Heterophobia on the rise????

[GotZoom]

First, I know of no such test showing which public officials have limited free speech and which don't.

Second, the two examples you gave are of elected officials, who are put in office by voters. If they make such statements, it is the responsibility of the voters, not the PC Speech Police, to oust those people. In the case of this story, the board director served at the pleasure of the governor, who obviously took issue with his comments. Nevertheless, the governor should not fire someone for a comment made outside the job on an issue that has nothing to do with someone's job.

I'm really surprised that you, being an ACLU member, would not stand up for someone's right to freely express themselves.

Perhaps he has realized that free speech doesn't apply to everyone at any time they want.

Perhaps he has realized that people declaring their right to free speech and saying/writing something could have a negative effect on something; or worse, result in long term damage.

 

[acludem]

Many of you are trying to meld to completely separate topics into one. Free speech is one thing, decorum and professional conduct is another. By your standards, a Congressman who sits on the ethics committee ought to be able to say "I think ethics rules are bullshit, fuck them." and then go an vote on enforcing them without any recourse. Does this sound stupid to anyone else? Hello! When you are making public policy, it is not a good idea to undermine the confidence of those you serve by making statements about segments of the population or about issues when you are expected to be able to vote and fairly represent the interests of your constituents. This doesn't mean you can't have an opinion. In the case we are discussing, the person in question sits on a committee that makes public policy than directly influence the lives of gay people. It's awfully difficult to believe that he will make decisions fairly when he has stated bluntly that he thinks homosexuality is a sin. No matter how he tries to qualify it, it doesn't matter. Do I think he should be fired, probably not. Do I think he should be reprimanded and asked not to say such things again, absolutely.

acludem

 

[Hobbit]

Many of you are trying to meld to completely separate topics into one. Free speech is one thing, decorum and professional conduct is another. By your standards, a Congressman who sits on the ethics committee ought to be able to say "I think ethics rules are bullshit, fuck them." and then go an vote on enforcing them without any recourse. Does this sound stupid to anyone else? Hello! When you are making public policy, it is not a good idea to undermine the confidence of those you serve by making statements about segments of the population or about issues when you are expected to be able to vote and fairly represent the interests of your constituents. This doesn't mean you can't have an opinion. In the case we are discussing, the person in question sits on a committee that makes public policy than directly influence the lives of gay people. It's awfully difficult to believe that he will make decisions fairly when he has stated bluntly that he thinks homosexuality is a sin. No matter how he tries to qualify it, it doesn't matter. Do I think he should be fired, probably not. Do I think he should be reprimanded and asked not to say such things again, absolutely.

acludem

We're not talking about teachers with tenure here. These are elected officials who can't get anything done without cooperation of other elected officials. If the people are so outraged by his statements that he's no longer qualified to make decisions, he'll be sequestered and soon replaced by the electoral process. You act as though he could immediately go in and change laws singlehandedly.

You're also ignoring the other side of the argument. The guy who had him fired is also a policy maker with significantly more power who has been accused of corruption and who has made several blatantly hateful, blanket statements about a religion that over 70% of U.S. citizens claim to follow, yet he is allowed to keep his job. Why hasn't he been fired for his lack of class or pretense of impartiality?

 

[GotZoom]

Many of you are trying to meld to completely separate topics into one. Free speech is one thing, decorum and professional conduct is another. By your standards, a Congressman who sits on the ethics committee ought to be able to say "I think ethics rules are bullshit, fuck them." and then go an vote on enforcing them without any recourse. Does this sound stupid to anyone else? Hello! When you are making public policy, it is not a good idea to undermine the confidence of those you serve by making statements about segments of the population or about issues when you are expected to be able to vote and fairly represent the interests of your constituents. This doesn't mean you can't have an opinion. In the case we are discussing, the person in question sits on a committee that makes public policy than directly influence the lives of gay people. It's awfully difficult to believe that he will make decisions fairly when he has stated bluntly that he thinks homosexuality is a sin. No matter how he tries to qualify it, it doesn't matter. Do I think he should be fired, probably not. Do I think he should be reprimanded and asked not to say such things again, absolutely.

acludem

But as we see, these two individuals have been treated differently.

Graham can blast and insult Catholics and "ex-gays" all he wants; without the fear of retribution.

Let's make a list: Oh goody... (trimmed from original post)

-----

Washington Metro board director and practicing Catholic Robert J. Smith:

He appeared on a local cable show as the Republican pointman to discuss gay marriage. Smith commented that, as a Roman Catholic, he believed homosexual behavior to be deviant in comparison to heterosexual behavior.

-----

Council Member Jim Graham:

In 2003, when he was a chair of the Metro Board, Graham remarked that he found PFOX's subway advertisements urging tolerance for ex-gays to be offensive and deplorable. In fact, he was so against PFOX's philosophy that he and the Metro Board eliminated free non-profit ad space which had enabled PFOX and other non-profits to place ads. Not just that, but he also proposed an amendment to extend the deadline for free ad space so that two gay activist organizations could take advantage of the free space.

In 2000, Mr. Graham, in his in his official role as a D.C. councilmember, when the D.C. City Council rejected a conscience clause to exempt Catholic organizations from being forced to purchase health insurance employee plans that covered artificial birth control, Graham lashed out at the Pope and the Washington Archdiocese for practicing the Catholic religion. He remarked
that he had spent years fighting church dogma and reportedly called
the Roman Catholic church a homophobic church.

-----

We have proof that Mr. Graham can't separate personal beliefs from how he votes and acts in an official capacity.

So far, we have no proof about Mr. Smith.

But Smith gets fired.

Once again, the pro-gay agenda dictates policy.

 

[5stringJeff]

Many of you are trying to meld to completely separate topics into one. Free speech is one thing, decorum and professional conduct is another. By your standards, a Congressman who sits on the ethics committee ought to be able to say "I think ethics rules are bullshit, fuck them." and then go an vote on enforcing them without any recourse. Does this sound stupid to anyone else? Hello! When you are making public policy, it is not a good idea to undermine the confidence of those you serve by making statements about segments of the population or about issues when you are expected to be able to vote and fairly represent the interests of your constituents. This doesn't mean you can't have an opinion. In the case we are discussing, the person in question sits on a committee that makes public policy than directly influence the lives of gay people. It's awfully difficult to believe that he will make decisions fairly when he has stated bluntly that he thinks homosexuality is a sin. No matter how he tries to qualify it, it doesn't matter. Do I think he should be fired, probably not. Do I think he should be reprimanded and asked not to say such things again, absolutely.

acludem

Again, you are confusing legislative branch members, accountable to voters, and executive branch appointees, accountable to the governor. The former can say whatever the hell they want, but have to face the voters. The latter should be able to say whatever the hell they want, but are accountable to their bosses (in this case, the governor).

And how on earth is this person directly affecting gays in his work? What's he going to do, put a big sign on the buses and trains in DC that say "Gays, sit in back?"

Now I will agree that it may not be a good idea to say such things while in such a position. However, holding and expressing differeing ideas doesn't justify firing someone.

 

[acludem]

What statements has he made about Christianity? If he has made blatantly derogatory statements, then he should be reprimanded. As for the corruption, that's a whole separate issue. The guy who made the anti-gay remark is not an elected official, he's appointed. Elected officials should be held to an even higher standard of conduct and decorum, you'd hope the people would have the sense to vote out someone like this, but unfortunately many people share his anti-gay views and would vote for him on that basis alone.

Free speech rights must be exercised with common sense and a sense of duty when you are working for the public. That doesn't mean you aren't entitled to express your opinions, it doesn't mean I wouldn't fight for your right to do so, it does mean you should exercise common sense and use decorum.

acludem

 

[5stringJeff]

Free speech rights must be exercised with common sense and a sense of duty when you are working for the public. That doesn't mean you aren't entitled to express your opinions, it doesn't mean I wouldn't fight for your right to do so, it does mean you should exercise common sense and use decorum.

acludem

But, apparently, you don't think it's worth fighting for this guy's rights to speak, as you've implied throughout this thread.

 

[GotZoom]

But, apparently, you don't think it's worth fighting for this guy's rights to speak, as you've implied throughout this thread.

I'm sure the amount of fight is equal to the amount of dollars Mr. Smith has donated to the ACLU.

 

[American_Jihad]

Taxpayer money helps fund 'heterophobia'

Matt C. Abbott
10/19/12


Not only does taxpayer money help fund Planned Parenthood and the killing of unborn children; it also helps fund "heterophobia."

From Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays (PFOX):

In a letter to the Centers for Disease Control, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays is asking President Obama's administration to stop promoting websites of organizations and publications that denigrate Christian ex-gay ministries and former homosexuals.

The CDC's federal government website, 'Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Health Youth Sources' ... links to gay activist organizations and homosexual resources for youth and parents, but fails to include links to organizations or resources for parents who do not affirm homosexual behavior, or for youth with unwanted same-sex attractions....

The CDC gave away over $100,000 in taxpayer money to fund [a] homosexual/transvestite 'youth activist' program....

---


Look, I'm all for reasonable anti-bullying efforts, for bullying is indeed a serious problem among the youth in our society. However, it's ridiculous to assert or insinuate that merely refusing to affirm homosexual activity constitutes "homophobic" bullying. It's even more ridiculous for the government to be funding groups that essentially advocate the persecution of those who defend and promote the natural law.

Homosexual activism certainly doesn't need taxpayer money.



Read more: Blog: Taxpayer money helps fund 'heterophobia'

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Heterophobia. Is that where you can't stop bleeding?

 

[American_Jihad]

Heterophobia. Is that where you can't stop bleeding?

Google

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Heterophobia. Is that where you can't stop bleeding?

Google

Thank you. Don't forget to tip your waitress.