The issue is we cannot grant privacy in advocacy, this is not safe or sane idea for a functioning democracy. Yes it has a chilling effect, very much so, a person will have to decide where they stand, what they are willing to advocate for, figure out if their actions are worth the fall out. It slows down the petition process, but it also guarantee its transparency and legitimacy. It gives us the ability to know our neighbors. I understand the touchy feelie everyone should be free to expound on what they want to without consequence, it empowers us and makes us feel important. Though it can’t and doesn’t work every action has a consequence and when we remove those consequences in the political process we lose any capability for temperance. Unfetter democracy is dangerous and truly horrible, it’s capricious, tyrannical and hateful. It is one of the most dangerous things out there. It’s why our nation and most other long running governments formed as a republic.

We can observe this as our petition process is being abused and manipulated to tragic ends prop 8, this referendum, unfunded tax cuts, crippled state governments, all because the petition process was used to end run around the protections afforded by the republic, used as a way to avoid our representational democracy. These petitions shouldn’t be singed mindlessly or with no risk.(Honestly a part of me died when someone suggested she may have singed it just so the petitioner wouldn’t have to feel bad or could make a living.) You put your name down for a law to be voted on, you better mean it, because you are calling for action that bypasses the protections put in place by our representational democracy.

The worst scam of this generation has been the hew and cry “Let the people vote.” This removes years of protections and active processes put in place to deny the tyranny of the majority.

So while signing a petition is a constitutionally protected right, the right to do so privately was deliberately omitted, this was not an accident or over site, the reason being there has to be consequences for what we stand for or a small handful of people can prey on the apathy of the masses.

Meanwhile should to put all the political theory aside. At the end of the day, an employer must be free to transfer, demote, move or fire an employee when a genuine conflict of interests arises, otherwise no one from the client to the employees to the employer themselves is safe from abuse or worse.

Post Script: When LGBT people are granted the rights to use tax exempt money to protest at military funerals, or are granted specific exemptions to federal compliance laws then we can make arguments about the government being far to generous when it comes to sexuality.

I love how some of us aren’t paying attention, while others seem to know her intimately. For example, iDavid knows that she’s a typical robot, and apparently he was there and knows whats in her heart and mind. Others have characterized her in ways that, Kithpine is correct in saying, can only be determined by asking her (during her paid administrative leave).

But, again, no one has addressed boundaries. Because those boundaries affect US, folks.

My privacy examples cited are OURS, you guys, not hers – the SCOTUS ruling overturning sodomy laws was entirely hung around the right to privacy (go back and read the decision).

Her enumerated rights here to petition her government are under direct attack, and you’d like to subject them to scrutiny by her employer. An equivalent here would be attending the wrong church and being fired for it. Or attending a political rally and being fired for it. Or being a member of a political party and being fired. It absolutely matters.

Kith, our opponents could so easily turn things around and argue about how society has been too generous when it comes to sexuality, argue that privacy isn’t promised anywhere in the Constitution (in fact, they argue precisely that). The same protections that protect her protect us.

Only fools think that because they happen to be winning the day that the weapons they drag out can’t be turned against them on another day.

And if you think the Constitution and our civil rights are “inane”, then you’re in the wrong country, and you’re not particularly bright. That’s what we’re fighting for every day for ourselves. Your version of extremism scares the crap out of me.

Gee maybe that is why she wasn’t fired outright even though people who work directly with and under her sphere of influence feel wronged, but instead put on PAID ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE while people have time to cool down, consider the legal ramifications and possible conflict of interests. Even if you want to say otherwise, this has created a conflict of interest and that is an offence that can get a person transferred, demoted, re-assigned or yes dare we think it fired.

Actions have consequences, even legal actions constitutionally protected ones, and a person should always be mindful of those consequences.

We as a society have been far too generous when it comes to faith and political action. The only privacy granted the political realm is voting, the only immunity from prying eyes for the stands you take is the voting booth. Everything else, donating money, signing petitions, writing your congressmen, is a matter of public record and it is so for a very good reason, so that your community, your employers, your neighbors, know where you are willing to make a stand and what you are willing to stand up for and so you are mindful of your own actions, words and deeds. Otherwise democracy breaks down to two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner, while all the geese abstain on the agreement they stay off the menu.

She knew exactly what she was doing when she signed the petition because her preacher told her to. Erotically she signed it because she did. None held a gun to her head. She’s a typical robot. But we don’t need religious robots with corrupted data posing as diverse, when they are not.

I agree with removing her from that position, and affording her another position and let her choose to stay or leave. This would assist in preserving her free speech rights and prevent major political fallout. But a two headed monster betraying her job title and her students staying in that position? That’s a bit like working at an ice cream factory then turning off all the electricity before you clock out.

She was also acting as a legislator when she signed that petition. Disclosure laws exist for a reason and have been upheld in courts repeatedly. She had no expectation of privacy when she engaged in politics like that.

It’s “I’ll handle the meat at work, but I’m going to advocate for vegetarianism at home”.

Question – should vegetarians who make no complaint at work about handling meat and do their job effectively, be barred from working in grocery stores that sell meat if they belong to pro-vegetarian or pro-animal-right groups?

It’s not nearly as cut and dry as you pretend.

Maybe she wanted to get it on the ballot so she could vote against it. Or maybe she just wanted to help the signature gatherers earn a living. I’ve signed petitions to get things on the ballot for both reasons.

It ends when people step up and take responsibility for their speech, their actions, when they stop saying “First amendment, I get to keep my job no matter how bad a fit it is!”

The problem is so many people want a free pass, that minor problems get major attention. People say things like

“I want to work as a grocery cashier but my religion doesn’t let me handle meat so the store needs to put a second at my register to touch the meat.”

“I want to work as a cab driver but can’t give rides to scantly clad women, dogs or people with booze, so the cab company has to make reasonable accommodation and let me only pick up only who I want to and in the best parts of the job, like the airport and hotels.”

“I want to work as a public social worker but I want to tell gays they are icky go talk to someone else.”

“I want to work as a pharmacist but I don’t want to pass out drugs I don’t like.”

“I want to work in a catholic school but I want to be a practicing athisist free to tell students god is make believe.”

“I want to work on a diversity council but I want to sign this here paper against diversity.”

It stops when this nonsense stops, protecting peoples rights to employment is about protecting people who can emotionally and physically do the job, not about protecting people who philosophically won’t or can’t do the job.

It stops when people look at their chosen carrier and their chosen life style and there personal philosophies and pick their jobs, based on that. Of course the coin works in the other direction also, employers have to accept the limitations of restricting their potential employee pools, if a catholic school realizes there are not a enough catholic to teach their classes they shouldn’t be able to higher non-catholic’s and force them to convert.

Like I said this is about people stepping up and accepting their actions and their carrier choices and recognizing and taking steps when those should collide.

This case may be an outlier, one where we can see that both sides have a point, but this happens because of all the above examples, the fact that people don’t stop and think about what they do and why, or worse feel like they shouldn’t have to and that their obliviousness should be protected.

AND BECAUSE THIS IS BEING MISSED
She was NOT fired, she is on PAID leave while the school sorts out the issue to see if there is a problem. When she is fired come back with the outrage. Right now the school is doing what they feel is right taking time to analyze the actions and possible conflicts, while removing the person to prevent further conflicts. A paid leave lets the situation be discussed and it gives all time to cool off. I think we’d do far better if more jobs employers took the PAID LEAVE route while investigating situations like this, instead of insisting the problem doesn’t exist, worrying about the bad press or just pulling the trigger and fire them at the first problem.

Am I the only one who finds that it is pretty bad for all these people to come out on this issue acting like a slap on the wrist (paid leave) is a beheading (termination with animus.)

*To clarify, CA is not a right to work state, I live in CA now, I used to live in Nevada which is a Right to Work state.