"I KNOW BUT ONE CODE OF MORALITY FOR MEN WHETHER ACTING SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY"
--Thomas Jefferson
Got Natural Law?
Got Socio-Biological Fitness?
"Gay" penguins don't - not even in the San Francisco zoo
FAIL.
Posted on 03/31/2012 6:12:56 PM PDT by massmike
A judge has stopped a Christian from using human rights arguments in his legal case against his employer who demoted him because of his moderate comments about gay weddings in churches.
The ruling was handed down last week by District Judge Charles Khan at Manchester County Court.
Adrian Smith will continue his legal action, claiming breach of contract, but the judge’s ruling will fuel concerns that the rights of Christians are being relegated.
The ruling also comes amid deep national controversy surrounding the government’s plans to redefine marriage.
Smith was a housing manager at Trafford Housing Trust (THT) when, on Feb. 13, 2011, he posted a link on his personal Facebook page to a BBC news story entitled “Gay church marriages get go ahead” and added his own comment: “an equality too far.”
The comment was made on his personal Facebook page, in his own personal time, and was only visible to his Facebook friends and their friends.
(Excerpt) Read more at charismanews.com ...
Sodomy trumps Christianity. This is the whole point of that movement!
The age of Christian persecution is coming back. If the government feared Christians as much as Muslims, this wouldn’t be happening.
I once knew a cute little blonde named Caan, who surprisingly was a Southern Baptist, but when it is spelled Khan, I think of a Pakistani or a Mongol. I bet Pakistanis outnumber Mongols by a thousand to one in todays Britain.
I don’t feel sorry for facebook posters that post personal comments for the world to see and then get burned for it. Facebook is just trouble waiting to happen. Figure it out. or don’t.
Why should he be burned for saying something which has been the standard of decency for thousands of years and even today is agreed with by a large majority?
It’s called Freedom of Speech.
Or are only Liberals allowed it now?
His facebook comment was very tame and much more private than the one you just posted on Free Republic, an entirely open forum.
‘“Human rights” = leftist term that really means no rights (i.e. rights granted by government that can be taken away at a whim)
“Natural rights” = means rights that all men possess, given by their Creator’
That’s an excellent way to put it.
Fascinating and disturbing that such mild comments could be deemed “hatred” punishable by the state. All of this is eventually brought about by the desire to criminalize Christianity. I figure sharing John 14:6 ‘Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’ and Acts 4:8-12 ‘Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders,if we are being examined today concerning a good deed done to a crippled man, by what means this man has been healed, let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by him this man is standing before you well. This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”’ will be deemed “hate speech” since it points to Jesus Christ providing the only way to salvation, thereby “discrimating” against athiests and all other non-Christians.
And yet he's been demoted, going through the courts, etc. I'm with RC on this one. It took me about 2 weeks on FB to realize what a bad idea it is, and it is different from FR: I don't know who 'RC one' or 'SC Swamp Fox' is because of anonymity, and although anonymity on the innerwebs has been criticized, FB constantly shows us just how painful the lack of anonymity can be.
Hey, go ahead and post a bunch of controversial comments on facebook for all of your friends and enemies to see if you think it’s a good idea. I won’t ever log on to facebook again, not even anonymously. It’s like playing with matches and gasoline. But if you think it’s a good idea, go for it.
that's exactly it. Long live internet anonymity.
I do everyday, and if my “friends’ can’t handle the truth, they ain’t friends for long.
Our Founding Fathers didn’t have Facebook, yet their letters still exists for us to read.
I don’t say anything online that I don’t say in person. PERIOD.
You are right when you say that posting this stuff on FB is trouble waiting to happen. I think we ought to be spoiling for a fight however.
I happen to take great exception to the GW scam and post everything I can that exposes it.
I work at a leftist University - if they take exception to my postings and make sure I get fired I won’t be going to some whiney leftie court to get satisfaction though I will take it on the chin and get another job.
Some things are worth fighting for, some sacrifices worth making. I happen to think that what I and others like me are doing empowers other to take a stand when they otherwise would be silent.
Cheers
Mel
"I KNOW BUT ONE CODE OF MORALITY FOR MEN WHETHER ACTING SINGLY OR COLLECTIVELY"
--Thomas Jefferson
Then how does the Gaystapo find out about these private posts? Do they have moles on Fagbook?
Then how does the Gaystapo find out about these private posts? Do they have moles on Fagbook?
I think it can work this way. Say your FB page is private in that only your friends can see your posts and pictures. But one of your FB friends, say a co-worker’s FB page doesn’t have any privacy settings. Your friend makes a comment on your private post and you post a reply; your post to him or her is now visible to everyone who can see your friends page, including the nosey boss who has nothing better to do all day that troll worker’s FB pages looking for something controversial or something along the lines of “I called out sick today but I actually went to the beach – Suckers!” or “I hate my boss and I’m looking for a new job – does anyone know who is hiring?”
I’ve worked for companies that had “Social Networking Policies”. Most of these policies reference posting confidential company information or trade secrets or making derogatory comments about the company, its management or products, but some also make reference that if you clearly identify yourself as an employee of Company X and you then post something derogatory or inflammatory (whatever that company deems to be so), then you are in essence making it sound that you are saying this, not as a private citizen but as an employee of Company X. I’m not saying this is right or that I agree with that sort of interpretation or policy but that is how some companies and organizations see it.
When you post on FB or Twitter or Linkedin, etc., you have to assume, even if you are using a pseudonym and have your privacy settings on, that anyone and everyone can see at least some if not all of what you post. I have a FB page mostly to keep in contact with family and friends living out of state but am very careful not to post too much about myself or ever mention where I work or post anything that I wouldn’t say at work. If a friend posts something controversial that I either agree or disagree with, it’s better to respond to them in a PM or an email than to post it directly on the FB page.
Private forums and sites like FR or Blogs work a bit different unless you post very specific and personal information about yourself and or your employer in any of your posts as that can be found using search engines.
If you stand for something, then you stand for it 24/7. That means anywhere, and everywhere. At all times.
Silence is considered acceptance, and I will not be silent.
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.