Thought crimes: Christian demoted at work

Keaton

A rather shocking story follows about a Christian man who made very reasonable comments on his facebook page. His fellow workers saw it, and reported him. Here is the 'offensive comment':

The events started on Sunday 13 February this year when Mr Smith noted a news report from the BBC News website, headlined “Gay church marriages get go ahead”.

Conscience

He posted a link to the report on his Facebook page, adding the comment “an equality step too far”.

Two colleagues read his Facebook comment. One of them posted a response asking Mr Smith to explain what he meant.

On the evening of Monday 14 February Mr Smith posted: “I don’t understand why people who have no faith and don’t believe in Christ would want to get hitched in church. The Bible is quite specific that marriage is for men and women. If the state wants to offer civil marriage to the same sex then that is up to the state; but the state shouldn’t impose its rules on places of faith and conscience”.

Complaint

Colleagues later complained to managers at Trafford Housing Trust, and after an investigation the mangers started disciplinary proceedings against Mr Smith.

Bosses concluded that he was guilty of gross misconduct. They said they could have dismissed him, but because of his loyal service over 18 years they decided to demote him and cut his salary by 40 per cent.

http://www.christian.org.uk/news/christian-hit-with-40-pay-cut-over-facebook-comments/

I wonder if he'd made comments about his drinking escapades at the weekend or his trip to a gay pride event, would he have been demoted? I think not!!!

Can you believe that? Still, I think Christians should not be intimidated, nor silenced.

alex73

Certainly this side of the Atlantic its seen as very politically incorrect to say that I believe that Gay Marriage is wrong or I believe that Abortion is wrong.

I think the Guy should have held is tongue, He was not working in the Church. Who knows in what context he spoke and how he was provoked to saying it.

But If I were asked a Direct question. Do you believe Gay People should be married in a Christian Church, my answer would be the exact same.

I work in a free Gay friendly American Company, and on this topic I keep my mouth shut, we are not a religious organisation of any form.

However where my company works in a Muslim country they bend the knee to every single religious demand. They are quick to stand up for Gay Rights in US but not in Saudi Arabia.

Newsite

Keaton wrote: »

A rather shocking story follows about a Christian man who made very reasonable comments on his facebook page. His fellow workers saw it, and reported him. Here is the 'offensive comment':



http://www.christian.org.uk/news/christian-hit-with-40-pay-cut-over-facebook-comments/

I wonder if he'd made comments about his drinking escapades at the weekend or his trip to a gay pride event, would he have been demoted? I think not!!!

Can you believe that? Still, I think Christians should not be intimidated, nor silenced.

Disgrace!! But not surprising!

What in the name of ***** is it any business of his employers what he believes or writes on his FB profile?!

Manach

AFAIK, currently proposed UK legislation in this area would allow Churches to opt out of any same-sex marriages ceremonies being held. Saying that, there would be nothing to stop future amendments to impose an obligation on such.

Keaton

I think this issue is one of freedom of expression, and freedom of religion. Although it was possibly imprudent, given the current liberal climate, to express such views, he did so in his own time on his own website, in a reasonable way. It's a pity thought police agents reported him - they were obviously gunning for him.

Keaton

Manach wrote: »

AFAIK, currently proposed UK legislation in this area would allow Churches to opt out of any same-sex marriages ceremonies being held. Saying that, there would be nothing to stop future amendments to impose an obligation on such.

That's not the issue here. The issue is free speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of expression, and the basic right to an opinion.

Kadongy

Personally I think a compelling counter-argument would have been better than a severe disciplinary measure.
I completely disagree with his PoV, but I disagree more with stomping on someone rather than trying to change their mind. It seems very hypocritical in this context too.

The Quadratic Equation

Welcome to the new world, the future is here

gimmebroadband

Those who doesn't give allegiance to the beast (secularism) will be disciplined! :rolleyes:

goose2005

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Those who doesn't give allegiance to the beast (secularism) will be disciplined! :rolleyes:

Funny that in any country where Christian doctrine rules, secularism is seen as "the beast", but when a Christian group is out of power, secularism is great - e.g. the Catholic Church in America is fine with "the secular agenda" because it protects them from the Protestant majority, and Irish Catholics were happy with state secular schools initially because at least they weren't run by the Established church. But as soon as the RCC got the whip-hand in Ireland, everything changed and 'secularism' became a threat.

The Quadratic Equation

goose2005 wrote: »

Funny that in any country where Christian doctrine rules, secularism is seen as "the beast", but when a Christian group is out of power, secularism is great - e.g. the Catholic Church in America is fine with "the secular agenda" because it protects them from the Protestant majority, and Irish Catholics were happy with state secular schools initially because at least they weren't run by the Established church. But as soon as the RCC got the whip-hand in Ireland, everything changed and 'secularism' became a threat.

I remember now what that reminds me of

gimmebroadband

goose2005 wrote: »

Funny that in any country where Christian doctrine rules, secularism is seen as "the beast", but when a Christian group is out of power, secularism is great - e.g. the Catholic Church in America is fine with "the secular agenda" because it protects them from the Protestant majority, and Irish Catholics were happy with state secular schools initially because at least they weren't run by the Established church. But as soon as the RCC got the whip-hand in Ireland, everything changed and 'secularism' became a threat.

Utter rubbish!

Zombrex

gimmebroadband wrote: »

Utter rubbish!

Its not rubbish at all, groups love government when it is protecting their freedom from oppression by others and hate it when it is stopping them oppress others, the Catholic church being by far the best example of this hypocracy.

But anyway this thread isn't about the Catholic church, back on topic this is an unacceptable demotion of this guy (assuming of course the Dail Mail article is accurate which lets be honest isn't normally the case) and if true he should sue the crap out fo Trafford Housing Trust.

homer911

.. just another very good reason not to befriend work colleagues on Facebook

Keylem

homer911 wrote: »

.. just another very good reason not to befriend work colleagues on Facebook

....with friends like that who needs enemies!

alex73

homer911 wrote: »

.. just another very good reason not to befriend work colleagues on Facebook

Exactly. Something similar happened to me some months ago. I posted somthing about as speech the Pope gave and a "Friend" from school on face book got annoyed saying how could I support a Pope who offended Gay people. People with no faith don't understand people with Faith.

I learned my lesson on Facebook... Either use it for close personal friends show share your interests and opinions (as friends do) don't have 500+ people you hardly know and who many be offended.

But then again you have people who get offended when you don't befriend them on FB.. you can't win. I think sooner or later FB will implode when my kids see me on it then won't want to join.

mikemac

I'd understand the boss taking action if you called in sick and there was photos of you on the booze on facebook

But how can you disciplined for stating your view? You may as well report your teammate for what they said down the pub
And it's his own facebook account, not like he was claiming to represent the views of the council and was working as a spokesman

Facebook for friends, linkedin for colleagues I suppose

Following this thread, will be watching the case with interest, I think he'll be successful in his case against the council. Though common sense isn't common in law

Zombrex

homer911 wrote: »

.. just another very good reason not to befriend work colleagues on Facebook

it is also another reason why countries need an american style declaration on secularism, freedom of/from religion and free speech, rather than the adhoc approach Britain takes.

alex73

Zombrex wrote: »

it is also another reason why countries need an american style declaration on secularism, freedom of/from religion and free speech, rather than the adhoc approach Britain takes.

Scary thing... The guy was just pointing out what most real christians believe. Mind you, goes to show his Facebook Friends were not really Friends.

What is needed is respect. This is a total undermining of relgious beliefs. Kind of like a semi communist regime where you had to mind what you said or it would be reported.

Zombrex

alex73 wrote: »

Scary thing... The guy was just pointing out what most real christians believe.

Yes, it is scary that most Christians believe this :P

alex73 wrote: »

What is needed is respect. This is a total undermining of relgious beliefs. Kind of like a semi communist regime where you had to mind what you said or it would be reported.

What is needed is a top down regulation on freedom of speech and freedom of/from religion. And a rethink of hate legislation.

PatricaMcKay2

Zombrex wrote: »

it is also another reason why countries need an american style declaration on secularism, freedom of/from religion and free speech, rather than the adhoc approach Britain takes.

I fully agree.

Secularism as in the seperation of Church and State is supported by the Gospel, Christ was clear that His Kingdom is not of this world, and attempts to fuse Church and State always end up piosonous to both. That said there is another type of "secularism" which aims at the enforcement of its utilitarian hedonistic philosophy across the board. What you are suggesting would safe guard Ireland from both dangers, however the Irish lack the maturity.

cybercellesta

Pope Benedict and the National Secular Society have one thing in common, both welcome the removal of the Church’s privileges.

Pope Benedict made it clear during his State Visit to Germany that he welcomes secularization for liberating the Church from wealth and privilege,because the real danger to the Church is not secularization but Christians who have become worldly:

‘Secularizing trends – whether by expropriation of Church goods,or elimination of privileges or the like – have always meant a profound liberation of the Church from forms of worldliness,for in the process she as it were sets aside her worldly wealth and once again completely embraces her worldly poverty.

http://protectthepope.com/?p=3872

tommy2bad

Keaton, the linked piece is a bit lacking in detail to make a decision. On the surface it seems that he will win the case as this is a clear encroachment on his personal liberty. But the comment 'an equality too far' suggests that he didn't read the original facebook link as it not applicable.
We don't know if his facebook profile is public or not, whether his opinions expressed on facebook would make him unsuitable for the position he held or, apart from whats in the linked article, very little to reach a conclusion.
Oh hang on this from the Daily Mail;

A shocked Mr Smith, who managed a team looking after local housing issues, immediately removed the reference to where he worked from the page.

I guess he's on less sure ground than I thought.

Manach

Zombrex wrote: »

it is also another reason why countries need an american style declaration on secularism, freedom of/from religion and free speech, rather than the adhoc approach Britain takes.

It seems not even the American's are immune from this.
christian-teacher-under-investigation-for-opposing-homosexuality

MrPudding

Zombrex wrote: »

What is needed is a top down regulation on freedom of speech and freedom of/from religion. And a rethink of hate legislation.

There is talk about removing the reference to "likely to insult" from some of the UK legislation. I think this would be a good step. It was that kind of legislation that saw preachers being arrested as well as that atheist muppet that left the pamphlets in a prayer room.

I am not sure how I feel about this case. On the basis of the fact that I can find I think he was silly to say what he said where he said it, but I am not comfortable with the result.

I look forward to the employment tribunal case.

MrP

raah!

It's not fair to say that what this is a result of is "secularism" as understood by catholics who want the government to be neutral to their religion in america. This is the kind of "secularism" espoused by people who conflate "secularism" in an anti-religious agenda. Or who try to hide their anti-religious motives under a banner of secularism.

Punishing a man for making a comment giving his opinion on a certain matter is not secularism. This is nothing short of institutionalised anti religious discrimination, by the kind of people who claim to be champions of "secularism". It just goes to show that they don't understand what secularism is, and why so many people are therefore suspicious of the kind of things that they claim they are standing for under the banner of secularism.

The Quadratic Equation

homer911 wrote: »

.. just another very good reason not to befriend work colleagues on Facebook

Or another good reason to never ever use "Arsebook" in the first place.

Zombrex

Manach wrote: »

It seems not even the American's are immune from this.
christian-teacher-under-investigation-for-opposing-homosexuality

Well that is some what different given that her views directly effect her role as a teacher (ie it is a requirement of her job that she is not intolerant of homosexuals).

If she was a construction worker or a banker who was fired simply because he boss didn't like her attitude, that would be completely different.

And yes this applies both ways, if she was a teacher with an RE class (probably not in America but lets say Ireland) and expressed the view that all religions are cancer on the face of the Earth that would seriously call into question her ability to objectively teach children.

CiaranMT

Manach wrote: »

It seems not even the American's are immune from this.
christian-teacher-under-investigation-for-opposing-homosexuality

All this 'entitled to your own beliefs' stuff... Sure, that's fine. Doesn't mean that the beliefs have to be respected, especially if these beliefs put others at risk of harrassment, unfair treatment or bullying.

Gay children who will feel vulnerable enough as it is in a classroom, knowing they aren't part of the norm, don't benefit in any way from having a teacher who spouts such claptrap.

I'd put the development of these children (straight and gay) way before the rights of the teacher involved to hold her rather retrograde beliefs.

Newsite

CiaranMT wrote: »

All this 'entitled to your own beliefs' stuff... Sure, that's fine. Doesn't mean that the beliefs have to be respected, especially if these beliefs put others at risk of harrassment, unfair treatment or bullying.

Gay children who will feel vulnerable enough as it is in a classroom, knowing they aren't part of the norm, don't benefit in any way from having a teacher who spouts such claptrap.

I'd put the development of these children (straight and gay) way before the rights of the teacher involved to hold her rather retrograde beliefs.

'Claptrap' like the word of God, would that be right?

Newsite

CiaranMT wrote: »

All this 'entitled to your own beliefs' stuff... Sure, that's fine. Doesn't mean that the beliefs have to be respected, especially if these beliefs put others at risk of harrassment, unfair treatment or bullying.

Gay children who will feel vulnerable enough as it is in a classroom, knowing they aren't part of the norm, don't benefit in any way from having a teacher who spouts such claptrap.

I'd put the development of these children (straight and gay) way before the rights of the teacher involved to hold her rather retrograde beliefs.

That'd lead us down an interesting path, wouldn't it? And who decides on this exactly?

Zombrex

Newsite wrote: »

'Claptrap' like the word of God, would that be right?

Well yes, since the word of God was to put practising homosexuals to death.

Thankfully (for gay people at least) society doesn't think like that any more.

HavingCrack

A perfect example of why having facebook is a bad idea.

On the other hand I hope he sues the fcukers for as much as he can. As far as I can see his comment bears no relation to his employment whatsoever and his employer has absolutely no right to cut his pay.

Newsite

Zombrex wrote: »

Well yes, since the word of God was to put practising homosexuals to death.

Thankfully (for gay people at least) society doesn't think like that any more.

Well this guy isn't relying on society to tell him what's right and what's not. Essentially he's being punished and being made an example of because he believes.

It's police state stuff.

CiaranMT

Newsite wrote: »

'Claptrap' like the word of God, would that be right?

It would seem so.

Newsite wrote: »

That'd lead us down an interesting path, wouldn't it? And who decides on this exactly?

A society interested in treating its members equally.

Zombrex

Newsite wrote: »

Well this guy isn't relying on society to tell him what's right and what's not. Essentially he's being punished and being made an example of because he believes.

It's police state stuff.

As opposed to when homosexuals were put to death for homosexual practices because it was the word of God? Yes, clearly things are much worse now...

Manach

It could also be pointed out that official death sentences or state sponsored mobs were the reward of religious believers in the past, being a convenient scapegoat for societal ills. To have religious children taught that their view point is incorrect in matters of social mores also places them in non-favourable developmental position.

PatricaMcKay2

Outside of a few people I believe that there are sociological causes a lot of the time for homosexuality, and its best in order to deal with homosexuality to address them rather than fighting against it head on.

MrPudding

HavingCrack wrote: »

As far as I can see his comment bears no relation to his employment whatsoever and his employer has absolutely no right to cut his pay.

I am in no way saying I agree with what happened here, I have not seen enough information to make an option, though my initial feeling is I am not happy with it, but, it is related to his employer because at the time he made the comments his employer was mentioned on his profile. Again, I am not commented on the rights and wrongs of it, merely pointing out the connection to his his employer that you seem to have missed in the story.

MrP

Zombrex

Manach wrote: »

It could also be pointed out that official death sentences or state sponsored mobs were the reward of religious believers in the past, being a convenient scapegoat for societal ills.

It could be if anyone was harking back to a time when that used to happen, if someone said 'Claptrap' like the teachings of Mao, would that be right?

CiaranMT

PatricaMcKay2 wrote: »

Outside of a few people I believe that there are sociological causes a lot of the time for homosexuality, and its best in order to deal with homosexuality to address them rather than fighting against it head on.

What're these causes? I'm interested to hear.

PatricaMcKay2

CiaranMT wrote: »

What're these causes? I'm interested to hear.

Militarism on one side, hedonistic individualism on the other.

Newsite

CiaranMT wrote: »

A society interested in treating its members equally.

Interesting, seeing as you say you'd put the the 'development of these children' (whatever that means) 'way ahead' of the teacher's rights.

That's equal then? Where the teacher's rights just don't seem as equal as the children's.

HavingCrack

MrPudding wrote: »

I am in no way saying I agree with what happened here, I have not seen enough information to make an option, though my initial feeling is I am not happy with it, but, it is related to his employer because at the time he made the comments his employer was mentioned on his profile. Again, I am not commented on the rights and wrongs of it, merely pointing out the connection to his his employer that you seem to have missed in the story.

MrP

Ah ok, I did actually miss the connection to his employer. I suppose in a manner of speaking it could be argued that he was bringing his employers name into disrepute. All the same we simply don't have enough facts to really make any judgement call on it. The whole story seems far too simplistic to be honest.

HavingCrack

PatricaMcKay2 wrote: »

Militarism on one side, hedonistic individualism on the other.

Militarism causes homosexuality . Well that's a new one I have to admit.

CiaranMT

PatricaMcKay2 wrote: »

Militarism on one side, hedonistic individualism on the other.

Could you expand a little? I'm not aware of these

Newsite wrote: »

Interesting, seeing as you say you'd put the the 'development of these children' (whatever that means) 'way ahead' of the teacher's rights.

That's equal then? Where the teacher's rights just don't seem as equal as the children's.

Would an openly racist teacher be allowed to teach a class (school, even) which includes people outside his race?

PatricaMcKay2

HavingCrack wrote: »

Militarism causes homosexuality . Well that's a new one I have to admit.

Pre-Christian Ireland, Sparta, the FrieKorps and before the military culture in pre-WWI Germany, the Samurai in Japan are all pretty obvious examples. Its cult of masculinity and masculine solidarity and dispargement of the feminine should make that all obvious.

PatricaMcKay2

CiaranMT wrote: »

Could you expand a little? I'm not aware of these

There isnt that much militarism in the south true, but there is a lot in the north. If you cant see the individualistic hedonism of the south than really there is not much point arguing with you.

CiaranMT

Well no I was looking for some papers or articles on the topics, I hadn't heard of these before.

Newsite

CiaranMT wrote: »

Would an openly racist teacher be allowed to teach a class (school, even) which includes people outside his race?

How are you making that leap?

PatricaMcKay2

CiaranMT wrote: »

Well no I was looking for some papers or articles on the topics, I hadn't heard of these before.

In this day and age no one is going to say it out loud but do your own research on societies were homosexuality was prominent.

If a socialist society began in Ireland tomorrow the massive amount of homosexuality here would shrink to a miniscule amount in ten years.