Atlanta Fire Chief Fired for writing book with anti-gay views

[cooks1]

Now this one is interesting. l will be keeping an eye on how this one goes.

http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/06/a...rPUfGjI4IScpjI+SLDwEYGJlv6SgFQrLBMa1ozrgOWxU=

After being fired for writing what’s been described as an “anti-gay” book, former Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran says he “absolutely” wants his job back.

“In the United States of America, Americans should not have to choose between keeping your job and living out your faith,” Cochran told The Daily Signal in an exclusive interview. “And that’s the position the city of Atlanta actually has taken—that I have to have a choice to live out my faith or to keep my job.”

Cochran was fired in January 2015 for publishing a men’s devotional book for a Baptist church group. In the book, “Who Told You That You Were Naked?” Cochran addressed issues of homosexuality, gay marriage and premarital sex from a biblical perspective.

Now, should he be fired for having these views? No. But did the city have the right to fire him for publishing these views contradictory to their policy? I just don't know.

To me, this is a little different than 'the baker refusing to make the cake for the gay couple'. It has not been shown that this man actually discriminated against anyone. On the other side of the coin, this book would be a pretty damning piece of evidence should any gay ever try to sue the fire department. And the fact that he disseminated the book to some, but not all work colleagues does not bode well for him either.

While I clearly disagree with the guy, I am not completely sure I am on board with his getting sacked.

Side Note- Dude does kind of look and sound like a closeted, repressed gay IMO.

 

[Mike]

When will people learn that in a world where you can be fired for pretty much any reason, you cannot say unpopular things and have it get back to your job. They will fire you. It is known.

 

[JDragon]

I'm sure we will get many conservative posters who will not agree with firing him but will vigorously defend his employer's right to do so ...

Is he a public servant? If so, in Germany, there would be very little question that he cannot write a book as he pleases, regardless of leaning, and in any case must adhere to constitutional principles. Did not bother reading the specifics of the case here, though.

Personally, I see it as OP: He is free to have these views, especially as they should not interfere with his professional duties. But as a public servant (according to my German understanding), he simply has limited freedom of speech. That's how it is.

 

[cooks1]

When will people learn that in a world where you can be fired for pretty much any reason, you cannot say unpopular things and have it get back to your job. They will fire you. It is known.

There are certainly a lot of examples to support this. People have a right to express their beliefs, but there is no inherent right to be able to do that completely free of consequence.

 

[IdahoCBR]

There are certainly a lot of examples to support this. People have a right to express their beliefs, but there is no inherent right to be able to do that completely free of consequence.

Exactly.

The guy was allowed to exercise his 1st amendment rights but just didn't like the consequences of doing so.

 

[Mike]

There are certainly a lot of examples to support this. People have a right to express their beliefs, but there is no inherent right to be able to do that completely free of consequence.

Yeah I disagree with it personally, but people should know by now the employer has all the power. If you say or do something they don't like they are going to fire you. Shouldn't come as a surprise.

 

[__Big_D__]

Eh, would you support him being sacked if instead of expressing homophobic thoughts he wrote a book expressing racist thoughts?

 

[klnOmega]

I disagree with the firing.

I don't see it as a legal issue though. I think the city did have the right to fire him. After all, if he is attracting negative, unwanted attention to the firehouse, it makes sense that they might not want him there. Still, I think it would be nice for employers to stick by their employers and try to educated the public that there can be a seperation between personal life and work life. This guy could hate gays with everyone bone in his body, and still be capable of rescuing them from fires when his job calls.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

Doesn't seem like the speech was made in pursuant to his official job duties. Usually speech made by a public official is protected if it is engaged in as a private citizen. From what I recall, for the government to regulate private speech made by an employee on a matter of public importance (morality, SSM..) they can impose only those speech restrictions that are necessary for to operate efficiently and effectively.

I think the guy has a decent case.

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

When will people learn that in a world where you can be fired for pretty much any reason, you cannot say unpopular things and have it get back to your job. They will fire you. It is known.

if he passed the book out to employees, that is a problem. If not IMO it's not how I think it should have been handled.

What if it becomes "unpopular" to critique the president, "unpopular" to talk about religion?

What used to be, I don't agree with what you are saying but I will fight to let you say it has turned into, shut your mouth or lose your job.

Be careful what you defend, it might come back on you one day.

 

[TheComebackKid]

Another blow for freedom

 

[cooks1]

Eh, would you support him being sacked if instead of expressing homophobic thoughts he wrote a book expressing racist thoughts?

While I am certainly pro-gay and pro-gay marriage, I must admit that I would be more supportive of his being sacked if he wrote a book expressing racist thoughts. Though it would have been a little more challenging (though certainly not impossible) for him to find scripture backing up his racism that was to find scripture to back up his anti-gay sentiment.

We are coming to a point in history when our societal intolerance for prejudice is going to increasingly butt heads with religious dogma's advocacy of prejudice. And since freedom of religion and speech are protected, it is going to make for some interesting times.

 

[ripskater]

Was he fired for writing that "homosexual acts are a sin"?

Edit: I read the article and watched the video. That's what he got fired for. Saying it's a sin.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

Exactly.

The guy was allowed to exercise his 1st amendment rights but just didn't like the consequences of doing so.

The city isn't a private employer, they don't get the right to fire people without just cause.

 

[TheComebackKid]

Eh, would you support him being sacked if instead of expressing homophobic thoughts he wrote a book expressing racist thoughts?

Being racists involves hating someone and viewing them as inferior. Disagreeing with a gay lifestyle does not.

Apples and oranges.

 

[Mike]

if he passed the book out to employees, that is a problem. If not IMO it's not how I think it should have been handled.

What if it becomes "unpopular" to critique the president, "unpopular" to talk about religion?

What used to be, I don't agree with what you are saying but I will fight to let you say it has turned into, shut your mouth or lose your job.

Be careful what you defend, it might come back on you one day.

Well I don't support it personally. But people have been ok with at will employment, and employers generally being given more and more power over employees. This is the outcome of that, employees being fired whenever they publically do something the employer doesn't approve of. If people don't like it they need to fight to change the laws to give employees more rights and job security.

 

[ripskater]

The city of Atlanta has a large gay scene. 3rd largest behind San Francisco and Seattle.

 

[ILLogic]

I've known of coworkers getting fired for talking shit about other coworkers on Facebook. They can fire you for anything.

 

[PainIsLIfe]

I don't understand how so many posters in this thread have a double take on what is isn't permissible by an employer.

-This guys can be fired for writing a religious book - presumably because the employer/company (in this case the state) holds all the power.

-A cake maker should be fined for not making a cake - presumably because the company doesn't have any power.

-A college professor's employer can't fire her because she has freedom of expression -presumably because the state can't censure free thought.

 

[__Big_D__]

While I am certainly pro-gay and pro-gay marriage, I must admit that I would be more supportive of his being sacked if he wrote a book expressing racist thoughts. Though it would have been a little more challenging (though certainly not impossible) for him to find scripture backing up his racism that was to find scripture to back up his anti-gay sentiment.

We are coming to a point in history when our societal intolerance for prejudice is going to increasingly butt heads with religious dogma's advocacy of prejudice. And since freedom of religion and speech are protected, it is going to make for some interesting times.

In my opinion I think we're just at another set of crossroads, where acceptance for homosexuality has only recently began to see the same acceptance that race relations did some 60-70 years ago.

Also, isn't homosexuality now protected the same as race is under the law?

Being racists involves hating someone and viewing them as inferior. Disagreeing with a gay lifestyle does not.

Apples and oranges.

Not sure it's apples and oranges as far as the law is concerned. I may be wrong though..