It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Massachusetts Man Says He Was Fired for Telling Colleague Her Gay Marriage Is Wrong

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I mis read the article.




posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I mis read the article.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   
He was out of line. If he didn't want to hear about the marriage, he should have just said, "I don't want to hear about your personal life". End of discussion. But to comment on feeling it was "wrong" was out of line.

I don't get to tell someone who's religious that I think they're idiots for believing in God. I don't get to tell someone of some ethnic group that I think ethnics are stupid or otherwise not to my liking. I don't get to tell women that I think they're awful. So why should I get to tell someone that I disapprove of their marriage?

If you've got a problem with someone, keep it to yourself, or face the consequences.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   
I say it was a knee-jerk solution of let the new guy go rather than spend the time and effort to investigate the situation. As a newly hired guy, he would have been on some sort of probation. That is why I try to avoid jobs that are not mom and pop businesses, not that these things do not happen there as well, it is just that you tend to have a chance of having your side of the story heard before judgement is passed.

Of course a good job boils down to three things in no particular order:


  • The job that you do.
  • The people you work with and for.
  • The pay for the job done.


One out of three is an acceptable job until something better comes along. Two out of three is not bad, you can spend a few years there. There out of three is a keeper.

For me, I would guess that this was a one out of three type of job anyway.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
I can't see them firing him if his version of events is true. Is she really did "invite" comment multiple times then she has no basis for complaint and he might have a case for wrongful termination, (though finding a lawyer willing to take the case on spec will probably be impossible).

She was a manager, he a deputy manager and they did not work at the same location normally. I find it hard to believe a big corporation like that would make such a huge mistake.

Either he had previous issues or things did not happen exactly the way he describes. I personally find it hard to believe someone would push for comment four times, if someone did my alarm bells would be going off in a big way.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ecoparity
 


Why is it so hard to believe?

She made a complaint and since he apparently doesn't agree with the homosexual way of life they let him go.

Its much easier to suffer a day or two of bad press then to have the whole gay community come down on you for not standing up for them.



posted on Nov, 7 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Less time talking. More time working. This can solve many issues in the work place.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by HotSauce
 



He said he then left the store briefly to visit the airport's chapel before returning.

link

Does this seem odd ? To leave your place of work and visit a chapel.

Returning with a compulsion to confront the "deviant" .


"By the fourth time she mentioned it, I felt God wanted me to express how I felt about the matter, so I did



..... Vidala, who had been employed for just a matter of weeks

link

Just in the door , so to speak . Perhaps if he had worked there longer and built up a rapport with fellow workers, he may not of been fired .



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by UmbraSumus
 


I think leaving, no matter where he went, was a good move. If he stayed and not thought about the situation he might have acutally said something bad.

The lady apparently wouldn't shut up about her lifestyle and he let her know that he was not comfortable with it.

Doesn't matter if he had worked a day or 10 years. He shouldn't have been fired.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldDragger

It has zip to with free speech or PC.
It's a simple as respecting others beliefs.
Work is not a platform for people to express their religious beliefs.
As an employer I have the right to maintain a stable environment, I pay people to produce for my business , any intefrence in that makes somebody an unproductive employee, and I will terminate them.
Express your religion outside of my employment, it's not part of of your job description and I don't pay you to do that.
My business does not exist to further your self expression in any way , shape or form.


The article states that the lady brought it up four times. You say you don't pay people to express their religious views, what about expressing the homosexuality? You want to maintain a stable and work environment, how do we know this guy wasn't working and the lady stopped what she was doing just to chat about how gay she is. Your thread addresses nothing about what the woman did wrong, only about the man and his religious views. Should I assume you are sexists and anti-religion?

And about respecting other people's beliefs. Since when did that become a rule or law? If I don't like it, if I don't agree with it, I'M NOT GOING TO RESPECT IT. Period. I'm tired of people saying that you have to be tolerant and respectful of something you don't agree with, because, NO! YOU DON'T!



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 01:00 AM
link   
Very characteristic of the "homo" agenda. destroy the existence of any other point of view than pro-homo. Lack of real tolerance is really a fundamental human problem. No question the homos want to be openly chatting up their degeneracy in the work place.

The fundamental problem is that the fictional government sets up fictional standards to manipulate the society for other reasons. This falls back to the "legal society" and it's criminal nature. What should happen is that the individual company sets it's own individual rules what ever they may be and people take it or leave it. The company owners are true to themselves and people honer their right to be true to themselves whether it's to not hire gays or only hire gays or allow gays to babble in the work place or not. It is not a "governing / government" business or authority, right or law. It is the free choice of the owners / board of directors.

I think these issues exist specifically to force a percent of the public to need the government and want the maniacal control. Everyone with a cause wants the government to be in their corner to force the world to do what they want. Freedom will never exist until people can tolerate free will in others including the free will not to associate with them or their beliefs.

The concept of freedom is the fictional open mindedness of the fictional liberal. That is to sit around and wallow in the filth of everyone's perverted ideas and natures and be just one happy debased collective. Accepting everyone means being degraded by association without thought or interest in it's adverse influence on the individual spiritual well being. It is a deliberate agenda to debase the spirit. Real freedom is in detachment from the worlds of matter and avoidance of degrading influence.But that doesn't support subjugation.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by HotSauce
 
It's quickly becoming the People's Republic of the United States.

Should we just remove the Bill of Rights all together?? It appears people today feel it's not relevant anymore.

I have just as much a right under the Constitution to tell someone I think homosexuality is wrong as they have the right to tell me Christianity is wrong.

Freedom of speech works both ways, I never pout and run to human resources when someone bashes Christianity.

I agree with the previous poster, this nation is turning into a bunch of first graders.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by HotSauce
Well just read this for yourself. I would love to get feedback on how people view this.



Vidala said he felt "intentionally goaded" by the manager to comment on her relationship.

"She knew how I felt about homosexuality," he said. "When you talk to someone about something like that, you want their support. She was kind of looking into my eyes for that social cue for me to say, 'I'm happy for you.' But I really couldn't feel happy for her."


This guy gets fired for speaking his religious views. So does this mean we can fire people for talking about Allah all the time at work?

I guess now days you cannot even speak your mind unless it is ran through the Politically Correct filter.

Source

[edit on 7-11-2009 by HotSauce]


uhhmm...yes, you can get fired for talking about allah all the time at work. the workplace is not a democracy, it's a dictatorship. proper business etiquette is required by the owners, and if it is not followed, you can legally be fired. i think every teenager realizes this, when they get their first job. if you worked for me, i wouldn't permit any religion being discussed anytime while on the clock, if someone does, they're fired.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Well I guess the whole state of Maine would get fired then huh? I would guess this guy would be welcome in that state. If I were him I would put that state in my rear view mirror. Maybe one day Massachusetts will over turn that law as well. Lets hope so...



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   
I agree with some other posters in this thread. There is more to this story. Certainly, the young man should not be fired for his religious views. He should have bit his tongue and refrained from a full frontal religious point of view.

Every company/business has it own unique culture. There could have been a majority of gays that worked there. Many states are "right to work states" and employees can be fired at will for whatever reason. Like maybe having pink hair or bad hygeine.

en.wikipedia.org...

But its about time the tables are turned. Ask any gay person over 35 if they have ever been fired for being gay. You will find a large majority of gays have at some point in their lives have been fired for being gay.

Goaded or not, the young man was fired for being a bigot on the job. He should have kept his mouth shut. HAHA!

When I've worked, my personal life stayed out of the business I worked for. We all have different ways of thinking and acting in our personal lives. Leave your personal life at home.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by HotSauce
 


Politically correct filter? [*SNIP*] I am absolutely for free speech, people should be able to say what they like as long as they do not cause harm.

However directly insulting someone in a work environment does not come under free speech. He knew it would offend her and said it out of malice and if you want to play it that way then people should be able to call each other all sorts of things [*SNIP*] because that's free speech right?

No it's not alright, this guy deserves to be fired, he has no manners and no common decency. If he wants to hold up a sign as a rally against homosexual marriage then he has every right to, but no right to directly insult an individual in the workplace.

 


Mod edit: Personal insult removed.

Mod Note: Courtesy is Mandatory – Please Review Link.

Mod edit: Censor circumvention of racial terms removed.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 11/8/2009 by AshleyD]



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Did she bring up being gay four times or did she bring up her new marriage four times? A gay couple should be able to talk about their relationships just like heterosexuals in the office do. Since this guy found it offensive, she was probably just bantering but he was looking for the offense.

It is possible that she did throw it in his face. Then they are both wrong. She was baiting him and he took it.

But he probably clearly signed a statement when hired that you can't discriminate against sexual orientation, so he is not allowed to publicly condemn it.

The bottom line is that no one here saw the conversations or know what is going on.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 




But he probably clearly signed a statement when hired that you can't discriminate against sexual orientation, so he is not allowed to publicly condemn it.


So it is discrimination now just to say you disagree with something? So we only have a right to express ourselves if we have something positive to say?

Welcome to the PC Hell created by Liberals. Kids can't play to win because someone might get their feeling hurt. Adults can not express their dislike of something because it might hurt someones feelings.

So now we are reduced to live on egg shells regarding who is the most sensitive least common denominator. What a great free country we live in these days.



posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ReelView
 





Very characteristic of the "homo" agenda. destroy the existence of any other point of view than pro-homo.

Hm, reminds me of something about some men wearing skirts and hiding behind a fish doing something very similar, now who are they ?
Good job those homo fag queer loving sickos don't get into positions of authority, I mean that's scary dude they could learn the bit about burning the other point of view alive.

If gay people weren't treated with intolerance (to put it mildly) to begin with they probably wouldn't react as you allege.



posted on Nov, 9 2009 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by HotSauce
 


You want to say what you want? Then don't work for an equal opportunity employer. The workplace isn't the place to spray your agenda.

If someone wants to be able to say what they want, then you go work for Johnny the landscaper or Tommy towtruck company. But if a company reports itself as an equal opportunity employer, it is advertising itself as a safe haven to work without discrimination. And you sign a pretty white paper that says you will adhere to it when hired.

The guy should of read the fine print.

All the article said was she mentioned her marriage four times. NOT her sexuality. If a heterosexual mentioned her marriage four times, being a happy newlywed, Mr I can't function without a pastor would not of bat an eye.




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join