San Diego Firefighters Forced To Attend Gay Pride Parade

With all of the speculation I've seen in these posts, maybe it would help if you read the actual complaint that the firefighters made.

Complaint

There were firefighters who were volunteering to drive the truck in the parade, but the Captain ordered the ON DUTY CREW to man the truck.

What I want to know is where were the Police during this parade? If the statements that the firefighters made in their complaint about the way that the crowd was acting were correct, I want to know if there were any arrests for lewd conduct and indecent exposure. If this was any other type of parade I can guarentee that there would have been arrests.

Personally I would have asked for the order in writing and then I would have declined and filed a complaint with my union if there were any reprecussions.

Originally posted by RedEyes
Presumably this is the exact reason that most firefighters signed up, not to attend rallies which promote something that goes against their beliefs? I am not religious and don't care what people get up to in their private lives, but these firefighters do seem to be religious and doing what they were asked to do goes against THEIR beliefs.

I understand where you are comming from. But, if it was part of their duty, then it was part of their duty.

Or do you believe that a Muslim that works at 7/11 has the right to refuse to sell tobacco because it is against their belief? I bet alot of you that are saying it was against the firefighters beliefs are the same people who said the exact opposite in the thread about muslims refusing to sell tobacco because of their beliefs.

Furthermore, it is against my belief system to not work at all. Do you think that would work if I sued my superior because they make me do things against my belief system?

This is starting to sound like an attack and it really isn't, but aren't you the narrow minded one for not being empathetic enough to understand the views and concerns of others?

But, when your views and concerns stop you from doing your job, then it might be time to look for other employment.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Personally I would have asked for the order in writing and then I would have declined and filed a complaint with my union if there were any reprecussions.

Which is what should have happened.

No, dont turn the tables around. I am not narrowminded, if i were, i would never have marched with gays to raise money for AIDS.
I am not gay.

The narrowmindness comes from homophobia, paranoia and the inability to be tolerant to those who are "different" in society.

I would march for any good cause whether i was involved personally or not. In fact, i was the top money raiser for AIDS and received all kinds of praises. I didnt care about the praises, i just wanted to raise money to help those less fortunate and suffering.

A few hours at a gathering is not going to cause you everlasting grief and harm and post traumatic stress syndrome, for heavens sakes.

Maybe they can get a lawyer and file a frivolous action against their boss?
It would be tossed out of court in a heartbeat.

BE OPEN MINDED and realize there are all kinds of people in this world and if you can help, HELP.

If my job tells me i have to walk up and down the streets with a sign saying "support Bush" i would have to do it, unless, i quit. they pay you to do whatever it is they want.

And YES, firefighters are at most public functions, beleive it or not.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by dgtempe]

Originally posted by marg6043
Enlightened Js? they are playing the game quite well actually, they are the forced victims of a lesbian power

You're missing the point, marg. When I say enlightened, I'm referring to those who are showing support for gays in order to appear enlightened to the rest of us. It's the PC thing to do, don't you know?

They forced themselves on attending so they can have now a thread like this one to support their views of how sick society is when they force good Christian men and women into the depravity of attending a gay and lesbian parade.

How do you know these firefighters were Christian, marg? You are being very judgemental and prejudiced. You assume that anyone who would prefer not to attend a gay pride parade must be Christian.

Shame on you.

Originally posted by Griff

If the men refused to follow the direct order, they could have been suspended on the spot and stripped of any chance for a promotion, according to their manual, Ghiotto said. It was Ghiotto's first direct order.

This is supposition from the firemen. Nowhere did I read that the comander said if they didn't, she'd strip them of a chance for promotion.

Read the passage again. Key in on the words according to their manual.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Wrong. That would have put them into the position of defending themselves, instead of putting the focus where it belongs - on the supervisor.

Originally posted by Griff
No. It would have put the focus on the supervisor.

Which is where the entire focus of the discussion should be. She acted illegally by making them attend a gay pride rally in support of gays. They did nothing wrong.

In other words, she promoted a political agenda using city personnel while they were on duty. That is illegal.

But then, it's so much easier and more fun to appear "enlightened" and to mock the "Homophobic firefighters", isn't it?

No. It's easier to recognize that these guys were ordered (so they say) to do their job and not whine about it.

Their job does not include promoting a political agenda while on the job.

Originally posted by RedEyes
Presumably this is the exact reason that most firefighters signed up, not to attend rallies which promote something that goes against their beliefs? I am not religious and don't care what people get up to in their private lives, but these firefighters do seem to be religious and doing what they were asked to do goes against THEIR beliefs.

It is possible that they objected on religious grounds. But there could be other reasons, including the fact that perhaps they find the act physically repulsive. Or possibly they object to promoting any political agenda while on the job. The point is, their objection is not illegal. The order to attend was illegal.

Originally posted by Griff

I understand where you are comming from. But, if it was part of their duty, then it was part of their duty.

I agree, if it was part of their duty and they signed up to the service knowing this then they have no complaint. If they were off duty they have grounds for the complaint, if they were on duty but firefighters are not required at these types of functions then they have grounds for the complaint.

Originally posted by Griff

Or do you believe that a Muslim that works at 7/11 has the right to refuse to sell tobacco because it is against their belief? I bet alot of you that are saying it was against the firefighters beliefs are the same people who said the exact opposite in the thread about muslims refusing to sell tobacco because of their beliefs.
[/quote]

No I don't. A similar incident to what you describe happened in the UK not so long ago. A pharmacist refused to sell a customer the morning after pill as it was against her beliefs. I do not believe that this lady had the right to refuse to sell the morning after pill either.

Originally posted by Griff

Furthermore, it is against my belief system to not work at all. Do you think that would work if I sued my superior because they make me do things against my belief system?

We are not taking about silly beliefs like that Griff even though i'm with you 100%

We are talking about their religious beliefs. I am not religious but I do understand how some people are deeply religious and their religious beliefs take priority in their lives - not that I agree, but I understand.

Originally posted by Griff

But, when your views and concerns stop you from doing your job, then it might be time to look for other employment.

Again, agreed. If they signed up to the service knowing that they were expected to attend these types of functions then they should shut up and get on with it. I am unsure if firefighters are required to attend these events though.

Originally posted by dgtempe

The narrowmindness comes from homophobia, paranoia and the inability to be tolerant to those who are "different" in society.

And these firefighters are different to you. They react differently to certain situations than you would. You don't seem to be very tolerant towards them. So according to YOUR description of narrowmindedness ( above ) aren't you narrowminded?

Originally posted by dgtempe

I would march for any good cause whether i was involved personally or not. In fact, i was the top money raiser for AIDS and received all kinds of praises. I didnt care about the praises, i just wanted to raise money to help those less fortunate and suffering.

You don't have to march in a rally to show support. Many people show much greater support in other ways.

Originally posted by dgtempe

A few hours at a gathering is not going to cause you everlasting grief and harm and post traumatic stress syndrome, for heavens sakes.

I didn't read anything that stated the firefighters thought that it would have this kind of effect on them.

Originally posted by dgtempe

BE OPEN MINDED and realize there are all kinds of people in this world

I'm rubber you are glue.

Originally posted by dgtempe

If my job tells me i have to walk up and down the streets with a sign saying "support Bush" i would have to do it, unless, i quit. they pay you to do whatever it is they want.

And YES, firefighters are at most public functions, beleive it or not.

True, and if they are required to be at these functions they have no grounds for complaint.

"I've dealt with finding bodies in burning buildings, traffic accidents with kids, but I've never been so stressed out before until this incident," Ghiotto told FOXNews.com in an exclusive interview.

Does anyone else find this statement disturbing?

This guy was more stressed out by being cat-called buy a couple of gay men, than he was by finding children mangled and burned????

Well lucky for him he wasn't born a women because this guy wouldn't last one day walking past a construction site. It was obvious these guys where there to work, otherwise they would not have faced disciplinary action. This guy has his head on backwards IMHO. Do us all a favor and shut up.

If my job tells me i have to walk up and down the streets with a sign saying "support Bush" i would have to do it, unless, i quit. they pay you to do whatever it is they want.

Actually, if your job is in the public sector (for example a city or state job, civil service) that would be illegal and you could probably get a nice settlement off them for wrongful termination among things, depending on how good your lawyer is.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Read the passage again. Key in on the words according to their manual.

Yes, according to my manual, I only have 5 sick days. If I happen to take 6 instead, am I to just automatically think that my superior is going to fire me? Or should I actually try and talk with my superior?

Which is where the entire focus of the discussion should be. She acted illegally by making them attend a gay pride rally in support of gays. They did nothing wrong.

If this is the reason, then I agree with you. If the reason was to do their jobs, then I disagree.

In other words, she promoted a political agenda using city personnel while they were on duty. That is illegal.

What political agenda? I didn't read where she made them dress in drag and walk in the parade. The parade route was in front of the firestation. Did she make them wave banners and dance with the men?

This is where it gets confusing. What where her orders exactly?

Their job does not include promoting a political agenda while on the job.

So, the policemen at Bush rallies are promoting political agenda? Or are they doing their job?

The order to attend was illegal.

Not if the order was to do their job.

This is the info we need before we can judge anyone....firemen or superior.

Originally posted by RedEyes
No I don't. A similar incident to what you describe happened in the UK not so long ago. A pharmacist refused to sell a customer the morning after pill as it was against her beliefs. I do not believe that this lady had the right to refuse to sell the morning after pill either.

We are talking about their religious beliefs. I am not religious but I do understand how some people are deeply religious and their religious beliefs take priority in their lives - not that I agree, but I understand.

Why do these 2 statements seem to be conflicting?

In the first case, you believe the pharmacist's belief system was in the wrong, but in this instance someone's belief system is in the right? I'm confuzzled on this.

I am unsure if firefighters are required to attend these events though.

Also am I.

As if there aren't actually serious things in the world to be worried about!

So a few firemen get sassy catcalls, big deal. It's not as if they were forced to wear cowboy hats and leather chaps is it? I'd wager that if they'd been forced to be on duty at a "Pretty Ladies Supporting Women's Beach Volleyball" parade and had been "harassed" they wouldn't be complaining so vocally.

Is this the sort of insignificant rubbish that people will complain about to get their 15 minutes of fame?

Do you see how easy a community event becomes a political agenda?

If the firefighters were "on duty", and their boss says that the "on-
duty" team will ride in the community parade as a show of support for the
community, then that is what they should've done. It was not a show of
support for the lifestyles or anything like that.

As I said before, maybe these firefighters are in over their heads. If they
feel reluctant around gays, what's next? Will they feel reluctant around
Asians? Latinos? Senior citizens? Pets?

sounds like a case of a couple of embarrased whiner babies to me..

i like this part of the article best


--"I've dealt with finding bodies in burning buildings, traffic accidents with kids, but I've never been so stressed out before until this incident,"---

^^^seems like a shallow, homophobe to me....

personally, i would think the carnage he mentions and trying to put out a burning building would be more stressful than going to a gay parade.


homophbe crybaby...that is my stance

Ghiotto and three other firefighters filed a sexual harassment complaint against the city's fire department last week after being forced to attend the parade in uniform despite objections they made to superiors.

I don't think that word means what you think it means. They were ordered to attend the meeting, they were not forced.

They shouldn't have gone, plain and simple. If disciplinary action was filed against them they could have taken action then.



BTW, how many people here have been to or seen a gay pride parade ? I have.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by discomfit]

Originally posted by dgtempe
If my job tells me i have to walk up and down the streets with a sign saying "support Bush" i would have to do it, unless, i quit. they pay you to do whatever it is they want.

And YES, firefighters are at most public functions, beleive it or not.

agreed.
i used to sell cars for a pretty good sized dealer....my GM would often have us go get his lunch or gas his car up, etc.....pretty sure that is not in the job description but i was on the job and he told me to do it...thats how it works.

these guys just don't want to be associated with it...rally's/parades like this in the cities often involve the cops and fireman....it is the way it works.
there are other jobs out there. they can quit ANY time they want to

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by RedEyes
No I don't. A similar incident to what you describe happened in the UK not so long ago. A pharmacist refused to sell a customer the morning after pill as it was against her beliefs. I do not believe that this lady had the right to refuse to sell the morning after pill either.

We are talking about their religious beliefs. I am not religious but I do understand how some people are deeply religious and their religious beliefs take priority in their lives - not that I agree, but I understand.

Why do these 2 statements seem to be conflicting?

In the first case, you believe the pharmacist's belief system was in the wrong, but in this instance someone's belief system is in the right? I'm confuzzled on this.

I have stated this before, but I'll say it again to be clear. If someone is going to take a job that will require them to do things that go against their religious beliefs then they obviously should not take the job because if they refuse to do their duty they are in the wrong. But, if you take a job where your religious are not comprimised in your duties and your boss asks you to do something that does comprimise them ( and its not your duty ) then that boss is in the wrong. But as you previosuly said its very hard to comment on this particular case as we really don't have all the relevant facts.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Their job does not include promoting a political agenda while on the job.

and showing up, being at, being near, or marching in a gay rally does not mean you are promoting anything...it means you are on the clock, walking....

Originally posted by discomfit
I don't think that word means what you think it means. They were ordered to attend the meeting, they were not forced.


[edit on 8-8-2007 by discomfit]

i seriously doubt these guys were 'forced' as well.

maybe the boss really really wanted them to go and they really really didn't. so now, they cry, and sue......problem solved