Atlanta Ousts Fire Chief Who Has Antigay Views

tres borrachos said:

What on Earth is with the hostile post and the shouting?

Click to expand...

Sorry, tres. I wasn't shouting. I was highlighting for emphasis. It was not my attention to shout at you.

And where did he say he had any "business knowing about the sexual orientation of his employees or their family members"? Are you making things up now?

Click to expand...

He doesn't have any business knowing, that is my point in this instance. However, statistically we can assume that a percentage of people who work under his supervision are homosexual or have sons or daughters or family members who are homosexual. The point is he doesn't know. He did, however, hand out a book that he wrote stating his personal belief about his religion relating to homosexuality. There is no way his alleged actions could make those people feel comfortable about their sexual orientation or about their opinions about sexual orientation or their opinions about his specific religious beliefs. The should not be put in a position where they have their big boss saying in essence "what you do and what you belief is wrong". That is precisely what he is alleged to have done.

And you say he has "no business knowing the religions of his employees". Sorry but there is no law that prohibits his employees from making their religious beliefs known to him or attending the same church as their supervisor.

Click to expand...

Agreed and there is no law requiring employees to inform their employers and supervisors of their religion. Therefore Cochran has no idea unless how many people he supervises are of a particular faith. That alone is a reason for him not to assume. People who aren't of his faith or are a less extreme member of his faith or are of no faith at all should not have to be concerned about how his feelings may effect their employment. Frankly and thankfully, most Christians and most people of other religions and most atheists don't feel compelled to tell their bosses or even their workmates about their religious beliefs. It's off putting at least and coming from a person with Cochran's background it can be a big red flag.

And if you read about this story (which apparently you didn't) you will see that he gave that book to less than 5 people whose religious beliefs were the same as his. And he also gave a copy to the mayor a year ago, and the mayor said he would read it.

Click to expand...

So all the five people share his religion and share his views on his religion and share his views on homosexuality? You don't know. I don't know and neither does Cochran. He assumes. In his high position there he has to know that one hell of a lot of what he hears from people reporting to him is butt kissing.

Re: Atlanta Fire Chief: I was fired because of my Christian faith

EVERYONE has opinions and the God given right as Americans to express those opinions even in written book form. Show me the Chief's employee file with actual discrimination evidence and/or evidence of a hostile work environment. If there is nothing there to support such claims then Mayor Mohammed Kasim Reed should be ashamed of himself for this decision.

matchlight said:

Because they're not really liberals, but the very opposite.

Click to expand...

“Liberals”, in the modern American sense, are very tolerant, as long as they agree with what it is that they are to tolerate. Not so much of opinions and beliefs that they find disagreeable.

But when you think about it, this wrong-wing version of “tolerance” does seem to miss the whole point of tolerance, doesn't it?

Bob Blaylock said:

“Liberals”, in the modern American sense, are very tolerant, as long as they agree with what it is that they are to tolerate. Not so much of opinions and beliefs that they find disagreeable.

But when you think about it, this wrong-wing version of “tolerance” does seem to miss the whole point of tolerance, doesn't it?

Click to expand...

We don't agree with public figures in positions of authority pushing their religion on subordinates. Sorry this bothers you so much.

Do I have this right? The guy was writing a book and asked some of his co-workers to read it? And because it was religious in nature and spoke ill of a protected liberal group of supposed victims the guy was fired? Is this sort of thing strictly prohibited in the Chiefs contract, or is the mayor just scared of the intolerant fascist homo activists raining down on him?

Bob Blaylock said:

“Liberals”, in the modern American sense, are very tolerant, as long as they agree with what it is that they are to tolerate. Not so much of opinions and beliefs that they find disagreeable.

But when you think about it, this wrong-wing version of “tolerance” does seem to miss the whole point of tolerance, doesn't it?

Click to expand...

If disagreeing with someone and saying so makes you intolerant, I guess there's a lot of intolerant people on this site. You included if that's your definition.

WCH said:

Yeah the publishers and distributors of the Gideon Bible should be in prison.

Ever heard of the first amendment?

Click to expand...

nope they haven't.

WCH said:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/07/us/atlanta-ousts-fire-chief-who-has-antigay-views.html?_r=0

ATLANTA — Mayor Kasim Reed announced Tuesday that he had fired the chief of the city’s Fire Rescue Department, Kelvin Cochran, after Mr. Cochran gave workers a religious book he wrote containing passages that condemn homosexuality.

Mr. Reed had suspended Mr. Cochran for a month without pay in November, opening an investigation into whether Mr. Cochran’s authorship and distribution of the book to workers violated the city’s nondiscrimination policies. That move sparked a debate about religious liberty and freedom of expression: Last month, the 1.4-million member Georgia Baptist Convention began an online petition that called for Mr. Cochran’s reinstatement and suggested his First Amendment rights had been violated.

The matter also presents a challenge for Mr. Reed, a second-term Democrat who presides over a metropolis whose social mosaic is defined by strong expressions of Christianity and large and politically powerful gay, lesbian, transgender and bisexual groups.

snip...

Homosexual Agenda strikes again

Click to expand...

They're out to get you.

Fletch said:

Like I said, he was fired for discrimination. Had what he wrote not mentioned homosexuality, he would not have been fired.

Click to expand...

What if he had someone under his command who was openly cheating on a spouse? It seems that Mr. Cochran's book also made mention of adultery along with homosexuality and quite a few other forms of sexual immorality. Would an adulterer among his subordinates have had valid cause to demand him to be fired, for having expressed disapproval of adultery?

Deuce said:

We don't agree with public figures in positions of authority pushing their religion on subordinates.

Click to expand...

Do you have evidence that that is what he was doing here?

fmw said:

Our economy will be in a serious fix if we don't allow employers to fire employees who bring discredit to their organizations.

Click to expand...

Firing a good man for having written a book upholding decent moral values, in order to placate a whining bunch of immoral perverts, brings discredit on an organization.

iguanaman said:

Govt. officials promoting religious views violates the separation of church and state. Why is that so difficult for you? You want a theocracy?
What if he was a Muslim handing out Jihad pamphlets? Still OK with you?

Click to expand...

Firing him for expressing his religious views violates the constitution. the government can't do it. it also violates his freedom of speech.
he has a major lawsuit if he chooses to push it.

PS no one said he was on the clock. he could have been off the clock.
as the SCOTUS has ruled just because you enter a public domain doesn't not mean you give up your 1st amendment rights. they have ruled on this time and time and time again.

Bob Blaylock said:

What if he had someone under his command who was openly cheating on a spouse? It seems that Mr. Cochran's book also made mention of adultery along with homosexuality and quite a few other forms of sexual immorality. Would an adulterer among his subordinates have had valid cause to demand him to be fired, for having expressed disapproval of adultery?

Click to expand...

No. Adulterers have not been granted the official stamp of protected political victim class. No one cares if they are discriminated against.

Bob Blaylock said:

Firing a good man for having written a book upholding decent moral values, in order to placate a whining bunch of immoral perverts, brings discredit on an organization.

Click to expand...

That is still not what happened.

tres borrachos said:

Of course you wouldn't have a problem with it if he spoke publicly in church about his book while not in uniform. I have no idea what that meant.

Click to expand...

It meant exactly what I said. No one is taking away his free speech - as long as he is not representing the city or giving the appearance of representing the city while doing it. Simple as that.

Put him in uniform and have him proselytize and it is an issue. At that point it can be construed that he represents the City of Atlanta. Allow him to do it at work or in a work related function and the city is in essence giving its approval, at least tacitly, for him to use the bully pulpit. That too is a no, no.

And unless someone can demonstrate that he forced his book and/or religion on his subordinates against their will while in uniform, or can show that he in any way discriminated against people in that department, I can't support the idea of terminating him even though I personally find what he said reprehensible.

Click to expand...

If his actions took place in uniform and/or at a work, or related event, the very fact that you are saying if no one complains the behavior OK is exactly what would encourage abuse! You are placing the burden on the employee to out themselves. That is often tantamount to professional suicide. The employee should not be placed in the position to begin with.

Re: Atlanta Fire Chief: I was fired because of my Christian faith

Deuce said:

Because you mentioned a number of people in your post. "Only a few."

The number of times he did it doesn't matter. Who he did it to doesn't matter. He's a supervisor and a public servant, it's not appropriate.

Click to expand...

Where, in the First Amendment, does it say that the rights affirmed therein only belong to those who are neither public servants nor in supervisory positions?

tacomancer said:

This is so obvious

It baffles me that people can't see the issue here

Click to expand...

Same, same me. No religion at work. Not a little bit, not sometimes, not only on break, not my religion, not anyone's religion. Period. How difficult can that be? If you work on the taxpayers nickel no religion at work.

Re: Atlanta Fire Chief: I was fired because of my Christian faith

Amandi said:

Restating the question trying to get a rise out of me because you called sick pervert doesnt [sic] change my answer. The existance [sic] of differeing [sic] views does not cause the hostile work enviroment [sic]; it is the stateing [sic] of those views by a supervisor that does. I would also say that the supervisor handing out literature saying why Christianity is wrong about homosexuality would be inapropriate [sic] as well.

Click to expand...

You seem to be ducking the question.

The matter involves a decent man, of good morals, who wrote a book upholding these morals. The claim is that because there may be some sick perverts working under him, who may find it uncomfortable to work under a leader that they know believes in decent morals, that this is an excuse to fire that leader. The claim to which I was responding wasn't even based on that decent leader treating perverts any differently than other underlings; just the fact that these sick perverts might be uncomfortable working under a leader who upheld the morality that they reject.

So, I am asking; if the fire chief was a sick homosexual pervert, would any decent, moral people working under him have similar cause to feel uncomfortable, and would their discomfort be just cause to fire him?

Or does the privilege of having such consideration given to one's “discomfort” only apply to evil people being uncomfortable with working under good people; and not with good people working under evil people?

OrphanSlug said:

Except that did not happen, his beliefs are not censored. The book is still around and so is his ability to write / speak more about it. He willingly signed an agreement with the city and it looks like he broke the agreement.

Click to expand...

Really? He agreed to waive his First Amendment rights as a condition of working for the city? Since when does government have the authority to require one to give up their most essential Constitutional rights as a condition of employment?

Re: Atlanta Fire Chief: I was fired because of my Christian faith

We has similar nonsense a while back with that NASA guy who handed out DVD's of his sermons to workmates among other stuff. He claimed religious discrimination, he was lawfully laid off during downsizing of the mission.

Re: Atlanta Fire Chief: I was fired because of my Christian faith

CMPancake said:

You avoided the question. Do you believe the Muslim Police Commissioner has the same right to spread his hate speech among his employees as the Christian Fire Chief?

Click to expand...

Of course he does, just as you have the right to characterize the expression of opinions and beliefs with which you disagree as “spread[ing] his hate speech”. Of course, I equally have the right to call you out for the idiocy and dishonesty that you display by so doing; especially if you also claim to be “tolerant”.

Re: Atlanta Fire Chief: I was fired because of my Christian faith

Bob Blaylock said:

Of course he does, just as you have the right to characterize the expression of opinions and beliefs with which you disagree as “spread[ing] his hate speech”. Of course, I equally have the right to call you out for the idiocy and dishonesty that you display by so doing; especially if you also claim to be “tolerant”.

Click to expand...

isn't funny some of the most intolerant people I know of claim the title of tolerance. I don't think they understand what the word means.

Re: Atlanta Fire Chief: I was fired because of my Christian faith

CMPancake said:

But while we're at it, I am very much interested in how you broad stroke the entire LGBT community as evil and vile. Do Gay Firemen and women go to hell for simply being gay, or do they get a free pass because they are willing to put their asses on the line to save people regardless of their skin, creed, religious belieffs [sic], etc?

Click to expand...

Homosexual behavior is immoral. There is nothing wrong or inappropriate about calling it out for what it is, nor about calling out those sick perverts who practice it for what they are.

rocket88 said:

If disagreeing with someone and saying so makes you intolerant, I guess there's a lot of intolerant people on this site. You included if that's your definition.

Click to expand...

At least I do not claim “tolerance” among my virtues, so I am not a hypocrite when I fail to practice it.

ludin said:

Firing him for expressing his religious views violates the constitution. the government can't do it. it also violates his freedom of speech.
he has a major lawsuit if he chooses to push it.

PS no one said he was on the clock. he could have been off the clock.
as the SCOTUS has ruled just because you enter a public domain doesn't not mean you give up your 1st amendment rights. they have ruled on this time and time and time again.

Click to expand...

Indeed, think of what it would mean if politicians were not allowed to freely hold, and express what beliefs they will, and to act in their duties according to their beliefs? The entire process of lawmaking really depends on the ability of lawmakers to discuss and debate their opinions freely, and to author and vote on legislation in accordance therewith.