Was Atlanta's Fire Chief Fired Over His Faith?

Christian Post ^ | 01/15/2015 | BY JIM DALY

[editor-surveyor]

.
>> “Our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom have picked up his case and will be representing him as the litigation winds its ways through the courts in the coming weeks and months.” <<

.

[discostu]

The truth has a tendency to be a broken record. The 14th doesn’t change any part of this. Because it’s not a law, it’s an employee guideline. As an employer the government (at all levels) is allowed to do all kinds of stuff it’s not allowed to do to the citizenry. Because the employer-employee relationship is vastly different from the government-citizen relationship, especially in a republic. Starting from the most basic part of the relationship of who gets to fire whom and why.

I guarantee everywhere you’ve ever lived every layer of the government (city, county, state and yes even the fed) has fired at least 1 person every couple of years for saying the wrong thing in the wrong place with the wrong audience. Your first amendment rights have almost no impact at all on your employment status, even when you’re an employee of the government:
http://www.workplacefairness.org/retaliationpublic#1
Courts have been cautious in this area, limiting the protection to speech that is on matters of “public concern.” The Supreme Court is not yet ready to say that public employees are protected from retaliation for any First Amendment activity. Thus, while the government could not put someone in jail for complaining about a meager raise, the government might still be able to fire a public employee for this reason, unless the complaint was a matter of “public concern.”

And a book about his faith is not a matter of public concern. Sorry but you need to own up to the fact that government employees aren’t protected from firing by the 1st. Never have been, never will be.

[editor-surveyor]

.
Your embrace of government tyranny is always your main gig here.

You are wrong on this and when the case has been decided it will be clear, even to you.

.

[discostu]

This isn’t government tyranny, it’s employer responsibility. And I don’t embrace government tyranny on any issue.

Meanwhile your need to turn this to personal attacks and out right lies shows you know where the facts and logic lead. But you won’t admit you’re wrong.

This case has been decided dozens, maybe even hundreds, of times already. The first amendment does not protect you from being fired, even as a government employee.

[editor-surveyor]

You are completely wrong.

It has been decided once, when the Hatch act, which permitted these kinds of excess, was thrown out.

It relates solely to public employment.

[discostu]

This is much like when I said the NFL would settle the concussion suit out of court and you insulted me and said they wouldn’t even be sued even though there was already a suit filed. You are, quite simply, wrong. This has been decided, even for public employees:
http://www.firstamendment.com/first-amendment/
Speech relating to matters that do not fall within the definition of ‘public concern’ may be used as a basis to terminate employees, even if the speech occurs on the employee’s free time.
http://www3.ce9.uscourts.gov/jury-instructions/node/147
Under the First Amendment, a public employee has a qualified right to speak on matters of public concern. In order to prove the defendant deprived the plaintiff of this First Amendment right, the plaintiff must prove the following additional elements by a preponderance of the evidence:

1. the plaintiff spoke as a citizen and not as part of [his] [her] official duties;

2. the speech was on a matter of public concern;
http://www.michbar.org/journal/article.cfm?articleID=874&volumeID=66
whether the speech involves a matter of public concern;

And plenty of others. It’s been decided already. Many times.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

>> “ failing to obtain permission for publishing the book.” <<

He got permission from the ethics commission.

He is being fired because somebody got offended at his religion.

That’s all it takes now.

[editor-surveyor]

.
I agree fully.

.

[Thank You Rush]

“”Our friends at Alliance Defending Freedom have picked up his case and will be representing him as the litigation winds its ways through the courts in the coming weeks and months.””

That’s why I asked - usually “THE” would already have specified what litigation was going to take place.