- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,719
- Reaction score
- 35,498
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The chief was fired for his religious beliefs
If your religion required you wear a thong then you'd have a case.
Also you don't give up the right to first amendment protection of religious expression because you are a manager. Again, the SCOTUS is very clear on this in case law.
Thing that gets me in all of this is the fact that any of these words are merely a mouse click away from ANYONE wanting them, public, private, it matters little, both spaces have the internet and MOST web filters do not subscribe to politically correct speech, so they don't work well.. Maybe we need more progressives to design software to keep us all safe from those pesky neoconservative liberty seekers..
Tim-
What law says religious material can be handed out at work to people you think want them? Look into that and get back to me.
Cochran states in his book that he distributed at work that homosexuality as a “perversion” akin to bestiality and pederasty and also states that his first duty as chief is to change the fire department so that it glorifies God and in essence believes as the chief believes. That's wrong.
that is your view point. he spoke out against homosexuality and gay marriage while also speaking out against sex outside of marriage among other things. he should have his life ruined. because a few people get their panties in a bunch.No, that is not true. Stop attributing things to me that I have not said!
My workplace has very specific policies related to workplace behavior. My workplace does not tolerate harassment based on religion, gender, race, sexual orientation or disability. You are free to believe anything you want but it is against policy for you to express those personal opinions at work. Employees are made aware of these policies when they become employed during their initial processing through human resources. They sign forms acknowledging this and are given a copy of this policy (and others). They are also informed as to the procedures for inquiring about a policy and/or a violation of a policy and/or how and to whom the violation is reported, and the procedures relating to how the complaint will be investigated.
One day when you start work you'll likely have the experience when you go through human resources.
Well, that's rather in dispute.
From what I've been able to gather it seems he was suspended after giving his subordinates a copy of a book containing some of his beliefs, and seemingly at least one of those employees went to his superiors to complain about him distributing his book to his subordinates. This suspension was seemingly to look into if there was a potential issue regarding the cities anti-discrimination laws.
This was due to a passage in his book which suggested his first priority as the fire chief was "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God". When you then proceed to equate homosexuals...a protected status by Atlanta's anti-discrimination laws....to those who engage in pedorasty and beastiality (both illegal acts) after stating that your top priority on the job is to cultivate a culture that fits your religious views then it reasonably sets off alarms of potential anti-discrimination issues.
He was reportedly fired for talking about an ongoing investigation while on suspension, publishing the book without authorization which supposedly is required by his employment contract (the former part of that he disputes), and because of the potential liability that the city of Atlanta would face keeping him employed in a supervisory role.
Him remaining in any kind of supervisory position would be a gigantic "COME SUE US" sign for any homosexual employee who was unhappy with shifts/promotions/treatment or any homosexual applicant who was not offered a job....as they could point to this individuals book, his statements about homosexuality, his claim that his job as chief is to cultivate a culture pleasing to god, and alledge then that it was his efforts to create such a culture that led to their treatment.
No it isn't. That is not in any way a standard workplace policy. I have worked in state, local and federal government for 30 years and NEVER has what you stated been the policy of the workplace. If that is the policy in the city of Atlanta then it is both abnormal and illegal.
I don't think you could wear a thong to work, even if some random Bible passage said you should. Meanwhile, even the Pope has said: "If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”
Are you so sure your religion requires you to hate homosexuals?
That was more your point than it was mine. You were the one who tried to foist responsibility off of the local authorities onto the big monolithic structure of federal regulation as if the city's hands were tied... being just a cog in said monolithic regulatory machine.
Well, that's rather in dispute.
From what I've been able to gather it seems he was suspended after giving his subordinates a copy of a book containing some of his beliefs, and seemingly at least one of those employees went to his superiors to complain about him distributing his book to his subordinates. This suspension was seemingly to look into if there was a potential issue regarding the cities anti-discrimination laws.
This was due to a passage in his book which suggested his first priority as the fire chief was "to cultivate its culture to the glory of God". When you then proceed to equate homosexuals...a protected status by Atlanta's anti-discrimination laws....to those who engage in pedorasty and beastiality (both illegal acts) after stating that your top priority on the job is to cultivate a culture that fits your religious views then it reasonably sets off alarms of potential anti-discrimination issues.
He was reportedly fired for talking about an ongoing investigation while on suspension, publishing the book without authorization which supposedly is required by his employment contract (the former part of that he disputes), and because of the potential liability that the city of Atlanta would face keeping him employed in a supervisory role.
Him remaining in any kind of supervisory position would be a gigantic "COME SUE US" sign for any homosexual employee who was unhappy with shifts/promotions/treatment or any homosexual applicant who was not offered a job....as they could point to this individuals book, his statements about homosexuality, his claim that his job as chief is to cultivate a culture pleasing to god, and alledge then that it was his efforts to create such a culture that led to their treatment.
Oh, really? Did you retire in the early 1960s? Tell us what state and local governments.
How is the policy of the City of Atlanta "abnormal and illegal". Spell it out for us.
The attorneys working for the City of Atlanta participated in the 30 day investigation of Chief Cochran and advised the city administration as to what violations occurred, what actions could be taken and what actions could be legally upheld. That is the way it works. I've been that and done there a few times. I have participated directly in the process and have worked with government attorneys and human resources. It is a grave process. It would surprise the hell out of me if the city's decisions were not carefully deliberated. Apparently you know more than the rest of us, please share.
100% YES. But then some people are simply more aware that infringement of First Amendment rights on anyone is infringement on First Amendment rights of everyone. Others are more self centered and choose to wait until they disagree with the government enforcers.
I already have religion is a protect class. you seem to be ignoring this fact.
yes that was in the book BECAUSE IT WAS A STUDY GUIDE FOR THE BIBLE. that is what the BIBLE SAYS. in a chapter about sexual morality. boy for someone that thinks he knows it all you know nothing.
that is your view point. he spoke out against homosexuality and gay marriage while also speaking out against sex outside of marriage among other things. he should have his life ruined. because a few people get their panties in a bunch.
I already have a job and trust me I see HR violations everywhere however guess what people I work with don't wear their friggen heart on their sleeve.
PS by posting this on a forum you should be fired. you are disparaging against religious people and their view point.
he didn't express them at work he expressed them outside of work.
what part of that don't you understand or don't comprehend?
I guess the whole thing. the city violated his rights to express his religious views outside of work and fired him over it. I hope he sues.
religious discrimination is against the law.
It has nothing to do with the viewpoint - it has to do with a person with hiring/firing/promotion/pay authority using that power over subordinates in the workplace to promote any viewpoint about religion - yeah the law is pretty settled on that one.
right, just as handing out atheist pamphlets promotes a viewpoint on religion. so any atheist would have to be fired for doing such a thing. right?
right, just as handing out atheist pamphlets promotes a viewpoint on religion. so any atheist would have to be fired for doing such a thing. right?
So wait....
Lets say a Supervisor wrote a book detailing his views on various things, specifically how Hitler and the Nazi regmine was correct. Part of said book equated Jews to conmen and thieves. It described them as some of the most vile creatures on the earth and an afront to the vision of Hitler. It then goes on to suggest that his first duty as a supervisor was to cultivate a culture in line with Hitler's views. He then gave said book to his subordinates
Are we seriously suggesting that the supervisor's bosses shouldn't have legitimate cause to potentially suspend said supervisor to see if he was indeed "cultivating" such a culture with regards to any Jewish employees or applicants? Or possibly even to terminate and/or demote said supervisor due to the potential liability on the part of potential discrimination claims from Jewish employees and/or applicants?
OR if you want to just focus on the religious aspect...
Change it from Hitler and the Nazi Regime to the supervisor holding radical islamist views. In his book suggests Jews are an infidel, a wretched vile race and religion, that will be judged with scorn from Allah and should not be embraced. In it, he suggests his first duty as a supervisor is to cultivate a culture in line with Allah. He then gave said book to his subordinates.
Again, same questions as above.
I just can't fathom how that would or should be viewed as acceptable. I can't imagine how that would not create a significant liability on the business or agency. I can't imagine how that would not foster a very hostile and problematic work environment.
It'd be one thing if it was JUST expressing those views. In such a case I can understand people possibly feeling uneasy in the work place, but at least in that such case there's no clear indication to lead one to believe the supervisor would let those views impact his PROFESSIONAL duties. However, when he's stating that his duty as Police Chief was to cultivate a culture in line with his gods it creates a reasonable question as to how his views are affecting his professional choices.
Stephen Borders, presidents of the Atlanta Professional Firefighters union, said the union has not officially filed complaints over the matter, but he has heard from a number of employees about the book. Borders said the fire department has few, if any, openly gay firefighters.
“Even the employees that reach out to us don’t want us to be involved in their complaint because they are afraid it will get out to their officers and their chief and they will be labeled and outed just by being concerned about how they’re treated,” he said.
Borders said he hopes the controversy leads to a support group or office that works with employees who fear discrimination based on sexual orientation or religious views.
“He can have whatever beliefs he wants, but the fact that he’s representing himself as a fire chief and bringing this into the fire department, to me that’s not the message we need to send to employees nor the citizens.”
In the same way that the actions against the chief is a gigantic "COME SUE US" sign planted on the Chief's front lawn.
As I pointed out earlier, the SCOTUS is pretty clear on when and where hate speech can be enforced
If the Chief fired a gay person for no actionable reason then they could indeed sue him for discrimination, but that would be a case for the courts. What the City of Atlanta has done is punish the Chief for a crime they think he might commit which is a violation of his first amendment freedoms.
So wait....
Lets say a Supervisor wrote a book detailing his views on various things, specifically how Hitler and the Nazi regmine was correct. Part of said book equated Jews to conmen and thieves. It described them as some of the most vile creatures on the earth and an afront to the vision of Hitler. It then goes on to suggest that his first duty as a supervisor was to cultivate a culture in line with Hitler's views. He then gave said book to his subordinates
Are we seriously suggesting that the supervisor's bosses shouldn't have legitimate cause to potentially suspend said supervisor to see if he was indeed "cultivating" such a culture with regards to any Jewish employees or applicants? Or possibly even to terminate and/or demote said supervisor due to the potential liability on the part of potential discrimination claims from Jewish employees and/or applicants?
OR if you want to just focus on the religious aspect...
Change it from Hitler and the Nazi Regime to the supervisor holding radical islamist views. In his book suggests Jews are an infidel, a wretched vile race and religion, that will be judged with scorn from Allah and should not be embraced. In it, he suggests his first duty as a supervisor is to cultivate a culture in line with Allah. He then gave said book to his subordinates.
Again, same questions as above.
I just can't fathom how that would or should be viewed as acceptable. I can't imagine how that would not create a significant liability on the business or agency. I can't imagine how that would not foster a very hostile and problematic work environment.
It'd be one thing if it was JUST expressing those views. In such a case I can understand people possibly feeling uneasy in the work place, but at least in that such case there's no clear indication to lead one to believe the supervisor would let those views impact his PROFESSIONAL duties. However, when he's stating that his duty as Police Chief was to cultivate a culture in line with his gods it creates a reasonable question as to how his views are affecting his professional choices.
Good thing he didn't say that.
How could you possibly not know that there are laws against discrimination in the work place? And if you do know about them, how could he possibly manage without discriminating when holding those types of views?
Are you telling me you think a gay person would have a fair shake at a job in his fire house?
I was pointing out that your can't treat government as an entity and that government employment is the same as private employment in terms of following eeoc regulations. Your interpretation of my statements seems to be from somewhere having nothing to do with me.
No, government and private employment is not the same in this case since the Private employer is not required to protect free speech of its employees while the government is required to protect the free speech of everyone, including those working for the government.
Sure. And so would any Muslim. Thank you for agreeing with us.
How could you possibly not know that a law doesn't mean a damn thing if it violates the Constitution?
Are you telling me a white male conservative would have a fair shake at a job in a government office run by non-whites who clearly were leftists and were lukewarm at best about whites? Or maybe, as in graduate school admissions, discrimination is only impermissible when the victim is a member of some grievance group so-called liberals have the crying towel out for.
And mine as well. There is nothing inequitable about it. Everyone is free of the imposition of every other person's religious beliefs, including atheism. If you permit one religion you must permit all.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?