Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Atlanta Fire Chief - fired for being Christian.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    wrong. it was not in an inflammatory manner
    Regardless of what one believes about homosexuality, it is undeniably a significant part of a gay person's identity. That doesn't mean that being gay completely defines a person, but nevertheless, it is a rather important, large part. Grouping people who share this identity with people who do legitimately evil, despicable things like molesting and exploiting children is most certainly inflammatory.

    and even if it was, that has nothing to do with it. The first amendment doesn't just protect nice religious expression, but all religious expression. And you obviously are new to the workforce or you have never held a job either. Because you can't fire someone because of their religious beliefs. Now if he instigated a policy of firing anyone who was not Christian or who was gay, then they had a right to fire him. He did not do that.
    Oy vey.

    Is Cochran being threatened with arrest for having made those statements? Is the government forbidding him to make such statements in the future, or demanding that he stop being Christian? If not, then his first amendment rights aren't being violated. And although he didn't technically discriminate, do you really believe gay employees and residents who see that he likens them to people who manipulate and exploit children are going to feel comfortable and trusting around him, confident that he'll be fair to them?

    Finally, there's a significant difference between firing someone for saying "I'm a Christian" and firing someone for saying "God will smite you heathens with fire and brimstone for your sinful consensual, monogamous homosexual relationships that are akin to molesting children."

    He gave it to friends at work who already were his Christian peers. Apparently they asked him for it. No different from me giving the guy who works next to me a Christian book since I know he is a Christian and shares my beliefs. He did not give it to everyone or make it available to everyone at work. He gave a copy to the mayor and that is how it became "public" - but he was only doing what was right, letting his boss have a copy. It was not meant to be distributed. If it was, then it was the mayor who distributed it.
    Man, I know this. I even acknowledged it in my earlier posts. This has somehow turned into a bizarre matter of semantics. Weird.

    Bull crap. utter bull crap. which is all that ever comes out of your posts. The mayor can't claim that this was news
    Baseless insults aside, and assuming that Cochran's version of events is actually true, is it not possible that with all the issues that the mayor has to deal with, he simply forgot about the book and never got around to reading it, so it was genuinely a surprise when he heard the news about the content?

    or that the fire chief was acting unchristian, or different than any christian in the last 2000 years.
    Many Christians do not believe that homosexuality is inherently a sin, and even among those who do, many are understanding enough to not group gay people with child molesters.

    Cochran, as has been stated over and over, got permission to write the book, published it privately, did not distribute it to everyone at work, and did not institute any work policies based on his beliefs.
    Technically, this hasn't been proven yet.
    Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

    I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by square_peg View Post
      Regardless of what one believes about homosexuality, it is undeniably a significant part of a gay person's identity. That doesn't mean that being gay completely defines a person, but nevertheless, it is a rather important, large part. Grouping people who share this identity with people who do legitimately evil, despicable things like molesting and exploiting children is most certainly inflammatory.
      The bible places homosexual behavior in the same category as liars, evil people, adulterers, sexual offenders, and so on. That is not news nor is it controversial. It has been a Christian doctrine for 2000 years. Cochran merely reiterated the bible's teachings on 1/2 of a page. I have done so here too, as have others. If it offends you, so what? Get over it. Cochran still has the right to his beliefs and not get fired over it. Not because of "free speech" but because of the civil rights act and the constitution. The same law that you were using saying that Christians had to make wedding cakes for gay couples because of discrimination is the same law that says you can't fire someone for their religious beliefs.

      The CR act of 1964 says:
      "It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -

      (1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin; "

      and

      "(j) The term “religion” includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief, unless an employer demonstrates that he is unable to reasonably accommodate to an employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice without undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business."

      and the 1st amendment protects the individual's right to practice his beliefs.

      Since Cochran was not bringing his beliefs in as policy, there was no hardship or wrong doing. He had the right to say what he wanted and believe as he wanted as a Christian.




      Oy vey.

      Is Cochran being threatened with arrest for having made those statements? Is the government forbidding him to make such statements in the future, or demanding that he stop being Christian? If not, then his first amendment rights aren't being violated. And although he didn't technically discriminate, do you really believe gay employees and residents who see that he likens them to people who manipulate and exploit children are going to feel comfortable and trusting around him, confident that he'll be fair to them?

      Finally, there's a significant difference between firing someone for saying "I'm a Christian" and firing someone for saying "God will smite you heathens with fire and brimstone for your sinful consensual, monogamous homosexual relationships that are akin to molesting children."
      see above.

      and you don't need to protect nice speech, do you? who would object to it?



      Man, I know this. I even acknowledged it in my earlier posts. This has somehow turned into a bizarre matter of semantics. Weird.
      again with the back-pedaling. figures.


      Baseless insults aside, and assuming that Cochran's version of events is actually true, is it not possible that with all the issues that the mayor has to deal with, he simply forgot about the book and never got around to reading it, so it was genuinely a surprise when he heard the news about the content?
      No it is not possible. because the Mayor did read it and suspended him for it. And gave a copy to others in the office. If anyone "distributed" the book, it was the Mayor himself.


      Many Christians do not believe that homosexuality is inherently a sin, and even among those who do, many are understanding enough to not group gay people with child molesters.
      Yeah and many liberal Christians think lots of things that are not biblical, nor part of orthodox Christian doctrine for the last 2000 years. Other than the last 40 or so years, I doubt you can point to any orthodox Christian group that claims that homosexual behavior is not a sin. Only since it became the inclusive, liberal thing to accept gays has there been any Christians that claim that homosexual behavior is not a sin. I call that accommodation. Making your religion teach what you want it to teach instead of learning and believing what it actually teaches. Just read the bible. Can you show me where it says homosexual behavior is OK? I have shown you where it says it is a sexual sin.


      Technically, this hasn't been proven yet.
      And generally we believe in innocent until proven guilty here in the USA. Yet since they have fired him without any proof that he used his religion at work, they are the ones who are in the wrong. They should prove cochran did something wrong before firing him.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by phank View Post
        I think what we're looking at here is a judgment call on the part of both Reed and Cochran. I'm reminded of Dave Barry's distinction between men and women. Asked if it's OK to take the toboggan off the ski jump, women asked if they should do this - that is, if it's a good idea. Men asked if they CAN do it - that is, if it's possible and legal. In this case, certainly Cochran CAN do what he did. Does that reflect good judgment? Apparently Reed was known to be disapproving. Reed is the boss. Does that matter?

        Reed, a politician, was concerned that the book would reflect poorly on the administration. He didn't need to be a political genius to predict that the LGBT community would paint Cochran as a raving bigot being protected by the Atlanta good old boy system. It was a matter of "I don't think the ranger's gonna like this, Yogi." What Cochran went ahead and did was not illegal, it didn't even violate any written guidelines. But it was clearly a foolish thing to do anyway, and Reed can't afford to be seen protecting fools.

        Are politicians too sensitive? I think it comes with the territory. Obama can't even play golf without being attacked. Attacks that can easily be avoided, are probably best to avoid.
        So having the Christian community certain that the Mayor is a bigot improves matters how, exactly? You just made a great argument for Reed's removal from office - anyone that politically insensitive to the majority of his constituents shouldn't be in office.
        "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

        "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

        My Personal Blog

        My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

        Quill Sword

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by square_peg View Post
          Many Christians do not believe that homosexuality is inherently a sin, and even among those who do, many are understanding enough to not group gay people with child molesters.
          Then there are many Christians who are dead wrong because the Bible clearly and unambiguously says that homosexuality is an abomination.
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            Then there are many Christians who are dead wrong because the Bible clearly and unambiguously says that homosexuality is an abomination.
            It's a matter of translation and interpretation. Saying it's 'clear' and 'unambiguous' is just wrong.
            "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
            "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
            "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              Then there are many Christians who are dead wrong because the Bible clearly and unambiguously says that homosexuality is an abomination.
              The Bible also clearly and unambiguously says that eating bacon is an abomination. Are the Christians who think it is not sinful to eat bacon "dead wrong?"
              "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
              --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                The Bible also clearly and unambiguously says that eating bacon is an abomination. Are the Christians who think it is not sinful to eat bacon "dead wrong?"
                On the other hand, the Bible clearly and unambiguously says that to the Christian, all foods are considered clean (this would include bacon). I'm fairly certain you won't find anything comparable for homosexual sex, but feel free to prove me wrong.
                Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                sigpic
                I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                  It's a matter of translation and interpretation. Saying it's 'clear' and 'unambiguous' is just wrong.
                  Not that I want to get into a debate on this, but it's worth pointing out that there are some things, I think we would all agree, that the Bible does in fact say clearly. Implying that everything in the Bible is up for interpretation seems like a rather clear overstatement to me.
                  I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                    It's a matter of translation and interpretation. Saying it's 'clear' and 'unambiguous' is just wrong.
                    Baloney. It is unambiguous and in both testaments - saying it is a matter of interpretation is purely deceptive.
                    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                    My Personal Blog

                    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                    Quill Sword

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                      The Bible also clearly and unambiguously says that eating bacon is an abomination. Are the Christians who think it is not sinful to eat bacon "dead wrong?"
                      Falls under 'read the whole book'
                      "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                      "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                      My Personal Blog

                      My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                      Quill Sword

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                        Then there are many Christians who are dead wrong because the Bible clearly and unambiguously says that homosexuality is an abomination.
                        Passages saying homosexuality is a sin are not incompatible with a Christian believing homosexuality is not a sin. Biblical inerrancy is not a requisite for Christianity.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
                          Passages saying homosexuality is a sin are not incompatible with a Christian believing homosexuality is not a sin. Biblical inerrancy is not a requisite for Christianity.
                          That's not even inerrancy - you're talking about incoherence.

                          Scripture isn't a buffet - and if you deliberately put your preferences before God's word it's you who's in the wrong.
                          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                          My Personal Blog

                          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                          Quill Sword

                          Comment


                          • I don't identify as inerrantist (mainly because I think the term is confusing and more trouble than it's worth but I have a high view of Scripture) and I concur with those who say homosexuality is sinful. The exegetical cases made to suggest otherwise strike me as very weak.
                            "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                              That's not even inerrancy - you're talking about incoherence.

                              Scripture isn't a buffet - and if you deliberately put your preferences before God's word it's you who's in the wrong.
                              I've never heard of Biblical incoherence, but that's a semantic issue, so I'll take your word for it.

                              The Bible itself is a buffet. The only passages that condemn homosexuality explicitly in the NT are from Paul.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by square_peg View Post
                                For the final time, the problem is that he expressed his beliefs in an inflammatory (and gratuitous) manner, not that he simply had beliefs or stated them. Believing traditional teachings about homosexuality doesn't require one to go linking it to bestiality and pederasty. Portraying this as "employers holding your job as ransom" is disingenuous. It's not "If you make any statements about your Christian beliefs, we'll fire you," but rather "If you make statements in an inflammatory manner that creates a hostile work environment, regardless of whether it pertains to your religious beliefs, you're being detrimental to the company (not to mention unnecessarily reflecting badly upon it), and because we have to remove detrimental forces from our company to keep it running smoothly, firing you may be an option that we have to take."
                                I'm sorry, but you seem to be repeating talking points vs actual history. I did something you didn't bother to do, I went and looked at what he said and here is what he said:

                                “Uncleanness — whatever is opposite of purity; including sodomy, homosexuality, lesbianism, pederasty, bestiality, all other forms of sexual perversion.”

                                And another passage, from his book:

                                “Naked men refuse to give in, so they pursue sexual fulfillment through multiple partners, with the opposite sex, the same sex and sex outside of marriage and many other vile, vulgar and inappropriate ways which defile their body-temple and dishonor God.”

                                Such hateful language. He obviously deserves to be fired because his majesty has royally decreed that anybody who steps out of doctrine, deserves to be fired. Of course, this is why I don't take a single word the LGBT community or you say seriously because both your codes for 'inflammatory language' is "HOW DARE YOU DISAGREE WITH US!" and anybody who doesn't prescribe to the doctrine deserves to be harassed, lied about, fired from their job, bullied, and made fun of for daring to disagree. Sorry, but there is no law that says you can be fired for 'inflammatory language' there Mr I Think I'm a King who can Tell Others How to Live. The fact that some of the WBC high ups, hold public jobs (I know some of them are social workers, this can be confirmed by a quick Google search, if you're interested) should indicate that what the mayor is doing, is illegal. Second, from what I've read, there has been zero evidence present that this guy made a 'hostel work environment'. Nothing, but facts do not matter when a person disagrees with the accepted doctrine, correct? Again, he dared to step out of your royal decrees and deserves to be fired for daring to disagree with you. Go ahead, present a single piece of evidence of this 'hostel work environment' that he created because I have been able to find none, but I'm sure the great King can find evidence that nobody has been able to produce or are you just speaking from talking points, that your masters have handed to you without thinking about if they are true or not? Again, after the manufactured outrage the LGBT community has engaged in before, I would check to see if 'water was in fact wet' if they made an announcement that water was wet. Give me a single reason to trust people that have been caught lying, in the past (did you read the comments that started the whole Chick-fil-A fire storm, they were not even remotely about homosexuality, but that didn't matter because stepping out of accepted doctrine is equal to hate, in the eyes of the LGBT community). Now, instead of mindless repeating talk points, go ahead and present your evidence or should I take it that you have none, but that doesn't matter because stepping out of line is enough to get your bullied, harassed, fired, and thrown out in the streets. I hope I never have to be subjected to your tend mercy, I have a feeling I could end up losing my head if I ever was.


                                Oh my goodness, I technically already addressed this too, when I said "Yes, he allegedly distributed this to Christian friends, but it was still in the workplace and the book has been made public now, so that point is moot."
                                Sorry, but there is no law against him handing out material, to people who ask for it, even if it is at your work place. If there is, go ahead, present a single piece of evidence that says there is or is the reality that the material he gave out, didn't meet the Square_Peg Seal of ApprovalTM, so he deserved to be harassed, bullied, fired, have his rights violated, and thrown out in the streets for daring to disagree with Square_Peg's accepted doctrine? Instead of repeating mindless talking points, present us with any evidence of any wrongdoing or do you have none, but it doesn't matter because he stepped out of the accepted doctrine and deserves to be punished?

                                "Seeing evil intentions?" Good God, I explicitly stated in my post that "I agree that ex-Chief Cochran wasn't technically being discriminatory, and that he wasn't making such statements in his official capacity as fire chief. And although I disagree with his stance concerning homosexuality, I believe it's entirely possible that he's overall a good, respectable man."
                                And yet, you're not standing up for his right to freely express his opinion and just mindless repeat your said talking points, without any evidence to back up a single thing you said. Here you go again, talking out of two sides of your mouth and thinking the rest of us are too stupid to see what you are doing. Sorry, but go ahead... present your evidence or is daring to disagree with Square_Peg's Accepted DoctrineTM, is all that matters?
                                That is the exact opposite of "seeing evil intentions."
                                No, it is more examples of your double speak and inability to think, before you post.

                                Of course not, and it's irrelevant because that's not at all what happened here. Obviously an employer can't fire me for what I say off-duty about my religious beliefs in a private forum, but if I got on TWeb and made inflammatory statements about my boss (such as comparing him/her to someone who has sex with animals and children), co-workers and the company that were later made public, it would be entirely within his/her right to fire me, because I would've cast the company in a bad light and created unnecessary discord leading to a hostile work environment. However, the employer could never have me arrested for saying such things, nor could the government take any action to prevent me from making inflammatory statements about a boss, co-workers or a company in the future. I'd always be free to say such things in such a manner, and employers would always be free to fire me for it if it causes hostile work environments.
                                Go ahead, prove he created a 'hostel work environment' or show a single thing he said that was so 'inflammatory' or is that code speak for, "HOW DARE YOU DISAGREE!" Sorry, but as I already pointed out, some of the WBC leaders do work in public positions and they have just as much of a right to freely express their views as anybody else does (of course, being backed by powerful lawyers, does have a tendency to make people nervous about firing you). This is just another mindless talking point, that you and your band have made up, to shut people up who disagree with you because you haven't presented anything to prove the above charges are true. Again, if the WBC people, can hold onto their jobs while protesting dead soldiers funerals, than a man can write a book, and not be bullied, harassed, and fired for it. Sorry, but you're not a king and holding people's jobs above their head, to ensure compliance, is illegal and I hope that the mayor loses his job over this because he doesn't deserve to be mayor. If he's going to bow to the LGBT bullies, to win votes (as you so pointed out, Atlanta has a large LGBT community), than he does not deserve to be a public servant.

                                As has repeatedly been shown in this post and others, there is little reason to trust your judgment in assessing such matters.
                                Sorry, but you haven't shown that, at all. What you keep showing me is that you deserve everything you get (and more) for being a little twit, that is incapable of proving his points. You want other people bullied, harassed, and fired for daring to disagree with accepted doctrine, so you should see how it feels to be a target of this behavior. Don't like it, stop calling for others to be treated this way. Is that so hard for you to understand or do you just want to be free to bully others, but not have to accept the same behavior yourself. Again, you made this bed, so sleep in it.
                                "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                                GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                354 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                112 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                361 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X