Gays and Straights in the Work Force: Tolerance for Other Viewpoints

In January 2001, Buonanno, an employee of AT&T, was handed a new AT&T Broadband Employee Handbook and asked to sign an “Acknowledgment of Receipt and Certificate of Understanding.” The certificate stated, in part, “I agree to follow the policies, rules and regulations contained in the handbook and to abide by any revisions made to them in the future.”

Upon reviewing the 84-page handbook, however, Buonanno — a Christian with biblically based beliefs regarding homosexuality — found several parts to which he could not in good conscience conform. On page 6, in the section titled “Diversity,” the handbook stated: “Each person at AT&T Broadband is charged with the responsibility to fully recognize, respect and value the differences among all of us.” On page 67, the company gave sexual orientation protected status.

For Buonanno, to acknowledge respect for a lifestyle that he believes to be sinful would be a compromise of his faith and a contradiction of the Bible’s views on homosexuality. So Buonanno notified his supervisor that — based on his religious beliefs — he could not sign the certificate of understanding. Buonanno added, however, that he had no problem declaring he would neither discriminate against nor harass people who were different from him, including homosexuals. He simply wanted to remain true to his faith and do his job.

AT&T’s response was typical of many politically correct establishments. The company gave Buonanno two choices: sign the certificate or be fired. Though his religious beliefs should have been accommodated in some fashion, his employment was terminated.

Gays And Straights In The Work Force: Tolerance For Other Viewpoints - John W. Whitehead

“All that gay and lesbian people are asking for is, if not understanding, then at least tolerance. All they are asking for is the same basic civil equality that all Americans yearn for and should be entitled to.” - Iowa State Rep. Ed Fallon

For many years, the rallying cry of the gay rights movement has been for greater tolerance and equal treatment — something due all Americans. Rarely, however, does one see those who champion tolerance for gays urging tolerance for other viewpoints. As gays have approached the mainstream, individuals who express concern about the gay lifestyle have found themselves ostracized. That is evident nowhere more than in corporate America.

In recent years, the tendency among corporations has been to aggressively advocate tolerance toward homosexuals. According to the Human Rights Campaign, the largest gay rights advocacy group in the country, 333 of the Fortune 500 companies have written policies prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. Many also require their employees to undergo sensitivity training on the subject.

Such protection of the gay lifestyle in the business world has caused concern among some heterosexual employees, including religious employees, who often find that their rights to freedom of religion and freedom of conscience are not being accommodated by such companies. One example is Albert Buonanno.

In January 2001, Buonanno, an employee of AT&T, was handed a new AT&T Broadband Employee Handbook and asked to sign an “Acknowledgment of Receipt and Certificate of Understanding.” The certificate stated, in part, “I agree to follow the policies, rules and regulations contained in the handbook and to abide by any revisions made to them in the future.”

Upon reviewing the 84-page handbook, however, Buonanno - a Christian with biblically based beliefs regarding homosexuality - found several parts to which he could not in good conscience conform. On page 6, in the section titled “Diversity,” the handbook stated: “Each person at AT&T Broadband is charged with the responsibility to fully recognize, respect and value the differences among all of us.” On page 67, the company gave sexual orientation protected status.

For Buonanno, to acknowledge respect for a lifestyle that he believes to be sinful would be a compromise of his faith and a contradiction of the Bible’s views on homosexuality. So Buonanno notified his supervisor that - based on his religious beliefs - he could not sign the certificate of understanding. Buonanno added, however, that he had no problem declaring he would neither discriminate against nor harass people who were different from him, including homosexuals. He simply wanted to remain true to his faith and do his job.

AT&T’s response was typical of many politically correct establishments. The company gave Buonanno two choices: sign the certificate or be fired. Though his religious beliefs should have been accommodated in some fashion, his employment was terminated.

His case is only one among many in which employees have been wrongfully denied accommodation and the right to freedom of conscience because of their religious beliefs - rights guaranteed both under federal law and under the First Amendment to the Constitution.

The issue is about more than an individual’s objection to homosexuality. It concerns the freedom of conscience - the right of individuals to object to something they believe is wrong, especially when it contradicts their religious beliefs, whether about war, abortion, homosexuality or whatever. That has always been a fundamental right guaranteed to all Americans. Such objections - unless they interfere with the clearly defined mission of the employer - must be accommodated.

Freedom of conscience in the workplace is an issue that we all need to support. Indeed, should anyone, gay or straight, be forced to deny and violate what they believe are sincerely held religious beliefs?

The First Amendment doesn’t apply only to speech that is politically correct or popular. It was written to protect speech that others might consider politically incorrect and unpopular. It was also written to protect those individuals who may not be part of the mainstream - people such as Albert Buonanno. It specifically protects the right of religious minorities to practice their religion without being harassed and denied a rightful place in the work force for doing so.

Gay people know what it means to be discriminated against because of lifestyle or beliefs. They therefore should be the first to defend people like Albert Buonanno. And we should demand that our workplaces not become bastions of conformity - where only accepted beliefs prevail. Indeed, if we truly believe in tolerance and diversity, then we all must practice it.

___________________________________________

I currently live up here in Toronto, Canada and can see where all this is going....one might even say the "thought police" are also in place up here....

A great article deserving of a full post....

- ConservativeStLouisGuy

A really big problem I have with some homosexuals, is their narrow-mindedness and close-mindedness about Christian and other religious beliefs. For anybody, homosexuals especially included, to discount the profound positive effect of Jesus on the entire history of men, is bizarre and weird.

A problem I have with some Christians, is their rabid personal reaction to homosexuals.

It truly does not seem possible to me that Jesus would approve of the expressions of hatred and animosity toward people (homosexuals) who are saying: this is the way we are, for whatever reason.

Doesnt everyone have an individual struggle with sin, however sin is defined?

It is important to keep in mind here, that so much of the discussion of sinfulness touches on government, and the role of government.

To me, abortion is the most ugly and disturbing practice going on today. Yet we accept it as if it were no big deal. Innocent human beings ... our brothers and sisters ... killed for convenience.

It is like living in a nightmare, to realize not only that innocent human life is being scraped to death, burned to death, dismembered to death, but also that the deaths are so widely regarded as not a big thing. We do not treat dogs that way, nor should we.

In the big picture, in the way life presents itself to us as imperfect and necessarily muddled, why would anyone waste his time condemning the love a man has for a man, or a woman for a woman? Because there is sex involved? Does anyone really want to go there?

Abortion. Islam. The mentality of unconstitutional government in all it's forms (oppressive taxation, over-regulation, pompous elitest judiciary).

The assault on the American system of justice, a wonder so casually maligned by liberals and conservatives alike, but a treasure for us all.

America is the guardian of liberty and miracle of all human history.

Why sweat the stuff which is only between God and man?

At what point do we wipe the dust off our feet, and protect our culture and our kids?

Never do we wipe the dust off our feet, and never do we forget our culture or our kids.

There is a fascinating thing about culture, kids, and dust.

All of us are affected by our culture ... our kids are. No getting around it.

Culture does send a message. Problem is, culture is too vast to regulate. Too many things coming from too many directions.

I am going to say something which is for me only.

Of every ten people I know, five look at life entirely different from me.

The pov of other folks does not seem believable to me, sometimes. But it is there. It actually exists.

It is utterly unreasonable to me, for instance, that any human being should consider abortion acceptable. To me, abortion is the basest activity of mankind, on the par with slavery.

If a man or woman romantically loves a fellow man or woman, and is faithful and considerate in the relationship, there is nothing which harms the rest of us, adult or child.

The government should no more be involved in loving, than it is in schooling. Mankind is in a still primitive stage where government is mistaken for reality ... even by conservatives, amazingly.

The ultimate question is morality, integrity, honesty and truth. Not inferential truth, but things as they actually are.

Kids are fine and doing well. They are sponges for the truth.

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.