• 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!

Koran burner Derek Fenton booted from his job at NJ Transit

do you know what their code of ethics states?

It doesn't matter.

If their code of ethics said you can't own a gun in you private life they couldn't fire someone for owning a gun either.

A government agencies code of ethics does not trump the Constitution
 
Funny how Free Speech works when he works for THE GOV'T!

That's how free speech works when you work anywhere. If your employee believes that your actions may damage their reputation they are not only within their legal right to FIRE you, it is essential that they do to set an example.
 
That's how free speech works when you work anywhere. If your employee believes that your actions may damage their reputation they are not only within their legal right to FIRE you, it is essential that they do to set an example.

Right has linked to a number of things in this thread showing this is not true. I can tell you as a federal employee we are specifically given training informing us we are absolutely free to engage in whatever political activism we wish, without using our position, on our own free time free of any potential repercussion regardless of what said political activity is sans federal crimes (IE trying to overthrow the government).

The government CAN NOT fire you for expressing a political view
 
Apparently, from what I've read, some restrictions apply to whether or not one can be fired for political views held / expressed [off the clock].
 
I hope he sues the everlovin **** out them for this.

So now bigots are a protected class??

Teachers, cops, get booted for behavior outside of work. As do other public sector employees. You do something off-hours that raises questions about your character or ability to perform your job, then sure, here's your pink slip, asshole, have a nice life.

Is it so hard to understand why we don't want someone whose rage toward Muslims is that out of control working for the transit dept.?? Please tell us you are able to wrap your head around that one...

"He said, 'This is America,' and he wanted to stand up for it, in a Tea Party kind of way," a police source said.

Oops... did he just say burning the Koran is the Tea Party way???
:3oops::3oops:
 
He did.... Though john wayne gacey was a democrat party captian :3oops:
 
Last edited:
So now bigots are a protected class??

Teachers, cops, get booted for behavior outside of work. As do other public sector employees. You do something off-hours that raises questions about your character or ability to perform your job, then sure, here's your pink slip, asshole, have a nice life.

Is it so hard to understand why we don't want someone whose rage toward Muslims is that out of control working for the transit dept.?? Please tell us you are able to wrap your head around that one...



Oops... did he just say burning the Koran is the Tea Party way???
:3oops::3oops:


It doesn't matter what he said. He could have burned the American flag, and I would still be against his firing if he was. You can't be fired for practicing one of your rights off duty when you work for the government. End of story.
 
So now bigots are a protected class??
I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Freedom and Liberty doesn't stop at just what you like hazlnut, I know that you don't understand that, but the rest of us do.
 
The guy was an idiot for burning the koran. It's a meaningless gesture, and he had to know it wasn't going to go over well with people.

That said, he absolutely has the right to do it. And although his firing was probably legal, it's still wrong. Hopefully he sues and wins.

What I don't know is the following:

Do the workers of NJ Transit have a union and does he have a contract? If there is a contract, the terms of the contract are relevant.
What are the "wrongful termination" laws in New Jersey? In many states, even a private employer would not be able to fire for non-work relevant factors.
How much of this is government funded?

Without answers to these questions, I m going to reserve judgement, but my inclination is the support this man's right to be able to speak without losing his job over it.
 
It doesn't matter what he said. He could have burned the American flag, and I would still be against his firing if he was. You can't be fired for practicing one of your rights off duty when you work for the government. End of story.

I'm not sure I agree. You have the right to say what you want, but do you have the right to your job? Yes, it might be morally despicable to fire an otherwise good employee for their off-duty behavior, but a violation of rights? Is there a right to work?

If this were a private sector job I'd be more sure on my opinion, but it is a public sector job so this puts me in the "Hrm, not sure" category.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure I agree. You have the right to say what you want, but do you have the right to your job? Yes, it might be morally despicable to fire an otherwise good employee for their off-duty behavior, but a violation of rights? Is there a right to work?

If this were a private sector job I'd be more sure on my opinion, but it is a public sector job so this puts me in the "Hrm, not sure" category.

The public sector issue is the key reason for it.

Do the following....

Replace Koran with:

The Bible
Dianetics
The American Flag
The Confederate Flag
The Mexican Flag
A reprinting USA Patriot Act
A reprinting of the Stimulus bill
The Democratic party Platform
The Republican party Platform
An image of George Bush
An image of Barack Obama
An image of Jesse Jackson
An image of Jerry Farwell
An Obama birth certificate
A picture of the Twin Towers while wearing a Cheney mask

Do any of you think it should be perfectly allowable for a government agency to fire a government employee that is not referencing or using his job in any way to do those things during his off time. If so, which ones exactly would you be fine with?
 
So now bigots are a protected class??

Teachers, cops, get booted for behavior outside of work. As do other public sector employees. You do something off-hours that raises questions about your character or ability to perform your job, then sure, here's your pink slip, asshole, have a nice life.

Is it so hard to understand why we don't want someone whose rage toward Muslims is that out of control working for the transit dept.?? Please tell us you are able to wrap your head around that one...

And yet you're completely wrong. The government cannot fire employees for engaging in protected speech. This is absolutely indisputable. The only question here is whether this particular speech is protected, and I think the evidence strongly indicates that it is.

If you can't be bothered to read the links that have been provided to you or the explanations that have been proffered, I don't know what to tell you.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't matter what he said. He could have burned the American flag, and I would still be against his firing if he was. You can't be fired for practicing one of your rights off duty when you work for the government. End of story.

If cops were practicing free expression when they posed for playboy or playgirl, why were they fired? Their actions off duty reflects on the police department and per their professional code of conduct, those actions potentially have consequences.

I'm sure the N.J. Transit office employs people of all faiths, and his presence will now be disruptive to the work environment. The state has a right to dictate an ethics code for its employees. Engaging in outrageous displays of hate speech is apparently a violation of that code. He was free to speak his mind, express himself. But as a government employee, that has consequences.

As a government employee, you are supposed to be a guardian of civil rights like freedom of religion however it is expressed in your state constitution. How can a person with this much hate for Muslims and Islam function in that capacity? And how can Muslims working with him or under him be expected to deal with him in a professional way?

Government can not forbid a wingnut priest from burning the Koran, but they certainly can set a code of conduct for those who wish to be employed by the state. When the military, experts in National Security, and DoD say that this type of protest will potentially endanger troops, the DON'T DO IT. Especially if you work for the Government.

From what I've read, this guy realized it was a bad idea right after he did it, but I don't think he can un-ring that bell.
 
And yet you're completely wrong. The government cannot fire employees for engaging in protected speech. This is absolutely indisputable. The only question here is whether this particular speech is protected, and I think the evidence strongly indicates that it is.
They can if they sign a contract (ie - saying they agree with NJ Transit Code of Ethics) when they first got the job.
If you can't be bothered to read the links that have been provided to you or the explanations that have been proffered, I don't know what to tell you.

How about reading this one:
H.S. Teacher Loses Job Over Facebook Posting - News Story - WCVB Boston

This teacher was forced to resign from her job for expressing herself on the social networking site Facebook. She did not do it on school time.

There is a level of professionalism to maintain while working as a federally funded employee.
 
And yet you're completely wrong. The government cannot fire employees for engaging in protected speech. This is absolutely indisputable. The only question here is whether this particular speech is protected, and I think the evidence strongly indicates that it is.

If you can't be bothered to read the links that have been provided to you or the explanations that have been proffered, I don't know what to tell you.

Pipe down, NYC, I skim to the end of the thread and answer the first post directed at me -- like most people. How come I haven't dedicated the last two hours of my life to satisfying you??? I was busy. So chill the frack out.

1) He wasn't fired for engaging in protected speech. He was fired for violating their code of conduct.

2) He was detained and questioned at the scene -- apparently the police thought his actions were bordering on 'yelling fire in a crowded movie house'. Were Muslims present when he did this? How far were they from the location of the proposed cultural center? Could his actions open the floodgates for others to take it a step further?

3) What really hurt him was getting his picture taken. When his name is out there, then his information is out there, and he's the new face of N.J. Transit. That's how he violated their ethics code--a very public act of hate speech. If he was working for a city office in another part of the country, he may not be in trouble.

And I'm getting sick of hearing the ignorant flag burning comparison -- the U.S. flag is a special and unique symbol that represents, in part, the freedom to burn it.

Burning the Koran in NYC, a metropolitan city with a big Muslim population is the equivalent of defecating on the Puerto Rican flag or pissing on a crucifix-- it's pushing the boundaries of free speech given the time and place -- the context.
 
If cops were practicing free expression when they posed for playboy or playgirl, why were they fired? Their actions off duty reflects on the police department and per their professional code of conduct, those actions potentially have consequences.

Police officers are generally treated differently than most government employees due to the manner of their interactions with the public and the autonomy that they wield.

The relevant First Amendment test for when the government may fire an employee for off-duty expression on a matter of public concern (such as the expression here) is unfortunately quite vague: The government may restrict such speech, but only if the restriction is “necessary for their employers to operate efficiently and effectively” (with “necessary” being read a bit loosely). It’s hard for me to see much of an argument that Fenton’s expression interferes with the employer’s effectiveness by undermining public confidence in the employer; Fenton isn’t a spokesman for the employer, or in a position where the public must be able to count on his fairness in exercising discretion with regard to members of the public (e.g., a police officer).

The Volokh Conspiracy » New Jersey Public Transit Employee Fired for Blasphemy


They can if they sign a contract (ie - saying they agree with NJ Transit Code of Ethics) when they first got the job.

So it's your contention that if the government required its employees to sign contracts pledging not to exercise their free speech rights at all, those contracts would be upheld by the courts?

How about reading this one:
H.S. Teacher Loses Job Over Facebook Posting - News Story - WCVB Boston

This teacher was forced to resign from her job for expressing herself on the social networking site Facebook. She did not do it on school time.

There is a level of professionalism to maintain while working as a federally funded employee.

Like police officers, teachers are treated differently due to their unique position. Moreover, the fact that she was fired doesn't speak to the question of whether such a firing was warranted.

Again, you're glossing over the fact that there is a multitude of case law on this.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...booted-his-job-nj-transit.html#post1058985677
 
Last edited:
And I'm getting sick of hearing the ignorant flag burning comparison -- the U.S. flag is a special and unique symbol that represents, in part, the freedom to burn it.

Burning the Koran in NYC, a metropolitan city with a big Muslim population is the equivalent of defecating on the Puerto Rican flag or pissing on a crucifix-- it's pushing the boundaries of free speech given the time and place -- the context.

So you can burn a flag, but not a Koran? Yeah that makes sense. Burning a Koran is protected speech, and to say it isn't is a slap in the face to the Constitution. Also who cares if he burned a Puerto Rican flag, or pissed on a crucifix? Those a protected just the same. And your whole context argument, can go screw itself. You can't be for speech you only like, free speech is in essence protecting unpopular speech, because popular speech doesn't need protecting.
 
Pipe down, NYC, I skim to the end of the thread and answer the first post directed at me -- like most people. How come I haven't dedicated the last two hours of my life to satisfying you??? I was busy. So chill the frack out.

You're blaming me for the fact that you didn't bother to read the thread?

1) He wasn't fired for engaging in protected speech. He was fired for violating their code of conduct.

And again, the government cannot enforce a code of conduct that violates the constitution (even if we assume that his actions violate said code).

2) He was detained and questioned at the scene -- apparently the police thought his actions were bordering on 'yelling fire in a crowded movie house'. Were Muslims present when he did this? How far were they from the location of the proposed cultural center? Could his actions open the floodgates for others to take it a step further?

Thankfully, none of this is relevant under the law.

3) What really hurt him was getting his picture taken. When his name is out there, then his information is out there, and he's the new face of N.J. Transit. That's how he violated their ethics code--a very public act of hate speech. If he was working for a city office in another part of the country, he may not be in trouble.

Again, this is just wrong from beginning to end.

And I'm getting sick of hearing the ignorant flag burning comparison -- the U.S. flag is a special and unique symbol that represents, in part, the freedom to burn it.

Burning the Koran in NYC, a metropolitan city with a big Muslim population is the equivalent of defecating on the Puerto Rican flag or pissing on a crucifix-- it's pushing the boundaries of free speech given the time and place -- the context.

Defecating on the PR flag = unprotected hate speech
Burning the US flag = protected speech

Interesting theory.
 
So you can burn a flag, but not a Koran? Yeah that makes sense. Burning a Koran is protected speech, and to say it isn't is a slap in the face to the Constitution. Also who cares if he burned a Puerto Rican flag, or pissed on a crucifix? Those a protected just the same. And your whole context argument, can go screw itself. You can't be for speech you only like, free speech is in essence protecting unpopular speech, because popular speech doesn't need protecting.

It's all about context. No, burning the Puerto Rican flag is not always covered. If you do it in a manner "Urging or instigating other persons to riot" or otherwise cause a disturbance.

If you're at an event, and because of the time, place, and people involved the situation becomes volatile and you take some action that is meant to get the ball rolling and enrage people even further... No, that is not covered.

Setting fire to something is often the symbolic/literal act of lighting a fuse. And if you are photographed doing this, your boss may feel your services are no longer needed. Clean out your locker.
 
You don't have that right to a job. An employer has the right to choose to terminate an employment agreement at any time. I don't care if it was the government; he wasn't arrested, had his property confiscated, or faced any other civil or criminal penalties. His rights weren't violated. He acted stupidly and is facing the consequences.
 
You don't have that right to a job. An employer has the right to choose to terminate an employment agreement at any time. I don't care if it was the government; he wasn't arrested, had his property confiscated, or faced any other civil or criminal penalties. His rights weren't violated. He acted stupidly and is facing the consequences.

So if Bush fired every single federal employee who disagreed with any administration policy, you think that would be constitutional? What if the government fired every Jewish or black employee?
 
So if Bush fired every single federal employee who disagreed with any administration policy, you think that would be constitutional? What if the government fired every Jewish or black employee?

That would be stupid and a very bad political move, but yes, he does have that right.
 
Back
Top Bottom