[seesawtron]

This would not be possible to implement in a lot of businesses where the "public image" of the employee (even during non working hours) matters to the company and its business.

But I agree with the argument "Judge the art, not the artist".

As Camus attempted to portray in "The stranger", the protagonist was on "a trial that judged his character and the ways in which he integrated in the society, not on a trial for killing an Arab".

[whstl]

I think it's two different topics here.

Businesses themselves rarely fire people out of principle, but rather because of pressure.

(at least in the case outlined by GP, where the cause is "not criminal, not involving employees/customers, not done under the guise of being an employee")

The pressure often comes from the outside, and it's indeed very difficult for a business to fight it.

I don't think GP is arguing for it, I also don't know if I am arguing for it... but... IMO for those cases the only simple "solution" I can see is to legally protect those people from being fired for unrelated reasons, so that business has legal plausible deniability, and hopefully doesn't suffer the consequences itself.

[Jensson]

> The pressure often comes from the outside, and it's indeed very difficult for a business to fight it.

In the rest of the world where you can't fire without a valid reason, it is very easy for them to say "We can't legally fire them for things they do unrelated to their job".