8 or thereabouts Supergirl and Batgirl began to rise immeasurably in my esteem but I always understood that these were all fictional characters. I knew they weren't real and so did everybody else.
Video game producers introduced super sexy women fighters into their games to attract the male gamer audience. Movies had 12 year old little girls outsmarting and defeating entire professional assassination squads. I always knew none of it was real. I knew Arnold's characters weren't real. I knew Die Hard wasn't real. I knew Clint's characters weren't real.
Over the years women have been told they can be anything they want to be and they've somehow come to believe that women can beat men at anything. They've come to believe that Supergirl and Batgirl are real and they want me to believe it too. Sorry. Not going to happen.
Bobby was interesting to listen to and I will miss his insights and perspective on the game. Jason usually has good stuff to say but it's going to be a little like trying to listen to Ron MacLean. Don't worry, Wally. All the other Sens podcasts are for sh_t so you will survive. Maybe your next move should be to bring in a woman to join you and Jason? Kind of like putting the cherry on top, no pun intended. :)
How dare someone have a different opinion. The horror!!
Very unfortunate situation where resiliency could of helped everybody. Completely agree Brent, very disappointing. At least you boys are honest, this is about money and DEI. Very disappointing indeed boys. Extremely weak behavior. Resiliency has left society.
Imagine a world without God Given Human Rights and Freedoms, such as Freedom of Opinion, Freedom of Thought, and Freedom of Expression, and now imagine a world where people actually cheer on the cancelation of these God Given Human Rights and Freedoms! #insanity #brainwashed #government #mentalillness
That's tinfoil-hat nonsense. Everyone including Bobby still has the right to think, decide, and say whatever they want. Likewise, the decision makers of CIH have the right to make decisions that support their business as they see fit. And you have the right to unsubscribe. Complete freedom for everyone.
@@pa-mo You just proved my point. What is your full name? Did you just call human rights and freedoms, tinfoil hat nonsense? Mind body spirit. Earth sun and moon, you cannot be entirely happy without a deep spiritual base, it's always been this way. Truth can be difficult.
Are you under the impression that freedom of speech means freedom from consequences?
If you say something that your employer feels harms their public image then you'll probably lose your job. This is especially true in the mass media when your whole job is to be interesting and/or informative (Bobby was both) without being offensive.
You can say whatever you want, but everyone else can judge you for it. It's a free country. They don't have to agree with you.
@@PeterDrake I'll just scoop all those logical fallacies into the bin. Irrelevant conclusion, ignoratio elenchi, or missing the point, among many misses. Today's society is terribly unbalanced, just waiting enthusiastically, in anticipation for an opportunity to be offended, and subsequently destroy people. Those who judge will never understand, and those who understand will never judge. #programmed #government #brainwashed
@@PeterDrake"Those who judge will never understand, and those who understand will never judge." - Wilson Kanadi
"Why ‘Freedom of Speech’ vs. ‘Freedom from Consequences’ Doesn’t Make Sense
April 26, 2017 Ben Smart
In recent debates about freedom of speech and censorship, it is often claimed that “freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.” You can say what you want, it is argued, but that doesn’t protect you from facing the consequences of your actions.
As George Takei put it a few years ago:
“‘Freedom of speech’ does not mean you get to say whatever you want without consequences. It simply means the government can’t stop you from saying it.”
It sounds persuasive. But a closer look reveals it is deeply flawed. Why?
Because it is literally impossible to have freedom of speech without freedom from consequences.
You Can Say What You Want, But…
Censorship
Imagine you are employed at an IT company, and your boss doesn’t believe in climate change. He says to you, “You are free to say whatever you like here, but if you ever talk about climate change, you’ll be fired.”
A few weeks later, you mention it in passing, and you lose your job.
Is your freedom of speech being protected? Of course not. Freedom of speech is not about letting people physically utter words. It is about protecting them from consequences that are imposed in order to control or restrict what can and can’t be spoken about.
In this scenario, it would be nonsensical to say that your freedom of speech was protected, but you simply weren’t protected from the consequences of what you said.
Freedom From Consequences
If you’re not yet convinced, apply the same logic to ‘freedom of expression’ or ‘freedom of religion’ and you quickly see how it falls apart.
Freedom of expression: you can write comics about whatever you like, but we’ll shoot you if you write something that offends us.
Freedom of religion: you can practice your religion if you like, but just be aware that we’ll kill you if you do. Remember, ‘freedom of religion doesn’t mean freedom from consequences!’
That’s completely ludicrous.
Or, “You’re free to insult Islam on your blog, but we’ll imprison and whip you if you do.” That’s what we call a textbook violation of freedom of speech, precisely because it imposed consequences in order to restrict and control what people can and can’t say.
By definition, freedom of speech must include freedom from consequences.
Freedom From All Consequences?
At this point, someone might object, “But freedom of speech doesn’t protect you from all the consequences of your actions!”
And yes, that’s true. Freedom of speech doesn’t protect us from the natural consequences of what we say. If you speak rudely, people won’t like you. That’s just a natural consequence, and the law won’t protect you from it!
But freedom of speech is about protecting people from the kind of consequences that are imposed in order to restrict, control, or manipulate what people can and can’t talk about.
It’s not talking about natural consequences, it’s talking about things like expelling people from a University because of something they said on a private Facebook account. It’s enforcing what ideas can and can’t be spoken about.
In those situations, ‘freedom of speech’ must mean ‘freedom from consequences.’
Different Kinds of Consequences
The confusion around this ‘freedom from consequences’ idea stems from a failure to distinguish between the (1) natural consequences of an action and (2) artificial consequences that are imposed with the purpose of restricting or controlling what people say.
In the former category (1), if your speech breaks the code of conduct at your workplace, they have perfectly legitimate grounds to fire you without violating your freedom of speech.
In the latter category (2), if an employer fires you because they disagree with something you said on some political topic unrelated to your work, they have violated your freedom of speech.
So yes, of course freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from natural consequences. But it intrinsically and categorically must mean freedom from consequences imposed to restrict or penalise people simply for holding and expressing ideas.
Now, to be clear, freedom of speech is not an unlimited and unrestricted right. Some kinds of speech are (rightfully) illegal, such as defamation and hate speech.
So by all means, if someone is breaking the law by their speech, they must face the consequences.
But if you simply disagree with or are offended by what someone says, then denying them a platform or imposing other consequences to punish them is denying their freedom of speech.
Asking The Right Questions
When it comes to the debate around censorship, the question is, what kinds of speech should be allowed, and which should not? What kinds of speech do we want to protect, and which do we not? What kinds of speech should be illegal, and which should not?
Those are complicated questions, and I don’t presume to have the answers to them. But they are the right questions to be asking.
So can we please do away with the nonsense about ‘freedom from consequences’?"
DONE WITH THIS SHOW AND WILL NO LONGER WATCH!!! Wally Ron Mclean Wallace. You are gutless Good luck with the show, I will no longer watch and unsubscribing. c ya
you must be a habs fan
@@gothamcollections1038 you must be a liberal
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
WE STAND WITH BOBBY RYAN
I heard a rumor that you stand with Bobby Ryan. True?