>>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.<<
Maybe yes, maybe no. But that is between the employer and the employee(s), and is not any kind of a freedom of anything issue. For the most part, the government intervenes when different standards are applied to different people. I can say “you can’t smoke” but it means ALL employees can’t smoke.
It always saddens me when people on THIS board, of all places don’t know what a “right” is nor what the USC is. Invented “rights” are what liberals create. Undermining private contracts — the basis for ALL common law — is what liberals do.
“It always saddens me when people on THIS board, of all places don’t know what a “right” is nor what the USC is.”
That begs the question: Will you tell us “what a ‘right’ is”?