Not Good: A&E Violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act Letting Phil Robertson Go

[Wildman]

Phil wasn't let go because of his religion

He was let go for acting like a bigoted asshole

that is impossible, you libertards have the bigoted asshole category all to yourselves, a monopoly it is so obvious with every post you all make.

 

[paperview]

...
The pedophiles are gaining strength, but they still have a long way to go before they can gain recognition as fine, upstanding Americans.

I know, huh?

"You gotta marry these girls when they're 15 or 16, they'll pick your ducks." - Duck Dynasty dood.

 

[Stephanie]

I don't know why conservatives have so much trouble with this

If when talking about homosexuality, you start babbling about bestiality or pedophilia.....you are going to catch hell for it

When talking about Jim Crow, if you start waxing nostalgic about the good ole days.....you are going to catch hell for it

Of course. The bestiality folks don't have the kind of lobbyists that Gays have.

And even among Gays transsexuals get a bum rap.

The pedophiles are gaining strength, but they still have a long way to go before they can gain recognition as fine, upstanding Americans.

Rednecks are still going strong

And so is your hate for others who don't think like you

 

[mudwhistle]

Nope...and every single one of them believe they should have the right to fire me, not for my behaviors, but my identity as a gay American.

There's no difference.

Being Gay is a behaviour, not an identity. Being monogamous is a behaviour. It's not like once you become Gay you're issued a special status for tax purposes.

Are you only a heterosexual when you are actually screwing?

Depends on who you're screwing....

 

[rightwinger]

Phil wasn't let go because of his religion

He was let go for acting like a bigoted asshole

that is impossible, you libertards have the bigoted asshole category all to yourselves, a monopoly it is so obvious with every post you all make.

Not me...its YOU

Best you could come up with huh?

 

[mudwhistle]

...
The pedophiles are gaining strength, but they still have a long way to go before they can gain recognition as fine, upstanding Americans.

I know, huh?

"You gotta marry these girls when they're 15 or 16, they'll pick your ducks." - Duck Dynasty dood.

Girls mature faster then boys.

In the ME and Africa girls are sometimes married off when they're 12. The boys don't become men till they've hit 30.

 

[jknowgood]

Once again conservatives show they don't understand the difference between behavior and identity.

Nor do liberals know the difference between action and opinion. You act as if his opinion hurt gay people. Well according to the gays that revolted against GLAAD for their role in this debacle, it didn't.

He's entitled to his opinion.

People are entitled to respond to his opinion.

See how that works?

The OP (and those who agree with it) approaches it from another angle though, and show the inability of those conservatives to differentiate between behavior and identity.

I'm sure if a gay person lost their job for acting to gay, you would feel the same way?

 

[Katzndogz]

A&E did not violate anything. They didn't fire Robertson for what he IS but what he SAID. IF there is a morality clause, and we can only assume that there is since no one here has seen it, that clause is inapplicable and void as the statements had approval (evidenced by the network's failure to object at the time) from the network.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Actually not.

First, a review would need to be conducted to determine if indeed the relationship between the network and the cast member actually constitutes an employer/employee relationship subject to Title VII protection.

But assuming such a relationship existed, the cast member wasn’t suspended because he was a Christian, the cast member was suspended because he made false, hateful, and ignorant statements concerning gays and African-Americans that didn’t comport with the networks policies, having nothing to do with Christian doctrine or dogma.

The cast member wasn’t suspended because the network doesn’t want to be associated with Christians, the cast member was suspended because the network doesn’t want to be associated with hateful bigots and racists, which is perfectly legitimate grounds for a suspension.

Exactly. Neither Robertson nor any other actor hired for a series could likely be classified as a salaried "employee". Not to mention anybody on a show like this signs a contract that has a morality clause in it, which basically means any time the Producer sees Talent not living up to the image, for whatever reason, they can can him.

This thread's a complete failure.

This thread is indeed a complete failure, where Robertson’s recourse would be a contract violation claim, not a civil rights violation claim, in that the former would be invalid due to the morals clause, and the latter invalid because there was no ‘religious discrimination.’

Here's where your amateur legal theory goes off the rails...
You stated..."the cast member was suspended because he made false, hateful, and ignorant statements concerning gays and African-Americans that didn’t comport with the networks policies, having nothing to do with Christian doctrine or dogma."...
That is an OPINION based on YOUR views. One cannot have their employment placed in jeopardy over a political viewpoint. Nor can a contract be terminated or altered based on same. Your theory subscribes to the notion that a person can be placed in jeopardy because another person's feelings got hurt.
Look, as this thing progresses, it is clear A&E and the liberal establishment went the wrong way and over reacted. The management of A&E and the left are now paying the price for their lack of self control.
Anyway one looks at this issue, it is a loser for GLAAD, A&E and the lib pundits who got themselves all lathered up about it.
Your side took one in the shorts on this one.
The best course of action would be for you and your lefty buddies to move on to the next cause.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Phil wasn't let go because of his religion

Sorry but you're wrong. He was let go for his religious views on homosexuality.

He was let go for his homophobic remarks.

That he used a 3000 year old book of superstition to rationalize them is besides the point.

That drivel does not dignify anything but contempt.
You should stop posting on this because with each word you lose. You are digging yourself deeper into the crevasse of far left wing moon bat 'ism'....
Quite frankly, your opinion does not matter. You are marginalized

 

[thereisnospoon]

Once again conservatives show they don't understand the difference between behavior and identity.

Nor do liberals know the difference between action and opinion. You act as if his opinion hurt gay people. Well according to the gays that revolted against GLAAD for their role in this debacle, it didn't.

He's entitled to his opinion.

People are entitled to respond to his opinion.

See how that works?

The OP (and those who agree with it) approaches it from another angle though, and show the inability of those conservatives to differentiate between behavior and identity.

Repeating the same inaccuracy does not make it fact.

 

[paperview]

Nor do liberals know the difference between action and opinion. You act as if his opinion hurt gay people. Well according to the gays that revolted against GLAAD for their role in this debacle, it didn't.

He's entitled to his opinion.

People are entitled to respond to his opinion.

See how that works?

The OP (and those who agree with it) approaches it from another angle though, and show the inability of those conservatives to differentiate between behavior and identity.

Repeating the same inaccuracy does not make it fact.

It's not inaccurate.

 

[paperview]

If some Christian employee took to the store announcement system and said: Attention K-Mart shoppers:::: and started reading from Deuteronomy would she be fired for her religion, her identity - or her behavior?

 

[KevinWestern]

Looks like Phil might own A&E after all this is over. Specifically, A&E violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.


Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964:

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. SEC. 2000e-2. [Section 703]

(a) Employer practices

It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer -

(1) to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.


That’s what discrimination is. It's law.

I think you're making an extremely weak argument.

Just because someone is a Christian doesn't mean they're allowed to do whatever they want at their place of employment related to their religion and expect there to be zero consequences. There are still rules, lol. This holds especially true when the individual is a contracted TV personality and is (essentially) representing the views and opinions of the network he/she has been hired by.

A&E is a private company and should be able to fire/suspend whomever they want. Why? Because they're writing the check. At the end of the day it's their network, and I think you all need to stop complaining about a private company doing what it wants with the assets it owns.

 

[Pogo]

Exactly. Neither Robertson nor any other actor hired for a series could likely be classified as a salaried "employee". Not to mention anybody on a show like this signs a contract that has a morality clause in it, which basically means any time the Producer sees Talent not living up to the image, for whatever reason, they can can him.

This thread's a complete failure.

This thread is indeed a complete failure, where Robertson’s recourse would be a contract violation claim, not a civil rights violation claim, in that the former would be invalid due to the morals clause, and the latter invalid because there was no ‘religious discrimination.’

Here's where your amateur legal theory goes off the rails...
You stated..."the cast member was suspended because he made false, hateful, and ignorant statements concerning gays and African-Americans that didn’t comport with the networks policies, having nothing to do with Christian doctrine or dogma."...
That is an OPINION based on YOUR views. One cannot have their employment placed in jeopardy over a political viewpoint. Nor can a contract be terminated or altered based on same. Your theory subscribes to the notion that a person can be placed in jeopardy because another person's feelings got hurt.
Look, as this thing progresses, it is clear A&E and the liberal establishment went the wrong way and over reacted. The management of A&E and the left are now paying the price for their lack of self control.
Anyway one looks at this issue, it is a loser for GLAAD, A&E and the lib pundits who got themselves all lathered up about it.
Your side took one in the shorts on this one.
The best course of action would be for you and your lefty buddies to move on to the next cause.

One's contract can indeed be terminated for: >> "If at any time while Artist is rendering or obligated to render on-camera services for the program hereunder, Artist is involved in any situation or occurrence which subjects Artist to public scandal, disrepute, widespread contempt, public ridicule, [or which is widely deemed by members of the general public, to embarrass, offend, insult or denigrate individuals or groups,] or that will tend to shock, insult or offend the community or public morals or decency or prejudice the Producer in general, then Producer shall have the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action it deems appropriate, including but not limited to terminating the production of the program." <<

Danth declares victory while drowning in legal quicksand. I love it.

 

[J.E.D]

Phil wasn't let go because of his religion

He was let go for acting like a bigoted asshole

Bullshit....The fact is A&E management was aware of the content of the interview months ago.
If quoting the Bible is a form of bigotry, we are doomed as a nation.
Oh, to you 'bigot' is just a label the throw around like a wad of mud, hoping it sticks to those you've deemed 'enemy'..

He didn't get in trouble for quoting the bible. He got in trouble for equating homosexuality to bestiality and saying that pre civil rights blacks were happy to have no rights.,

 

[J.E.D]

Again, he DID NOT COMPARE IT TO BESTIALITY. Can't you guys READ or are you really that ******* dense??? He said bestiality because it is in with A LIST OF SINS according to his belief and which is stated in the bible.

ARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGG

There are a lot of sins listed in the bible

But for some odd reason, conservatives always seem to mention bestiality and pedophilia when discussing homosexuality

Coincidence I guess

Sounds like an pedofile supporter your kind are sick.

Looks like you need to take an English and a spelling class. STAT

 

[hunarcy]

He didn't get in trouble for quoting the bible. He got in trouble for equating homosexuality to bestiality and saying that pre civil rights blacks were happy to have no rights.,

What he said about homosexuality and bestiality and adultery and all that was that all those things were sins and there's no difference in seriousness for sins.

His exact words on blacks were “I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I’m with the blacks, because we’re white trash. We’re going across the field.... They’re singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

Read More Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson Gives Drew Magary a Tour

I'm sure that, to a boy in North Louisiana in the 50's and 60's, a lot was hidden...but he never said they were happy to have no rights.

 

[Pogo]

Nope. Wouldn't even show up in court. Has no basis.

Shows me what a lack of access to the legal system produces. I cant believe how ignorant some of these morons are.

Because people don't agree with you doesn't make them ignorant, and plenty of lawyers have been shocked at how juries rule, regardless of the legalese and letter of the law, idiot.

Here is an example, ass h at.

Lesbian Teacher Wins $170,000 Court Award From Cincinnati Archdiocese | Daily News | NCRegister.com

Lesbian Teacher Wins $170,000 Court Award From Cincinnati Archdiocese (3434)

Jury disregards morals clause in her employment contract, ruling she was wrongfully dismissed after becoming pregnant through artificial insemination.

CINCINNATI — The Archdiocese of Cincinnati has been ordered to pay more than $170,000 in back pay and damages to a former Catholic schoolteacher who sued the archdiocese for firing her after she became pregnant through artificial insemination.

The archdiocese said it was enforcing a morals clause in an employment contract that requires archdiocesan employees to “comply and act consistently in accordance with the stated philosophy and teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.”

However, Christa Dias and her attorney argued that the archdiocese violated her rights under federal pregnancy anti-discrimination laws when it fired her from her teaching job in October 2010. A jury agreed, finding for the plaintiff after a week-long trial in a federal court in Ohio.

On June 3, the jury — after deliberating for two days — awarded Dias $50,000 in back day, $21,000 in compensatory damages and $100,000 in punitive damages, said Dan Andriacco, the communications director for the Archdiocese of Cincinnati.

Phil has a case, if he can find good lawyers to pursue it. And thank God fucktards like you are what compose fascist syndicates like GLAAD.

One glaring difference immediately apparent is that this teacher would have been a salaried employee. An actor on a TV series would not be working under that status. Nor could the school make the case that they're selling an image, as A&E does. And I guarantee you A&E has more knowledgeable and more expensive attorneys drawing up these contracts than the Archdiocese of Cincinnati.

Basically this premise carries the same flaw as the OP -- assuming a legal salaried employee status. An actor on a TV show, which has a finite (renewable) term, would be hired for the duration of that show and specifically for it (in other words Phil Robertson is not going to be asked to run camera for "Hoarders"), therefore he would be hired as an independent contractor, and almost certainly not a SAG member, which represents actual employees.

 

[Pogo]

a Gay Amercian...is that a special class of people?

Where's the box on the census that you check for that?

are you homosexual Amercian
Straight american
brown American
etc

Glad American...
Moody American...
Bitchy American...
Sublime American...



Of course most people would fit into:

Apathetic American