You want the courts to tell you that your local religious book store has to hire a cross dressing Satanist? HP is a private company and it can have whatever objectives its shareholders allow it to have. If the employees don't like those objectives they either shut up or get out. The employee who was fired, was not fired for his beliefs, he was fired for attempting to force his beliefs on others in contradiction to the company's objectives. That is insubordination and no company will allow that to stand. Good riddance. Why is it that so many so called cases of religious intolerance are brought on by the victims themselves?
I believe California already passed that one last year. I'm serious.
They already have.
City employees in San Fran Sicko who decide they want to lop off their dicks and 'become' women, will have it paid for through their health plan.
If only that were the case. But this person was undoubtedly bringing suit under the so-called Civil Rights Act, which, among other hideous things, attempts to prohibit emloyers from discriminating on the basis of religious views. And as one may surmise, it becomes totally impractical to enforce it to its full extent, so instead it gets enforced selectively, with the un-PC views getting the short shrift.
I've been saying a number of times on this forum that this unconstitutional abomination needs to be repealed post-haste.
Dude, I live in San Francisco, California, home of the Ninth Circuit and Mecca of radical gays, and I tell you with no touch of sarcasm or irony that the militant homosexuals are working on the above scenario becoming a reality. Already, this city and the state of California have surreptiously shoved through laws preventing "looksism" -- discriminating against ugly and/or obese and/or cross-dressing people.
That being said: a private company is permitted to perpetrate their own message, even one that is abhorrent to you. I am typing this as my work day has wound down at a company computer, and this company (which I guarantee you have heard of) -- also has the cockamamie "diversity is our strength" schtuff going on, complete with the dreaded diversity training laying a guilty trip on normal people because they think of themselves as normal. If this company chose to review every PC with keystroke loggers with the goal of firing everyone who didn't feel the way they do about "diversity," I would be toast.
However, I do take issue with your language when you say, "The employee who was fired, was not fired for his beliefs, he was fired for attempting to force his beliefs on others in contradiction to the company's objectives." He wasn't "forc[ing] his beliefs," he was expressing them.
His quotes were put up in his cubicle, and the "diversity" poster was in his cubicle, which he had to see. Note that the company also refused to take down their "diversity" poster from his cubicle.
I would assent to that if...if, mind you...the government kept its nose out of private businesses like restaurants. But instead, the government goes out of its way to interfere in private businesses whenever it likes.
And if the oh-so-private, publicly-traded HP decided it didn't want to hire minorities, do you think the government would take a hands-off approach? Oh-hohohoho! Think again.
Pigeon pucks, Dave.
It's HP, who's trying to force their PC diversity onto him.
Posting a sign is not focing anything on anyone, especially when the sign is not directive in nature.
Shalom.