You are generally free not to stand for the national anthem.
Suppose the SPSS (the professional society Haidt left in protest) had instead made a rule that they would play the national anthem at the start of every conference and anyone who didn’t stand wouldn’t be allowed to present their research.
If he had left in protest of that, would you assume he’s an unpatriotic asshole who hates America or that he’s standing up for free speech?
Yes, you might get some criticism for it, just like Haidt is.
A private organization like the NFL or the SPSS might not let you be a member if you don’t follow their rules. That’s within the bounds of free speech.
We only have freedoms by continually asserting them and sometimes sacrificing some social capital to use them.
I get that. I was just trying to understand from the original person I was responding to if they found the National Anthem “requirements” as repulsive.
Yes and no, a private organization can’t deny someone membership if a prospective member refused to make an oath to the effect of “I swear to discriminate against Asians”. So their freedom of speech ends where it infringes on the civil rights of others. Arguably, some DEI statements could come close to crossing that line.
Suppose the SPSS (the professional society Haidt left in protest) had instead made a rule that they would play the national anthem at the start of every conference and anyone who didn’t stand wouldn’t be allowed to present their research.
If he had left in protest of that, would you assume he’s an unpatriotic asshole who hates America or that he’s standing up for free speech?