In point of fact, while the threats and intimidation she faced were despicable (and possibly criminal, under other statues) acts, the woman who refused to speak is the exact opposite of a First Amendment curb: far from Congress “abridging the freedom of speech,” they gave her the opportunity to speak.

Regarding your other examples, there’s certainly a discussion to be had about whether employers should be barred from taking action against employees for statements made off the job (or even statements made on the job, but which do not pertain to their duties)—written properly, I think I’d support such a measure. But the fact is, in a lot of places, you can be fired “for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all.” I’d be interested to see if there’s any case law on whether a firing for statements made in defense of marriage would constitute discrimination on the basis of religion under Title VII.

[1] Of course, even that has never been seen as a legal absolute, as witness slander and libel laws.
[2] Also, I quibble with your apparent assertion that only “law-abiding” citizens should not face reprisals for their speech.

Dn Mitchell: As a rule of thumb, I think freedom of speech is an almost absolute right, at least in sense that we should not fear civil penalties for expressing our opinions and beliefs. I also generally think that individuals should be free to express their beliefs publicly without reprisal from their place of employment if it’s off the clock. Of course, companies should also be free to fire someone whose publicly expressed views are a potential embarrassment and cost to the company, whether the person is a member of the KKK or NAMBLA. I wouldn’t want a representative from either camp holding a high level position in my company, quite frankly. If they were, they’ve become a liability, no matter how good their “performance” was.

If you’re referring to the firing of Dr. Frank Turek at Cisco, then by all accounts, no, he should not have been fired as his beliefs were not expressed at work, nor does it appear that those beliefs led towards discriminatory employment practices on his part. I’ve written in support of people in both the private sector and academia who have been fired due to political correctness, and I’m sure I’m not the first one to do so.

See, when I say I believe in freedom, I mean it. I don’t mean “freedom for everyone and everything I personally agree with”. Unfortunately, given the fierce opposition to ENDA laws and any law that protects a person from being evicted or fired for sexual orientation, I don’t think this is really about “freedom” of anything.

Of course he does, everything is equal, except some ideas are more equal than others.

So, Tomas, you equate one idiot with a placard with a media corporation actually firing someone for expressing his religious beliefs publicly?

The US is following Europe’s footsteps
St. Justin Popovic: Whither does humanistic culture lead?
Europe made use of Christ “merely as a bridge from uncultured barbarism to cultured barbarism; that is, from a guileless barbarism into a sly barbarism.” (Bp. Nikolai [Velimirovich])

Of course, Maggie neglected to mention the placard one of her supporters brought to a NOM rally which featured “The Solution to Gay Marriage” followed by a picture of a hangman’s noose: http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2010/07/27/photoh-the-so-called-solution-to-gay-marriage/

Surely, you have better arguments than this drivel. The SCOTUS recently sided with Westboro Baptist, perhaps the most disgusting and vitriolic anti-gay group in America. Free speech isn’t going anywhere in this nation…