[bilbo0s]

I'm refuting the obligation of other people to listen or associate with you. That's all implicit in the first. Freedom of Speech. Freedom to Ignore. Freedom of Association. All of it.

NO. Your company is under no obligation to maintain your employment. Why? Because the owner of your company has rights too. You're not the only person who has rights. That's the whole point here. The First is for everyone. And they can do what they like with their rights. And you can do what you like with your rights.

We don't take away rights from Paul, because Peter finds Paul's rights inconvenient. That's not how the Constitution works.

[oefrha]

Again, where the hell did I say I’m the only person with rights? Could you please stop putting words into my mouth?

And again, in the cases I was alluding to, people were only terminated because of supposed “public outcry”. Without “public outcry” the companies wouldn’t have done anything. You think they actually enjoy disassociating with employees because they made some remarks on Twitter that are completely irrelevant to what they’re hired for? Think again.

So, Twitter mobs have no obligation to listen to or associate with the individuals I was talking about. Exactly. It would have been great if they disengage and left well enough alone. But nope, they’re out for blood.