Posted on 11/07/2009 11:31:23 AM PST by GiovannaNicoletta
A manager at a Massachusetts retail store claims he was unjustly fired after he told a colleague he thought her impending marriage to another woman was wrong.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
GOOD Grief..what is this world coming too!
No individual nor business can suppress freedom of speech. Only government can do that.
This is bad, but has nothing to do with any freedom, much less freedom of speech.
Clearly, only relativists can be team players. /s
I hope everyone in New York and New Jersey is paying attention;as your governors are attempting to impose gay “marriage” on your states,too!
BTW Are you a Constitutional Scholar?
I imagine if he had said to another employee, "Your Christian faith is wrong", most would be screaming for his head and celebrating his firing.
No, it is just a private company following through on its company policies.
People say all the time, that “your Christian faith is wrong.” Chances are your hiring manager won’t give a darn.
I’m on the side of the employee. If the lady asks him what he thinks of gay marriage, than she’d better be willing to live with the consequences.
Agree with the comment, “only relativists can be team players”. Word. Expresses the entire concept perfectly.
Those in so-called ‘gay marriage’ are guilty as sin and deep inside they know it. To assuage their consciences they seek outside approvals. Although Peter Vidala got fired from his job his promotion lies elsewhere but the gay marriage lesbo has her finite rewards at the moment——it’s as good as it gets for her destiny to darkness unless she repents of wickedness!
Good luck getting more than a handful to see the double standard. I gave up on that a while back.
..but Corzine is trying to force it through before he leaves office.
The First Amendment guarantee of free speech doesn't extend to private company employees. It's only designed to limit or prevent government from censoring speech of citizens. Companies are perfectly within their rights to limit what employees can or cannot say while they're working. It's well-settled law.
The Supreme Court, in a few cases going back to the late 70's, have even allowed the government to limit the speech of it's own employees, although their power isn't as robust as the power of a private employer.
>>Please, fill me in on your observations.<<
The US Constitution is a contract between the people of the USA and its government. The only entities it recognizes are the Federal Government, the States and the People.
When you contract with an employer, you give up a slew of rights. If the employer says you can’t talk politics, you can’t talk politics. As long as you are free to leave the employer, you can reassert your rights.
If I had someone who worked for me calling for jihad and telling my customers the same, I had damn well better be able to fire him.
>>BTW Are you a Constitutional Scholar?<<
I like to think so. I have spent thousands of hours studying the USC and associated interpretations, writings and papers.
It ended a long time ago!
If one employee had objected to another employees interracial marriage, the company would be within its rights to fire that employee.
Well, we know you sure aren't.
I agree with you. This kid was stupid for bringing it up.
If she insisted on talking about her gay marriage he could have suggested she focus on her work and not her personal life during business hours. Didn’t this idiot read his assistant manager manual? The first 50 pages probably covered these issues.
He said she mentioned it several times to him. As a former employer, I can tell you that she had no business bringing up her personal life to a fellow employee that she did not know. Her raising this issue surely gave him the justification to express his personal beliefs on it. She should have been repremanded. It is apparent that she was trying to goad him into saying something. I suspect that if she had simply mentioned it in passing one time, he likely would not have responded as he did.
Actually,SHE’S the one that started it....
A Massachusetts man was fired from a national retail corporation because of his traditional beliefs on same-sex marriage. Peter Vadala was formally dismissed from his job as second deputy manager of the Brookstone store at Boston’s Logan Airport on August 12, 2009, after a supervisor reported him to Human Resources regarding an incident two days earlier.
As Peter described the incident, he came to work on August 10 and began his day normally. A female manager from another store was in the store and began talking to Peter about her upcoming marriage. When Peter asked “where is he taking you for the honeymoon,” she corrected him and said she was not getting married to “he” but to another woman.
Peter did not immediately react, but when the manager sensed Peter’s discomfort with the subject of same-sex “marriage”, the woman apparently continued bringing it up to Peter throughout the day, reiterating that she was getting married to another woman. Finally, after the fourth or fifth time she brought it up, Peter remarked that his Christian beliefs did not accept same-sex marriage. At that point the woman became very angry and bluntly told Peter that he needed to “get over it” and said that she would be immediately contacting the Human Resources department.
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09d/vadala/index.html
Sounds to me like SHE was trying to provoke HIM!
“The US Constitution is a contract between the people of the USA and its government.”
Um, no. The contract is between the sovereign states and the federal government. That people were given rights was just a happy by-product.
And he took the bait.
And the private company took actions in accordance with its policy.
I know she did, and he took the bait. It could have just as easily been a corporate test to see what he would do. It doesn’t matter, he should have know better-period.
Is pretending to be married wrong?
His statement seems to accept the possibility of two persons of the same sex having a marriage, which is of course impossible.
Um, no. The contract is between the sovereign states and the federal government. That people were given rights was just a happy by-product.
The rights are confirmed in the contract as G-d given. The Rights are G-d given as identified in the contract.
So why is SHE not guilty of harassment?Isn’t SHE the one that was causing an uncomfortable atmosphere at work?Sounds to me like she’s a trouble-maker that this company would be better off without.Agree?
Is the ridicule necessary?
I doubt someone being harassed over his personel or religious beliefs is part of any corporate test.
No, one does not cause an uncomfortable situation by mentioning that she is getting married.
What ridicule????? Can’t a question be asked?
BTW Are you the thread monitor? Please... get a life.
He is being punished for standing his Christian ground when she provoked him. Nothing wrong there. The lesbies will abuse the current state of sin that our govt and courts endorse. satan wins for now, but this man will be rewarded in another way or another life.
The manager repeatedly brought the issue up to him. How come the employer rules don’t apply to her?
Well,it seems from all accounts that he didn’t say anything at first and tried to walk away and she sensed his being uncomfortable with the situation and she kept provoking him.That sounds like someone looking for a fight to me.I don’t know any company that needs that in the workplace.
Kneel before the Gay Zod! (Or as another poster put it “Kneel before the Gay Baal!”)
She should try doing that with a devout muslem...
You could sell tickets to that one!
And he took the bait.
And Brookstone in a private enterprise.
This situation is not different than if he had verbally objected to a co-worker’s interracial marriage.
Employee #1 approaches emplyee #2 and gives unsolicited advice:
“I think the way you are raising your children is wrong. You should not be allowing them to watch so much television, wear skimpy bathing suits while running in the sprinklers, or skip bible study on the sabbath.”
Employee #2 goes to his supervisor, and says
“I didn’t sign up for this BS when I came onboard here. Gonna do anything about this busybody?”
Well, women talk - about everything and frequently, in my experience. What if she had been talking about her son's Bar Mitzvah, or Kwanzaa, or her Passover Seder?
If he thought the conversations were inappropriate for the workplace, then he should have said so, and left it at that. But, he shouldn't have offered his moral judgment on her personal life, just like he shouldn't say that a Bar Mitzvah is immoral or Kwanzaa is racist.
The employee has a Constitutional Right to the Freedom of Religion, although it is true the place of business would not necessarily be a place to espouse those beliefs.
So, obviously, if you allow an employee to espouse her pantheistic lesbian beliefs to demean your own belief system, then that employee shouldn’t be punished for responding to the “religious” violation of the rude lesbian.
She should have been the one who was fired by harassing the Christian with her defense of immoral behavior in the guise of a fake “civil right” which allowed her to indulge in such nihilistic, socially destructive behavior.
So then,if it is not a test but a real situation,WHY is he the only one fired?Shouldn’t she be fired,too?What if a customer overheard them and she had made THEM feel uncomfortable?I just think that she sounds like a problem waiting to happen,and the company fired the wrong person.
It’s the company’s loss.
True, but he also has to make a living now.
His beliefs to him are just as valuable as her beliefs are to her - yet, lesbo has been given the green light. The Human Resource Dept should have asked the lesbo, why are you talking about your personal life while working?
He should have smelled rats earlier. She goaded him, and he took the bait. Instead, he should have said back, “You have said to me that you were married, four times in short order. Do you have a purpose in doing that?”
I would probably approach it from a different direction though, coming at an odd angle. For example, “Did you hear of that Indian city, suffering from a drought, where they married a small girl to a dog?”
Of course this compares her marriage with this Indian girl’s marriage, but does so indirectly enough so that if accused of harassment, you could respond that “she mentioned marriage four times, so I thought she wanted to talk about marriage.”
People expect to be taken on “head on”, so if you avoid doing this, you can still tear them to shreds, but still leave yourself some dodging room if you need it.
Back in 1980, our company owner and president meet with a group of new employees to orientate us to a large new project; and to the customers expectation.
When the meeting was almost over, he informed us: “Neither Titles, nor Degrees, nor experience count, in our corporation.
I thought what does count? Then He said, “Only one thing counts; “GETTING THE JOB DONE” is the only thing that counts.”
We often forget, we are there to get the job done; “On time, within the budget, to the customers satisfaction, and to make a profit.”
If we did our jobs we would not have the problems of all this other garbage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.