• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Firefighter Suspended Over Flag Sticker

B

Bzus

New member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
Location
The Dirty South
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The explanation is within the article you linked.

He said he was told displaying the sticker on the outside of the locker is a violation of department policy. Personal items can be posted inside the lockers.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with it being a flag, it has to do with him breaking a rule and refusing to comply. Nothing wrong with that.
 
This is the kind of dumbass rules you get when ****ing idiots bitch and moan and scream 'offensive' at the tiniest bull**** things.
 
rivrrat said:
This is the kind of dumbass rules you get when ****ing idiots bitch and moan and scream 'offensive' at the tiniest bull**** things.
Click to expand...

pretty much sums it up...
 
Metternich said:
This is one of those incidents when common sense should trump regulation.
Click to expand...

No, this is a situation where you can change the rules if you don't like it, but any one who refuses to obey them should be punished. When the guy refused to remove it after being told it was against regulations, he forced management to give him a penalty.
 
rivrrat said:
This is the kind of dumbass rules you get when ****ing idiots bitch and moan and scream 'offensive' at the tiniest bull**** things.
Click to expand...

The rules have nothing to do with any one being offended, it has to do with trying to keep a locker room neat and clean looking. Hysteria is not needed, it's a common rule. We have lockers for our coats and purses at work, and we are not allowed to display anything on the outside either. It's not a big deal.
 
This could be anything beside a flag. It just happened to be a flag.

This is one of those incidents when common sense should trump regulation.
Click to expand...

I don't resent common sense in those situations where it triumphs over principled rule of conduct, but neither do I resent principled rule of conduct when it triumphs over common sense. They are both important and don't deserve special privileges over the other. Winner take all.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
The rules have nothing to do with any one being offended, it has to do with trying to keep a locker room neat and clean looking. Hysteria is not needed, it's a common rule. We have lockers for our coats and purses at work, and we are not allowed to display anything on the outside either. It's not a big deal.
Click to expand...

If you read the article, you'll see that the rule did indeed come about because someone was "offended".
 
Morality Games said:
I don't resent common sense in those situations where it triumphs over principled rule of conduct, but neither do I resent principled rule of conduct when it triumphs over common sense. They are both important and don't deserve special privileges over the other. Winner take all.
Click to expand...

Rule of conduct? Concerning... Sticker placement?

Do you realize how absurd you just sounded?

Yes, you got me Morality Games, I resent the prinipled rule of conduct concerning sticker placement on my locker. Boy, you really made me look absurd. :lol:

Redress said:
No, this is a situation where you can change the rules if you don't like it, but any one who refuses to obey them should be punished. When the guy refused to remove it after being told it was against regulations, he forced management to give him a penalty.
Click to expand...

You should remember that we can't hear the invocation of the words you type, so when you say "punished" and make references to "forced management" it makes you seem a little insane. I'm all for blowing things out of proportion, but seriously: was there never a reductio ad absurdum you didn't like?
 
rivrrat said:
If you read the article, you'll see that the rule did indeed come about because someone was "offended".
Click to expand...

Not because of the flag. They were offended by some racially-offensive cartoon that someone posted on their locker, so the fire department just made a general rule that you couldn't post stuff on the outside of your locker anymore. Seems perfectly reasonable.

This guy is now asking the fire department to make an exception for him. He knew the rule and he CHOSE to make a big stink out of it. The fact that he went to the media and tried to make it seem like they found the American flag offensive just shows that he's a publicity whore, not someone with a legitimate grievance. This guy is not a unique snowflake; he has to follow the same rules as everyone else.
 
Rule of conduct? Concerning... Sticker placement?

Do you realize how absurd you just sounded?

Yes, you got me Morality Games, I resent the prinipled rule of conduct concerning sticker placement on my locker. Boy, you really made me look absurd.
Click to expand...

Symbols in general, not just stickers. I'm not sure what the most compelling motivation is behind the policy, but it is sufficiently important that the persons involved have determined it will be enforced. It could be that someone has in the past (or could in the future) posted a symbol which undermines group cohesion because its political, religious, or moral connotations flout the sensibilities of a significant number in the department. Group cohesion is as essential among fire men as it is among the police or the army, so naturally there would be measures for addressing such concerns. The prohibition on symbols on lockers might be part of a broader policy, perhaps a dumper part, but still one that needs to be upheld to maintain the integrity of the whole. That's my guess.
 
rivrrat said:
If you read the article, you'll see that the rule did indeed come about because someone was "offended".
Click to expand...

You are correct, but they where offended at a potentially racist cartoon. Most work places would do the same. No one was offended by the flag sticker.
 
Metternich said:
You should remember that we can't hear the invocation of the words you type, so when you say "punished" and make references to "forced management" it makes you seem a little insane. I'm all for blowing things out of proportion, but seriously: was there never a reductio ad absurdum you didn't like?
Click to expand...

I am a law and order type. If you cannot follow rules, you deserve what happens as a result. The guy was warned, chose to ignore the warning, and as such has no room to bitch that management followed through.
 
Redress said:
The explanation is within the article you linked.



It has nothing to do with it being a flag, it has to do with him breaking a rule and refusing to comply. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...
So you feel that any rule is justified by the fact that it is a rule.

Intersting. So, how do you justify any objection or rebellion against any rule anywhere?
 
Oftencold said:
So you feel that any rule is justified by the fact that it is a rule.

Intersting. So, how do you justify any objection or rebellion against any rule anywhere?
Click to expand...

If you don't like the rules, change them. But if you disobey the rules, then you suffer the consequences.
 
Probably they made an all encompassing rule regarding lockers because the fire dept. administration has better things to do than policing lockers. It's easier to ban everything. This firefighter only has the doofus to thank who posted the racially offensive cartoon. That firefighter should have had more common sense than that.
 
winston53660 said:
So say a fire fighter put the hammer and sickle on their locker?
Click to expand...

American flag... Equals a Hammer and Sickle? Sorry, try again.

Redress said:
I am a law and order type. If you cannot follow rules, you deserve what happens as a result. The guy was warned, chose to ignore the warning, and as such has no room to bitch that management followed through.
Click to expand...

This law is not based on justice, and inspires no order.

Morality Games said:
Symbols in general, not just stickers. I'm not sure what the most compelling motivation is behind the policy, but it is sufficiently important that the persons involved have determined it will be enforced. It could be that someone has in the past (or could in the future) posted a symbol which undermines group cohesion because its political, religious, or moral connotations flout the sensibilities of a significant number in the department. Group cohesion is as essential among fire men as it is among the police or the army, so naturally there would be measures for addressing such concerns. The prohibition on symbols on lockers might be part of a broader policy, perhaps a dumper part, but still one that needs to be upheld to maintain the integrity of the whole. That's my guess.
Click to expand...

What about symbols that increase group cohesion? Like, for instance, an America flag?

Kandahar said:
This guy is now asking the fire department to make an exception for him. He knew the rule and he CHOSE to make a big stink out of it. The fact that he went to the media and tried to make it seem like they found the American flag offensive just shows that he's a publicity whore, not someone with a legitimate grievance. This guy is not a unique snowflake; he has to follow the same rules as everyone else.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the 24-hour news cycle. It's been this way for a while, a little late to bring up the publicity whore card because it can be used on almost anything broadcast these days.
 
Metternich said:
What? An American flag is not a Crescent Moon or a Peace Sign; it's an American flag.

Stop being cute, what's your point?
Click to expand...

If one person is allowed to post a symbol on their locker why shouldn't other people be allowed to post the symbol of their choice?
 
Redress said:
The explanation is within the article you linked.



It has nothing to do with it being a flag, it has to do with him breaking a rule and refusing to comply. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...
Here we go again impuning heros. Just like the boy scout in the other thread I see a pattern forming. Let's start standing them against the wall for putting a sticker of an American flag on their locker, with a real flag fluttering in the wind outside the building. Redress, you're losing credibility fast, really fast. Make me want to puke how liberals hide behind regulations to spew their hate while defending the dismantalization of the Constitution. Hypocrites all of them.
 
winston53660 said:
If one person is allowed to post a symbol on their locker why shouldn't other people be allowed to post the symbol of their choice?
Click to expand...

I think some people feel that this is the United States of America, and our flag should not be offensive to anyone who chooses to live here, even immigrants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom