Worker fired for burning Koran

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Mac'nCheese, Sep 16, 2010.

  1. Mac'nCheese macrumors 68030

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
  2. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #2
    He should not have been fired. I would love to see the ACLU take up this case, but I'm betting they won't.
     
  3. steviem macrumors 68020

    steviem

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Location:
    New York, Baby!
  4. supercaliber macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2007
    #4
    I am 100% supportive of the mosque btw, however, Muslim terrorists have won the day if you ask me.

    If he burned the bible or the Torah nobody would care, but the Koran, my hell!!

    The extreme acts of terrorists HAVE created a bias in our society right now. We treat any overt public act against the Muslim religion as a threat to our safety. Sweet Lord have mercy.

    I can't beleive France had the balls to discriminate against the Bur-qua (a stupid law btw)
     
  5. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #5
    I believe that people should have the freedom to be as stupid as they like... on their own time.
     
  6. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #6
    The same way. Personally, I feel it is disrespectful to bury any religion's holy books. However, he was on his own time away from his job. They have no right or real reason to fire him.
     
  7. kavika411 macrumors 6502a

    kavika411

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    Alabama
    #7
    Based solely on that tiny "article," and assuming Jersey is an "employment at will" state (which I don't know whether they are), they had the right to fire him because his actions were on his own time and did not constitute a "protected class" activity. Had they learned he worshipped at a mosque over the weekend, and fired him for that reason, his termination would have been unlawful.

    I am not, of course, addressing the "rightness" of their actions. Just the legality.

    May edit when I learn more.
     
  8. MattSepeta macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #8
    Afaik

    As far as I can tell from the article... It was on his own time.

    If ACLU wants to maintain a SHRED of consistency they better represent this guy the same as they have others.

    Wagers?
     
  9. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #9
    He should be immediately re-instated, however if a Muslim co-worker chose to take it up with him the resulting decisions on how to deal with the situation should take this into account. He has every right to make a political or religious statement. By the same logic has also has to face any potential consequences.
     
  10. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #10
    With the information presented so far I agree with the ACLU, not with Governor Christie.

     
  11. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #12
    That's the impression I got too.

    If we started firing people for the idiotic things they did over the weekend, the unemployment rate would be far worse than it is today.
     
  12. chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #13
    Not much to argue. His legal rights were clearly violated.
     
  13. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #14
    OMG. Liberals and conservatives agree on something!

    Lock this thread down now before we start arguing again!
     
  14. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #15
    Liberals are generally in favor of free speech....even if we believe people are being hateful bigoted morons.
     
  15. chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #16
    It's pretty clear cut around here. (and both sides do it)

    1) Post inflammatory article with clear legal solution that appeals to one political bias, has little potential for meaningful discussion.

    2) Wait for opposite side to try and engage article with opposing opinion.

    3) Claim miracle when it doesn't happen.
     
  16. Mac'nCheese thread starter macrumors 68030

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #17

    New Jersey is an employment at will state.
     
  17. Mac'nCheese thread starter macrumors 68030

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #18
    Why do you think this has little potential for meaningful discussion? I can see both sides of view and since I'm working alone today, thought I start a discussion about something that caught my attention.
     
  18. MattSepeta macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #19
    Mighty bold statement to make. May I direct you here?

    That aside, your statement is so incredibly inaccurate, I have no idea where to begin?

    - In 2004 Rep. Louise
    Slaughter (D-New York) introduced HR 4710, “The MEDIA Act” (Meaningful
    Expression of Democracy in America), to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.

    I invite you to show me some examples of conservatives stifling free speech through legislation?
     
  19. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #20
    He shouldn't have been fired, bottom line. No discussion needed.

    I disagree. The war between Christian and Islmic fundamentalists is getting top billing here in the US (and much of the West), but any public burning of religious books is going to be seen as offensive by most people, or at least most will see it as a provocative act.
     
  20. chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #21
    Ahem,

     
  21. Mac'nCheese thread starter macrumors 68030

    Mac'nCheese

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2010
    #22
    Just because some people can't have a meaningful discussion, should we not even try. Should we not start any threads because someone might not be able to handle a discussion in a way you don't approve of?
     
  22. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #23
  23. chrmjenkins macrumors 603

    chrmjenkins

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    CA
    #24
    I make no claim of being an authority on what a meaningful discussion is. I'm just pointing out a common tactic.

    If you want to have a meaningful bilateral discussion, it's usually best not to state the conclusion in your opening question. ;)
     
  24. MattSepeta macrumors 65816

    MattSepeta

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Location:
    375th St. Y
    #25
    Excuse me? A poster made an outrageous blanket condemnation with no source, no facts, nothing. I provided two facts showing his statement to be inacurate, inviting him to elaborate or validate his initial statement.

    It had EVERYTHING to do with the topic as well. I even linked to a different thread on the same topic.

    But no, your right. I'm just being a negative force deteriorating the quality of the conversation.
     

Share This Page