this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
237 points (96.8% liked)

News

22897 readers
4071 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Just so people can judge for themselves...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 33 minutes ago

And if she pull this the Georgia mail carrier pulls the abortion and lgbt mail. Let people get the hate mail. The only ones it convinces are those that already agree everyone else just trashes it. Postal Carriers should deliver regardless of sender or recipient. This just does DeJoy's work for him.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of spite stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds

United States Postal Service creed (Wikipedia)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 hours ago

This is in Canada not the US.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

At some point we have to recognize that these organizations are delivering blatant misinformation and hate-speech. That is, speech designed to "other" an already minority group of civilians.

These postcards accuse teachers of “pushing transgenderism” and describe gender-affirming medical care as “chemical and surgical mutilation.”

This hateful and divisive rhetoric has real effects on trans people just trying to live their lives, and one should not be forced to participate in the dissemination of said hate-speech propaganda. I'm glad that they just suspended her, and ended up paying her for the days missed after she came back.

I, for one, am sick an tired of being delivered hate-speech in the mail. Some of the republican mailers I get are littered with the same hateful misinformation. It does nothing but foment anger towards an already marginalized minority group. It's wrong, and the post office should refuse to deliver it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago

That actually happens? I can’t say I’ve ever gotten hateful misinformation in the mail (and no, I don’t want to find out). My snail mail is mostly spam, with the occasional bill that doesn’t want to be electronic. More than half the time, it all goes directly in the recycle bin.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Disgusting as it is, she has a job to perform and has no authority to determine what mail is sent. This shit needs to be stopped at the source, not by a mail carrier. Either do you job or step aside.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Whenever laws get broken, it's constantly "I was just doing my job".

The Postal office can find someone else to do that delivery.

You don't know how long they've been working there. And that directly puts their family at potential harm.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (2 children)

It’s her job to deliver the mail. The only law broken here is her refusal to deliver it. You don’t get to cherry pick the mail system.

If she won’t deliver the mail, she needs to be fired. Period.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

The SS at Auschwitz were also "doing their job"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

I love this discussion because it's a complex issue.

I suppose I stand on the side that maybe she should have just delivered them. It's just words and individuals can throw garbage in the bin pretty easily. I sure as shit wouldn't want anybody filtering my mail.

OTOH, "got a job to do" is a weak justification for unethical behaviour.

Put me down 3:2 in favour of delivering the things I guess.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Hot take bud, where do you draw the line with that?

Can a transphobic postal carrier refuse to deliver anything they disagree with also? Shouldn’t they be able to decide what mail you get based on their beliefs as well?

Or are you a hypocrite that thinks that rules should only be broken because you disagree with them.

Oh, and please don’t go to Nazis when you feel someone disagrees with you. It’s immature, it’s irrelevant to the discussion, and it’s foolish as hell.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Pro trans material isn't putting people in harm's way

Huge difference bud

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

You’re wrong here bud. No matter how you feel about it. You’re wrong. It’s her job to deliver mail. Even if she disagrees with it.

And for the record- they will tell you that trans rights puts people in harms way as well- even if we both disagree- belief is belief at the end of the day- and someone is choosing to take the law into their own hands based on that belief.

She should be fired.

I’m done arguing this with people that don’t understand how federal laws work on the most basic of levels.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

She could argue it's self defence technically. As we all know what shitfuckery advertising like that leads to...

She's probably been delivering the mail for decades. Just not some bigoted advertising.

It's not my job to pull down Nazi sticker crap or clean it up, but I do.

Yes management should reject that delivery, but she also has a right not to put her family in harm's way.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

So should a bigoted transphobe mail carrier be allowed to deny mail from a source depicting trans rights as a positive thing?

Does this work both ways?

Or is it only that the law should be broken because you disagree with it. You don’t get to cherry pick federal laws bud. That’s not how it works.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

While I have the utmost sympathy for her, if a postal worker is picking and choosing what mail is to be delivered the entire concept of the post office becomes moot.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 hours ago

Yeah. I have very strong political, moral, and ethical opinions.

I'm also a government employee, and those opinions disappear when I'm performing my duties. I enforce rules I find idiotic all the damn time and let people get away with bullshit that should be illegal. They're not my rules.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 hours ago

Yep. This is part of the "Do the job" deal.

Because I'm sure we'll be up in arms if a religious Postal worker elected to not deliver mail for religious reasons.

[–] [email protected] 161 points 19 hours ago (7 children)

Pretty much anyone defending the postal worker here on the basis of what she did being "right" is missing the generalisation that must be made. If it's okay for postal workers to refuse to deliver mail containing viewpoints they disagree with, that means it's okay for bigoted postal workers to refuse to deliver mail from or to LGBT organisations. It means it would be okay for pro-life postal workers to refuse to deliver parcels containing birth control pills or flyers containing information about abortion services.

You cannot have it both ways. If you make a rule that there are cases when it is acceptable for postal workers to destroy or refuse to deliver mail, it will be used by the other side against you.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

I'll bite. Treating fascist flyers and LGBTQ+ flyers as the same thing is bullshit. Acting like the only fair thing to do is treat someone refusing the LGBTQ+ flyers the same as this person refusing to spread fascist flyers is bullshit. Reasons matter and it's bullshit that society has normalized stripping the context and nuance out of situations in the name of "fairness". She shouldn't have been punished. We don't have to generalize, we've been conditioned to generalize because it reinforces the status quo. It's ridiculous that people refuse to acknowledge the threat of fascism in actionable ways because it's """"""unfair""""""

Also, it's not ok for people to refuse to deliver medication on ideological grounds for an entirely different reason than it is to refuse to disseminate fascist propaganda. Postal workers wouldn't know they're delivering abortion medication in the first place as it's sealed in (at the very least) an envelope that does not provide a description of the contents in a way that would reveal abortion medications over any other medication.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 51 minutes ago

It is not a matter of fairness. I don't give a shit about fairness. You are fundamentally making the same argument that the other person has tried to make in vain. I will explain the problem again using a rhetorical game for your benefit, but I will not engage in an argument with you, as you lot tend to make the same arguments ad nauseum. You will receive at most one response from me.

We'll play a simple mind game here. Let us pretend that you are on the side of good, and I am on the side of evil. Remember, this is just a rhetorical game here. We will take turns in an office which you have granted the power to censor the post. While you are in power, you can write a rule that determines what is and is not acceptable material for delivery. You can write any rule you want, constrained only by the fact that the rule must be interpretable without relying on some external oracle (i.e. "articles deemed inappropriate by @[email protected] are prohibited" is not allowed as a rule) After that, you leave office and it's my turn in office. While in office, I will have the power to interpret the rule in any way I like, constrained only by the English language. After you have left office, all powers of interpretation are given to me (until I leave office).

Your goal is to write a rule that filters out all of the content that you deem "fascist". My goal will then be to apply, interpret, and bend your rule to filter out benign or left-wing content.

Remember, the goal of this exercise is to prove to you that it is impossible to design such a rule that can adequately restrain the use of the power you have given this office without also giving me the power to censor articles you think are acceptable. If you do not wish to play this game or reply with anything other than a proposed rule, I will link to the explanation I gave the other person and there will be no more responses from me after that.

If you want to play, reply with your proposed rule. I will reply with a way to interpret it in such a way that can be used to censor unintended articles.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Well said. It's great she stood up for what she believes in, but aside from common-sense exceptions like trafficking/bombs, couriers can't have a say over what they deliver.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I kinda wish they did for junk mail. God please stop sending me 200 page catalogs trying to sell me boomer clothes.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Agreed. I work in healthcare. As healthcare workers we are obligated to treat any patients regardless of their political affiliation or background. I just provided services to a guy the other day with a huge swastika tattooed on chest. Ive administered care to prisoners, bully/aggressive patients, racists, sexists, and others I would not normally would not align myself with. It does not mean i support anything my patients do or their viewpoint. You cannot have people determining on their own that they are not doing their job because x,y,z especially with more public services involved. It is a very slippery slope

You cant make exceptions for some circumstances without the effects/consequences extending to other cases for opposite side as this commenter noted. All mail legally needs to be delivered, even in Canada. Props to the postal worker for trying to stand up for what they believe but agreed they should lose their job for it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 hours ago

Providing necessary healthcare is vastly different than providing hate-speech mailers. I'm OK with the post office having a rule about not delivering mailers with blatant misinformation and/or hate-speech aimed against marginalized minority groups.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (2 children)

I think she is a legend for what she did and I think USPS was absolutely right to fire her for it.

I hope the mail goes back to being apolitical and that she experiences a soft landing and strong launch career-wise

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

... She wasn't fired lmao. People don't read.

She was given a 5 day suspension.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 17 hours ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 hours ago

Well, then I hope she becomes Duchess of Canada. (I don't know how things work up there)

[–] [email protected] 27 points 14 hours ago

Then he's extra right that the USPS did nothing wrong here.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 hours ago

Well, maybe I'd know that if I'd read the article. Did you ever consider that I was being lazy and vocal while uninformed?!

I don't know why I'm making it seem like this is your fault, but I hope you've learned your lesson

[–] [email protected] 32 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

You cannot have it both ways.

Ban the delivery of messages containing hate towards a group based on their identity.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 18 hours ago (10 children)

Let me try to twist this rule.

The delivery of materials informing women of abortion resources is now prohibited as this represents hate towards foetuses on the basis of their unborn status and advocates for killing them.

The delivery of materials promoting diversity in hiring and criticising the makeup of the boards of directors of large companies as being overwhelmingly white and male is now prohibited as this represents hate against white male executives.

You see, the issue is that you cannot guarantee that the person interpreting the rule you want to impose will think the same way you do.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 20 hours ago (10 children)

As terrible as the flyers are, personal political and religious beliefs should not be enforced in any way at a workplace.

Functionally this is similar to that county clerk that refused to issue marriage certificates to same sex couples. Can't be supportive of one and not the other without being hypocritical.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 18 hours ago

Personally, I think refraining from distributing genocidal propaganda is pretty functionally dissimilar to being a bigot.

I don't want to come off as abrasive and I don't want to assume any ill-intent on your part, but it's fucking frustrating hearing takes like this as a trans person. Equating the refusal to participate in a hateful disinformation campaign to refusing to marry a gay couple is deifying the liberal concepts of law & order at the expense of human decency. It is not hypocrisy to support anti-fascist actions whilst denouncing fascist actions, even if they express those actions in a similar fashion. For example, I largely support Just Stop Oil's disruptive protests, whereas I would be disgusted if fascists defaced artworks by spray-painting swastikas all over. Is that hypocritical?

Again, sorry if I come on strongly in this comment, my frustrations are definitely from society at large rather than your comment, but having your right to exist being framed as a "political belief" is frankly exhausting.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›