Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Christian stripped of workplace signs
World Net Daily ^ | August 23rd, 2004

Posted on 08/24/2004 9:10:45 AM PDT by missyme

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: TopQuark

I have a sign on my desk that says: 'Never underestimate the power of idiots in large groups'.

Seems appropriate for this workplace. :-)


21 posted on 08/24/2004 9:55:24 AM PDT by Happygal (Liberals - fully au fait with their 'rights', utterly ignorant of their responsibilities)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Dragoro
Singling out an employee for displaying religious signs, etc. is ridiculous.

But I will say that I am profoundly uninterested in the political, religious, sports, leisure, or any other preference of the government worker providing me with a service. Do the job for me, please, and spare me your Oakland Raiders poster.

As a corporate executive, I also must say that a bad impression forms in my mind when I go to an employee's cubicle or office and see lots of non-work-related posters and items.

To be frank, I question the commitment and attitude of someone who plasters their walls with Dilbert cartoons and paraphernalia. Baby, you're free to be who you wanna be, but if you're a covert whiner, don't expect me to entrust you with important work.

But, then, I'm probably just a hard nose. :-)
22 posted on 08/24/2004 10:05:02 AM PDT by good_fight (Anglo-Catholic in religion, classicist in literature, realist in politics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Happygal
'Never underestimate the power of idiots in large groups'.

Looks like you an I work at the same place...:)

23 posted on 08/24/2004 10:08:13 AM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
"Any employer" generally does not include the government That is, unfortunately, wrong prima facie.

or it's jackbooted thugs.

And this is nothing short of pathetic.

Although federal employees have much more dramatic "on the job" free speech rights than any other category of workers in the country, state employees are not far behind. Why do you insist on stating as facts something that you've never heard of and never read?

You cannot apply private sector standards to this situation.

I did not. Reread the post.

If management wants to "protect" the delicate sensibilities of clients visiting the site, they can set up a public access workstation however they wish.

Your world appears to be that of an IT worker. You should get out more often. Visit a bookstore and get yourself some paperback on management of economics.

clients (not "customers" PULEEEZE)

Once again you scream that you have never even opened a book on economics, management, or English.

Buy a book. It's a good investment.

24 posted on 08/24/2004 10:13:29 AM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark

I guess I pretty much agree with you there, but I'd go further, I'd like to see all the cubicle junk go. A lady in my department has a cubicle that's just brimming over with troll dolls, horse figurines and other crap. It's like walking around in someone's trailer.


25 posted on 08/24/2004 10:22:27 AM PDT by SoDak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: walden
Either you clean out ALL material of a personal, social, religious or political nature, or you clean out none of it. In every workplace, there is some of this stuff in almost every cubicle or office. But this guy was singled out, which is wrong.

I agree. Most business have facility standards about what cubicles should look like. Ours goes to the details of saying stuff like "you may have 1 personal photo on your desk, nothing on the walls", "nothing of a divisive or offensive nature may be posted, especially on the outside of the cubicle walls, etc.", etc. I can't remember the exact wording, haven't read it for awhile.

Ours here are pretty strict but the IT dept (where I work) is usually left alone simply because there's simply not enough storage so all the manuals etc. have to go on your desktop and we all have charts and database diagrams etc all over the walls. And since our area looks like a tornado went through it you generally don't notice the Dilbert cartoons posted in the midst of the sea of tech stuff ;) .

LQ

26 posted on 08/24/2004 10:37:44 AM PDT by LizardQueen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Several decades working INSIDE the government (collecting bills for it for several years if you want to know where I get my expertise in "jack bootedness"), plus winning a couple of precedental civil service cases (with the then brand new MSPB), has demonstrated to me that government employees have greater free speech rights in their work place than do private sector employees in their work places.

There might be some exceptions, but they are few!

Now, what was it you were trying to say?

27 posted on 08/24/2004 12:57:28 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
At best the could try to claim that the One Man One Woman sticker was creating a hostile environment for gays, but with California law, I don't see how they could even make that argument.

As approved by a large majority of the voters, it is state policy.

28 posted on 08/24/2004 1:52:15 PM PDT by atomicpossum (If there are two Americas, John Edwards isn't qualified to lead either of them.©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Congratulations on your victories. They are entirely unrelated to the discussion, however. Reread my post.


29 posted on 08/24/2004 6:32:43 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Your response included this from my original post: "Although federal employees have much more dramatic "on the job" free speech rights than any other category of workers in the country, state employees are not far behind.

To which you then responded: "Why do you insist on stating as facts something that you've never heard of and never read?

When you challenge my bona fides you get an answer addressing that issue. Such challenges are impolite among long-time FR posters. When it comes to a "newbie" such as yourself, I usually answer your "Why" whine.

When you do it again I enable you to eat your lunch two or three times over.

Capice?

30 posted on 08/24/2004 6:41:08 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
I guess, your ad hominem, as well as "bona fide" in the English plural is an indication of your qualifications and capacity for logic. Your capacity to see the facts is also on display: I am certainly not feeling offended at your silliness, but a three-year participation on FR hardly makes me a newbie. Nor did I complain, or whine, as you prefer to call it: there was even nothing to complain about. You should familiaeize yourself with the meaning of the words before you use them.

It is pretty moronic to state, as you did, that people in government have more rights. For a person practicing law, as you purport to do, this is preposterous. From your later post I understood better, I think, what you meant --- that people in government may be getting away with more. That well may be. This is even a question of rights: rather, it is the question of how far a person can go in his derlection of duty without being detected or punished. One of the first things you should've learned is the duality of rights and duties, and the difference between them.

Regardless of what you meant, to state that our constitution, statutes, or common law grant people in government more rights is below contempt.

You have showed your capacity to think. Thank you. Now stop playing an attorney and tell your mom to tuck you in. Good night.

31 posted on 08/24/2004 8:03:53 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: missyme
political, religious or social" in nature
That pretty darn well covers all personal expression, doesn't it! More "helpful" regulation of personal behavior from the "progressives" who want to ban books that criticize John F'n Kerry.
32 posted on 08/24/2004 8:09:41 PM PDT by Libertina (Abandoning Vietnam: 3.5 million died, (2.5 in Cambodia killing fields), 1.4 mil refugees)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Sorry. The people who work for the government have a superior free speech right vis a vis their employer. Numerous Supreme Court decisions back this up.

Whether things should be that way is a different question.

BTW, 3 years makes you a "newbie". Your recent posts demonstrate that you are also a "whiner".

You are also quick to call names which identifies you as a Liberal.

Certainly there are boards like DU and Bartcop where you can entertain yourselves.

33 posted on 08/24/2004 8:12:29 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson