• @auzy
    link
    124 hours ago

    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]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -5
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      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]
          link
          fedilink
          33 hours 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]
            link
            fedilink
            119 minutes ago

            It is a complex issue and deserves a full conversation. It’s hard to say what I would do in her shoes, but it probably would be to copy a personal letter a bunch of times. The context of the letter would, of course, be a general warning about circulating hate speech mail trying to misinform people, and be wary of what you read.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -13 hours ago

          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.

          • @auzy
            link
            23 hours ago

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

            Huge difference bud

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -2
              edit-2
              3 hours 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.

      • @auzy
        link
        23 hours ago

        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]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          03 hours 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.

          • Krzd
            link
            01 hour ago

            What? The flyers promote the discrimination and criminalisation of a memory group, versus your example which would be promoting minority rights.
            Those aren’t comparable.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              159 minutes ago

              They’re 100% comparable when you understand how federal law works. Learn it- then come back here and we can discuss whether or not a mail carrier has the right to decide what mail you get.

              Until then, I don’t think you can carry your side in this discussion.