Kodak fires man over 'gay' stance

WorldNetDaily ^ | Oct 24, 2002 | Joe Kovacs

[cajun-jack]

re #10: no they won't....probably have too many queers buying film to catch that "kodak moment"

[MEGoody]

Why does anyone need to 'come out' at work? If someone wants to be gay, let 'em. They don't need to be bragging about it to everyone in the office. I know I certainly don't want to hear about everyone's sexual 'preferences' or activities.

That would have been my response to the "memo."

[Station 51]

How can you expect privacy while sending an e-mail to 1000 people?

[LowOiL]

I'll bet Szabo regrets his overreaction.

Maybe Kodak will regret my lost business. Email just sent. I applaude the stance this fellow took, as will my church and family.

[chachacha]

Some folks don't have the same values as you MILLIE!

[Station 51]

Not if company policy violated his so-called rights.

So, just which of his civil rights were violated?

[eastsider]

How can you expect privacy while sending an e-mail to 1000 people?

That was a blunder. A fatal one. IMO.

[sinkspur]

He was threatened with termination if he didn't act AGAINST his religious beliefs. I believe that is grounds for lawsuit for violation of his constitutional rights of religious freedom.

If his religious beliefs do not allow him to support the policies of the company, then he is better off with another company. Why anybody would want to stay with an employer who makes him feel as if his religious rights are being violated is beyond me.

If New York is an "at will" state, Szabo is wasting his time with a lawsuit. He can be fired for any reason, or for no reason.

[LowOiL]

He was grandstanding.

Why is it "he' was grandstanding when "they" started it with their grandstanding stance of pushing the Gay agenda in his face. He was responding to their BS and rightfully so.

[eastsider]

If New York is an "at will" state, Szabo is wasting his time with a lawsuit. He can be fired for any reason, or for no reason.

He should at least include a violation of his first-amendment rights as one his claims to preserve his right to appeal to SCOTUS.

[MEGoody]

As I recall, discrimination based upon religious beliefs is against the law.

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

A good lawyer might be able to get Kodak on religious discrimination.

Definitely an idea worth exploring--makes sense to me.

[nina0113]

He also blasted his response to over 1,000 people ... He should have confined his objections to the sender of the e-mail.

I'm totally with you. He was grandstanding.

Probably didn't know the difference between "Reply" and "Reply All." He does now!

[sinkspur]

As I recall, discrimination based upon religious beliefs is against the law.

He will have a tough time convincing a court that his religious beliefs are being discriminated against.

[Station 51]

I work at a high tech company and we have quite a few Muslims in our ranks. A few days after 9/11/01 we all received a memo stating that anyone who made insensitive comments about a particular religion would face drastic disciplinary action. Two people were fired, a Muslim for laughing at a colleague for going to a Christian Church and saying some to the effect "you are wasting you time" and one Christian for putting ham sandwiches in a few Muslim employees desks.

The company set policy and two people choose to violate that policy. Just like the guy at Kodak they choose to be fired.

[NukeMan]

I agree. To be discriminated against (in legal jargon) means they actively prohibited him from observing the Sabbath or some such, or prohibited the 'reasonable accomodation' such as athe wearing of an unobtrusive crucifix, Star of David, etc.

Don't shoot the messenger here. The intersection of 'what is just and right' with 'what is the law' is often pitifully small.

[SkyPilot]

"Every possible definition of diversity is embraced by Kodak," Blamphin said.

Really Blamphin? OK--so how are you on pedophiles?

You see---this is the problem when you go down this road--everything must be tolerated as "diversity."

I have a better plan--how about we see what God has to say, and then follow that.

[B4Ranch]

I just read an article entitled "Kodak fires man over 'gay' stance"

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29394

From now on Kodak Film is on my forbidden purchase list, Fugi Film will be your replacement. I prefer American companies, however I will not support any company that places homosexual rights above or even close with heterosexuals.

Sincerely,

[Station 51]

Have you bothered to check Fuji's Policy concerning gays?