I went to the link. I read the whole story. In this case under a blanket dress code violation of expression of religious beliefs, I totally agree with Home Depot's decision. What if their dress code says you can't wear, or sport anything sexually offensive, by what you might have written in print on anything you wear, or what you reveal of your own self physically. Hey, I love God and my Country too, and I'm not afraid to say so. I also love Pussy. If I wore a pin that said, "I Love Pussy", it would be no more or less of a dress code violation than If I wore a "One Nation Under God" pin. The violation was a violation weather you like it or not. It all boils down to their dress code, which they have every right to enforce. The bottom line is dress code. I'm actually surprised this even made the news. Its yellow journalism. It may as well have been in the National Inquirer. It's not news, It's everyday business. It's a company upholding their end of the contract, and the employee breaching his end by refusing to abide by the dress code he agreed to in the first place. Its the overly Christian Righteous who don't give a shit about freedom of religion for (ALL) people not just Christians who made a story out of someone who refused to do what he agreed to in his employment contract. Lest not forget that this is not an issue about freedom of speech and One Nation under God, so much as an issue of a dress code violation. If I owned the Company, or managed, it, I'd of fired his sorry ass for insubordination, and dress code violation. Sorry I got long winded here. Rant Done.
Mr M is right..but. There are times when we ALL turn a cheek. This is one time they could have done that.
I don't disagree that there are times to turn a cheek, but that is my Christian beliefs and values speaking. If I was a Muslim, or Jewish, or anything else, I don't think I would agree to turning a Cheek in this particular case. Also, we have no idea if there was an underlying reason to fire the guy beyond his button. (I'm just totally guessing here), but maybe he was a lazy worker, or something else that would be hard to fire someone for, and this was the easy solid way to pin the tail on the donkey, and fire him. You can dislike the reason, but you can't deny they had a right to fire him on the basis of dress code violation, and it would hold up in court. Saying he was a lazy worker opens the door to interpretation.
I just wonder why they didn't say anything for the year he claims he's been wearing it? Sounds like there's more to the story. Maybe bringing his Bible to work is a clue. Sometimes good people cross the line with trying to get other people to believe like they do. Agree with Mr M - this is a case of a company enforcing their rules.
I can not follow the logic that a Jewish person would be offended by "One Nation Under God" as they believe in God. The button did not say "One Nation under Jesus".Additionally, I was REQUIRED to serve jury duty last week. It was not an option, I was served with a summons. And one of the first things they did, was ask us to stand and say the Pledge of Allegiance which states "One Nation Under God." I find it very interesting he had worn it a year before the stink was kicked up, and that they offered him another button saying "United We Stand" which isn't in the Pledge of Allegiance or on our currency, etc.I think there is an underlying story here that may come out in the days ahead.-Peace
I also read the whole story and I agree with Mr. M. Boy, won't he be surprised!The bottom line here is a privately owned business has every right to set a dress policy for employees. Guess what, if you don't like the policy, you have the option of working for somebody else. Taking the job implies consent to said policy. Period. There is no gray area here. It is as black and white as how long you get for lunch and how much you get paid.I'm frankly sick of the Jesus freaks out there who think that anything referring to "God" is ok to plaster anyplace they wish because of our right to freedom of religion. The pledge of allegiance does contain the words "one nation under God," despite another set of laws we have which call for the SEPARATION of church and State. It shouldn't be there. Plenty of people in this country don't believe in God, but they are still American citizens with equal rights to be either inspired or offended.Now, you take that into a nation-wide place of business like Home Cheapo. Every person who wears the orange apron represents that company. If it was my company, I know damned well I wouldn't want ANY of my people wearing or displaying any sort of message while on the clock unless I personally approved of it.The room for debate is whether or not that dress policy is discriminatory or in violation of a person's rights. That's where my favorite part of the story comes in - comments from a professor of civil rights and employment law.1. A private business DOES NOT have to by law operate under the provisions of the First Amendment.2. This guy's button is not a traditional form of religious expression, such as wearing a cross, or a yarmulke. It falls into the category of making a political statement, and a private company is well within its right to prohibit employees from making such statements on company time.Is it odd that he got away with it for a year before they did something about it? Sure. Then again, if you were jerking off in the handicapped stall every day during coffee break for a year until they finally caught you, does that mean you shouldn't be fired?? Hello?I agree that it is contradictory and in many ways silly that wearing a button with words from the pledge of allegiance on it can get you fired from your job, but the law is the law.As far as I'm concerned there's only one place for God or any other religious beliefs, and that's within a person's own heart. I have no tolerance for zealots who feel the need to sell their convictions to others. The last time a Jehovah's Witness came walking up my driveway, I gave him 30 seconds to run.
Joker, I'm not surprised; but I am pleased. It's nothing more than taking your beliefs and opinions out of the equation and looking at just the facts. Facts are facts. Its simple.
Dear Mr. Madding --Like most things, this is a tough call. Quite frankly, I don't think any workplace circumstances should take precedence over the First Amendment. On the other hand, it can be argued -- strenously -- that employees should not wear accouterments that could engender the commerce of their employer. I too am not pleased with certain aspects of the religious right that pursue dogma with the same ambition as the godless left. I also suspect there is an underlying story here... Had I been the manager of tht Home Depot store, I would have attempted to reach a less public and more satisfying arrangement than the current one.I do not shop at Home Depot under any circumstances. I prefer the much smaller, better informed old-fashioned hardware store in town... That Home Depot has been trying to put out of business for years. Fondest regards,Jack • reep • ToadTwisted Roads
Post a Comment