Box Turtle Bulletin
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobby“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
News and commentary about the anti-gay lobbyApril 28th, 2014
TODAY’S AGENDA is brought to you by:
From the Advocate, April 14, 1983, page 67.
Uncle Charlie’s began in two Manhattan locations in the mid 1970s: Uncle Charlie’s North was at 1049 Lexington Avenue near 75th street in the Upper East Side, and Uncle Charlie’s South was at 581 3rd Avenue at 38th Street in the Murray Hill neighborhood. The north location eventually closed (it is now a specialty stationary story), and South was joined by Uncle Charlie’s restaurant across the street and down a block at 542 3rd Avenue. Uncle Charlie’s Downtown opened on Greenwich Avenue at around 1980. I don’t know when Uncle Charlie’s South or the restaurant closed, but South today is home to a sushi bar, and the restaurant location became a Mediterranean bar and restaurant. Uncle Charlie’s Downtown closed in 1997 and became an Irish pub. Uncle Charlie’s is still around (although I’m not quite sure of its provenance) as a gay piano bar.
TODAY IN HISTORY:
Gay Bar Bombed in Greenwich Village: 1990. A home-made pipe bomb exploded shortly after midnight early Saturday morning at Uncle Charlie’s Downtown Bar, a popular video-bar in Greenwich Village. Damage to the building was described as minor, but at least three patrons were injured. Frizzell Green, said he was in the bar when the blast went off in a trash can, about five or six feet away from him. At first, police investigators told reporters that they didn’t consider the bombing to be bias-related. Gay rights activists disagreed, and organized a march on Saturday evening. Three to five hundred people gathered at Uncle Charlie’s and walked the ten blocks to the Sixth Precinct, blocking traffic and chanting “Hey, hey, ho, ho! Homophobia has got to go!”
The bombing went unsolved for five years, until February 1995 when Federal prosecutors charged El Sayyid A. Nosair with the attack. Nosair, one of the leaders of a fundamentalist Islamic terrorist group, was already serving a prison sentence for assault and possession of an illegal firearm in connection with the murder of radical Jewish Rabbi Meir Kahane. Bizarrely, the jury acquitted him of murder, leaving the judge in December 1991 to sentence Nosair to 7â…“ to 22 years in prison, the maximum allowed by law. So when Federal officials charged him again in 1995 for bombing the gay bar and conspiring to blow up other New York landmarks including the World Trade Center, he was found guilty of seditious conspiracy with other defendants, including the blind sheik, Omar Abdel Rahman, and sentenced to life imprisonment. At last report, Nosair was serving his sentence at the federal Supermax facility in Florence, Colorado.
TODAY’s BIRTHDAY:
Ryan Skipper: 1981-2007. Ryan would be celebrating his thirty-third birthday if Joseph Beardon and William Brown, Jr., hadn’t stabbed him more than 20 times, slit his throat, stole his car, left his body on a dark rural road in Wahneta, Florida, and bragged to friends that they killed him because he was “a faggot” on March 14, 2007. Jurors in Beardon and Brown’s trial were visibly shaken when they saw the autopsy photos. The coroner testified that it was the cut to the throat that killed him. The cut was 3.5 inches deep, tearing through skin, tissue, muscles and, more fatally, an artery. Ryan quickly bled to death within minutes. Bearden and Brown tried to clean the car so they could sell it. But it was too badly soaked with blood to be cleaned and they didn’t have a copy of the car’s title to sell it, so they abandoned it on a dock on Lake Pansy in Winter Haven and set it on fire. The flames only caused minor damage, and investigators were able to retrieve both of their fingerprints from the car.
Prosecutors had sought the death penalty for Bearden, but jurors found him guilty of second-degree murder instead of first-degree murder as charged. He was also found guilty of theft of a motor vehicle, accessory after the fact, tampering with evidence, and dealing in stolen property. He was sentenced to life in prison. A few months later, Brown was found guilty of first degree murder, robbery, arson, and tampering with evidence. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the first degree murder conviction, another life term for the armed robbery with a deadly weapon, fifteen years for arson, and a five for tampering with evidence.
If you know of something that belongs on the agenda, please send it here. Don’t forget to include the basics: who, what, when, where, and URL (if available).
And feel free to consider this your open thread for the day. What’s happening in your world?
Latest Posts
Featured Reports
In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.
When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.
In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.
On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.
Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"
At last, the truth can now be told.
Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!
And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.
Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.
Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.
Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.
The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.
“Google” is a trademark of Google Inc.
© Box Turtle Bulletin. All Rights Reserved.
Posts 
Posts via daily email:
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
The following is a cut-and-paste of a comment I left yesterday (Sunday, April 27, 2014). Since I was unplugged most of the day, it was the final comment of the day and, thus, not a part of the conversation. That comment:
“Sigh…
Ken Mehlman made a career of putting the civil rights of the gay population up for a vote — but his impetus was to make our civil rights a GOP campaign issue. After he retires from public service — surprise! Mehlman’s gay, and now (after 37 states follow his lead to either state DOMAs or state constitutional amendments barring marriage equality) he’s awfully sorry for the mess he helped create.
He lives in a state where marriage equality has become law. He signed the petition.
Andrew Sullivan is now an “independent†after touting the GOP conservative line for decades… even now, when asked, he’ll call himself a conservative independent. An emigre from Great Britain, Sullivan is married to a native-born American, in a state where marriage equality is the law.
He signed the petition; Sullivan, before any petition was ever written, was saying many of the same things the petition, in its final form says, but he was saying them on Bill Maher’s Real Time the same evening news of Eich’s resignation was announced.
The writers/editors of Box Turtle Bulletin signed the petition and offer in defense of their support the belief a person’s political belief and statements (and here, I paraphrase; please let me know if I’ve misinterpreted) should not endanger their employment.
If it were that simple, that’s a belief in which I heartily concur.
But it’s not “that simple.†Eich did not just voice a political belief; he helped finance a political campaign that, once put into place by a successful ballot initiative, removed the civil rights of a group of persons, based solely on being a member of that group.
Another internet company brought Eich’s past to light; OKCupid, a diverse, inclusive company,urged its own members to stop using the Mozilla browser. Other sites soon became “Mozilla unfriendly,†while, simultaneously, independent users began uninstalling their Mozilla browsers. And while that was going on, individual employees, literally at ALL levels in the Mozilla hierarchy quit their jobs, or went public with their own disappointment at the choice of Eich as Mozilla’s new CEO.
Not to be outdone, some portions of the conservative Right also called for a boycot, and a removal of, Mozilla’s browser… but they were doing so as a threat to Mozilla — capitulation to the militant homosexuals by Mozilla would be the clarion call to action in that boycott.
I’m sure Mozilla, in the midst of all this, consulted the accountants and the lawyers. It’s not even been revealed if Mozilla asked for Eich’s resignation, or if he simply said “screw itâ€, and quit.
The bottom line is someone, either Eich or Mozilla board members, realized to have the situation drag on would only hinder a company fighting hard to maintain its 2nd place in the browser wars; millions of dollars could, potentially, be at risk.
So, Eich quit. Those who wanted to gloat, gloated. Those who wanted to be seen as a victim screamed they’d been victimized.
I just want to aske the BTB crew: do you really not see the “other side†of what your petition means, and what it can appear to be saying about any gay person that signed it?”
Boris Hirsi
April 28th, 2014
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/donald-sterlings-personal-beliefs-are-none-of-your-business-right/discrimination/2014/04/27/86400
Looking forward for your enthusiastic defense of Mr.Sterling and his rights to bigotry.
Boris Hirsi
April 28th, 2014
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/04/27/Radium-One-Fires-Founder-and-CEO-for-Violent-Behavior
I also expect you to defend his rights to remain employed because as he said: “However, he defended his actions by stating that “there is a difference between temper and domestic violenceâ€. Bit like your differentiation between “belief” and “action”.
But of couse had Chabal donated money to man to beat his girlfriend that would have been just a “belief” and not an “act” according to Timothy.
Robert
April 28th, 2014
Don’t expect the BTB bloggers to sign on to a petition defending Sterling’s right to free speech. See, he’s a racist; racism is bad. Eich, on the other hand, is just a homophobe; homophobia is not so bad. Just because it leads to the self-hatred and often suicides of gay youth, it is just a matter of individual freedom that backward countries like Canada, the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, et al. just can’t comprehend when they enact hate speech laws.
The Lauderdale
April 28th, 2014
I didn’t agree with the petition either. I will also admit, I’m a bit annoyed by the way the BBT lads have ignored or sidestepped some of the more thoughtful critiques or questions that HAVE been posted, even in the midst of all the vitriol.
That said, these OT comments to non-related postings are annoying too. If people are going to be off-topic, I’m more interested in this:
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/04/28/4871111/united-church-of-christ-sues-over.html#.U15mLaKZj9s
uhhuhh
April 28th, 2014
Still waiting for the guys’ letter lecturing all people of color everywhere that they’re required to respect Donald Sterling’s bigotry and be careful never to do anything that might in anyway undermine him socially or economically. (rolls eyes)
The Lauderdale
April 28th, 2014
“That said, these OT comments to non-related postings are annoying too.”
Then again,
“And feel free to consider this your open thread for the day. What’s happening in your world?”
Okay, but I still like mine better. 8P
Timothy Kincaid
April 28th, 2014
Boris, no (as Jim very clearly explained) I did not pen the Statement. And I won’t be writing a commentary about a sports story (I assure you that my knowledge about sports, teams, owners, and sports culture are piss poor). I don’t know who Chabal is or what he “donated money to”. And, generally, when using “according to Timothy” it should at least somewhat follow what I have actually said.
Lauderdale, there are now several hundred comments. It’s impossible to address them all. And, generally, I now try now to limit my participation in the threads. I’ve discovered that I need not shoot down every person who disagrees with me or, through brilliant rhetoric, convince every reader of my position. I state what I believe, others state their views. If they differ, they differ. And, BTW, thank you for the link. I’ve just had my first cup of coffee and my morning walk and hadn’t seen the news. The concept that anti-gay marriage laws discriminate against certain churches is a notion that I’ve argued for years and I’m delighted that the UCC is taking this up.
The Lauderdale
April 28th, 2014
But you did not respond to the ones *I* wanted you to respond to, which were obviously the most intelligent and sensible…
The Lauderdale
April 28th, 2014
Also, yeah, excited about it.
Timothy Kincaid
April 28th, 2014
well I should have just asked you first. he he
DN
April 28th, 2014
Yeah. Sure you don’t do sports stories.
http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2014/04/22/64132#comment-368055
Boris Hirsi
April 28th, 2014
Sterling case is about “sports” in a same way as Eich case and your letter is about computers. And I did provide easy to read links for you.
Timothy does find time to nitpick spelling and accusing people of lacking readin comprehension and instead of answering questions refuting the terms that are used in questions.
Lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Ben M
April 28th, 2014
I saw this on NPR today – It focuses on evolution vs. creationism, but really, I have to agree that the overarching ideas apply just as much to marriage equality – “Ultimately, these questions aren’t so much about evolution versus creationism as about the coordination of public life in the face of profound disagreement.”
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2014/04/28/307659432/rational-debate-we-can-t-live-together-without-it/
Lucrece
April 28th, 2014
Life in Prison for torturing and slitting someone’s throat. The terror and pain the kid must have felt as the knife carved through his tissue.
And these creatures get to sit on a cell, never knowing the fear of at least seeing a needle puncture your arm and impending death. If there was ever a place for the death penalty, these people are it.
They still get to eat, and talk to family if they have any, and to FEEL, whatever the mix of bad with good. But Ryan’s miracle of life and feeling was ended abruptly and irreversibly for no reason. He lost his one chance at life and experience.
Jim Burroway
April 28th, 2014
Yes, this is an open thread, meaning that there is no such thing as an off-topic comment here.
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…â€
Should the editors of this blog chosen a name tat continues to deride a person simply because of their political views?
John Cornyn, after all, was simply expressing his viewpoint. Why should he be reminded of his support of that viewpoint on a continual basis? Just let it go, guys, and agree to disagree. After all, political discourse and opinion should never be punished.
Rob Tisinai
April 28th, 2014
Who said we can’t criticize people’s views?
Priya Lynn
April 28th, 2014
Rob, do you believe some people that oppose equal rights for blacks are not bigots?
Cause I don’t know how you can say some people who oppose marriage equality aren’t bigots and not say some people who oppose equality for blacks aren’t bigots.
Rob Tisinai
April 28th, 2014
Priya, I’m working on a blog post about that.
Priya Lynn
April 28th, 2014
Oh, I can’t wait for that.
Boris Hirsi
April 28th, 2014
I am still waiting for your condemnation of the mr. Sterling’s critics. After all we should all respect his views and not endanger his livelihood. Because respect. Or civility. Or something.
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
@Rob Tisinai,
Eich was not terminated because of his stated political views. Eich was not terminated because of his financial contributions in support of those political views.
It is not a certainty Eich was even terminated.
What is known is Mozilla employees — at all levels within the Mozilla organization, itself — made public their disappointment with the choice of Eich as new CEO. Several publicly resigned; two high-level programmers resigned, citing Eich’s “Yes on 8” contribution as a significant factor in their decision not to work for a company whose public face had made such a contribution. Board members resigned, citing Eich’s promotion to CEO as a significant factor in their decision.
In this environment, Eich resigned.
The night of Eich’s resignation, Andrew Sullivan was, coincidentally, a panelist on Real Time and, in a truly amazing coincidence! began making statements concerning Eich and his rights, and chastising “gay activists” in verbiage which appears in this petition, almost verbatim. In another amazing coincidence, not only is Sullivan an original signatory to this petition, he is the only original signatory without some sort of identifier… you know, like a title explaining the significance of signature… or a location… just his name. Just the way a person would sign the average business letter they’d just torn off.
My personal belief is Sullivan is responsible for the complete first-draft of the petition, and that the final petition is well over 75% representative of Sullivan’s personal views, with only the smallest part re-written to include suggestions from other signatories. The guys here at BTB have stated what they believe they’ve signed. I believe them. I believe they believe the petition says nothing more than an individual’s employment should not be in jeopardy because of a political viewpoint; at some point, they drank of the same Utopian Kool-Aid as SCOTUS when that body ruled “America doesn’t need Affirmative Action anymore!”, and they drank, deeply.
Jim Burroway
April 28th, 2014
While I don’t want to get into a naming game based on a process of elimination, I can confirm that Sullivan did not participate anywhere along the way in the drafting process. I don’t know why he didn’t chose to include any sort of affiliation with his signature.
And I REALLY have no idea what this could possible have to do with Affirmative Action. Talk about bringing in a topic that truly has NOTHING to do with this topic at hand.
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
Thank you, Jim.
I was, as I stated, merely guessing based on previous writings of Sullivan, and the coincidence of his appearance and statements on Real Time.
uhhuhh
April 28th, 2014
The Sterling story is not a sports story; it’s a bigotry story. Trying to dodge it by calling it a sports story tells us everything we need to know about your inability to square the public reaction to this bigotry to your smug lecturing of the entire gay community on Eich.
All the L.A. Clippers’ sponsors have now severed or suspended their relationships with the team over–wait for it–the owner’s mere expression of beliefs. Sterling hasn’t even contributed to a political campaign to take away anybody’s legal rights.
Four options: You all can (1) lecture all people of color to respect Sterling’s bigotry and attack all those advertisers for “punishing” his “free speech,” or (2) you can scrape your names off that insulting “declaration,” or (3) you can defend the view that gays don’t deserve the same consideration as African Americans, or (4) you can put a scarlet “hypocrite” on your foreheads.
Or you can make pathetic excuses about there being too many comments to respond to, or it being about sports, or whatever other dodge you can trump up.
uhhuhh
April 28th, 2014
“I believe they believe the petition says nothing more than an individual’s employment should not be in jeopardy because of a political viewpoint.”
That is not what the “declaration” says. It goes WAAAAAAAAAAAAY beyond employment. The Eich incident was just one example:
FROM THE INTRODUCTION: “we are concerned that recent events [PLURAL], **including** [BUT NOT LIMITED TO] the resignation of the CEO of Mozilla…, signal an eagerness by some supporters of same-sex marriage to punish rather than to criticize or to persuade those who disagree.”
FROM THE CORE ‘DECLARATION:’ “ANY effort to impose conformity, through government or ANY OTHER MEANS, by punishing the misguided for believing incorrectly….”
No one who READ the statement before signing can now claim to have thought it was only about the Eich incident or jobs. IT CLEARLY CONDEMNED ANYBODY USING ANY PRESSURE OTHER THAN USING “PERSUASION” ON BIGOTS.
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
@uhhuhh,
Yes, I agree with your understanding of what the petition says; so do, apparently, the overwhelming majority of commenters who’ve posted on the subject.
(I say “commenters”, as opposed to “commentators” as the comments have been made voluntarily, with no expectation of payment for, nor distribution of, that comment.)
But I also believe what I’ve been told by the BTB crew in their response(s) to those comments. The two beliefs are not mutually exclusive.
I am, however, looking forward to the full-blown blog postings of those at BTB, in which, I assume, the disjoint from their “belief” to the verbiage of the petition, itself, are discussed. Until that time… things can only get snarky, as has already been shown in exchanges between commenter Boris and Jim Burroway.
I know the pressures of working in print media; I’m sure the two BTB commentators who have promised a blog of clarification/explanation will adhere to those promises. To do otherwise would risk ruining the credibility of an Editorial Opinion blog that has, as its base, the reporting of historical and contemporaneous fact.
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
@Jim Burroway,
I’m sorry; I neglected to explain my reference to last week’s SCOTUS decision concerning affirmative action; you, apparently, did not understand my statement.
The Supreme Court, in deciding Michigan could stop using race as a deciding factor in admission applications to Michigan state-funded universitites, stated the “America had gone beyond the need of such programs.” In other words: discrimination based upon race no longer existed in this country… or at least no enough that the presence of racism represented a threat to fairness.
IOW: Utopia in racial equality has been reached.
The petition you signed, ultimately, says the same thing about the hetero-/homo- sexual communities’ intersect: parity is achieved! Halaloo!
Here. Have some Kool-Aid. You’ll like it; it’s fruit punch flavored.
Jim Burroway
April 28th, 2014
You are right, the statement goes beyond employment, and no I don’t think they are mutually exclusive, but I also think that the statement is being read far, far more broadly than what the statement actually says.
And yes, we are (individually) working on some posts — well, at least I am anyway. I hesitate to speak for anyone else. But it’s going to take some time, since we all also have full time jobs.
I probably should have been working on my posts over the weekend instead of spending so much time in the comments. But I have to admit, your comments have really helped us to crystalize your concerns and they will hopefully either sharpen our opinions or help us recognize areas of weaknesses that still need to be addressed. While my own fundamental opinion hasn’t changed, I do think your comments have helped me clarify in my own mind what I believe, what I don’t believe, and what I still have to ponder.
But I’ll go ahead and say this: Sullivan has a habit of firing before aiming. I think he misfired in his initial post about Mozilla by blaming “gay activists.” I hadn’t read his post when I put mine together the next day (where I didn’t mention gay activists).
I also didn’t see him on Bill Maher, simply because I don’t watch that show (or MSNBC even though it aligns more closely to my political views, or FOX) because after a long day at work and on the blog, I don’t need yet other thing to make me mad. You can picture me as Frank Costanza screaming “Serenity Now!” at the end of a typical day already.
Jim Burroway
April 28th, 2014
Since the Sterling story came up yesterday and I tried a boneheaded explanation which even I, in the light of day, can’t swallow, I went back to yesterday’s Daily Agenda thread to re-address it. That comment is here:
http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2014/04/27/64219#comment-368801
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
@Jim Burroway,
I followed your link and read your further explanation of your reasons the Eich and Sterling situation, and further delved into your belief Eich’s employment should not have been at risk because of his participation in the political process. Your viewpoint is based, seemingly, on that basic Constitutional precept (though it is not a specific enumerated “right”).
And, you know what? I agree with you. 100%.
But… (And you knew a “but” was coming, didn’t you?)
One salient point you omitted, especially in regard to California labor law: Californis is a “work at will state.” There are legal protections in place if someone believes their employment was terminated for very specific reasons, and can convince the appropriate governing representatives (juries, mediators, or bench-trial judges) of their belief. Outside of those specific protections — which have to be proven after termination! a persons’ employment is “at risk” if their supervisor merely awakens with a bad headache.
Jim Burroway
April 28th, 2014
You are right. California is a “work at will” state. And even if it weren’t, CEO is an “at will” position.
My beef isn’t whether Mozilla fired Eich, forced his resignation, or beat him up in a dark alley.
It’s the expectation that was voiced before he left Mozilla that he should be disqualified from holding that job because of his Prop 8 donation.
And so I have to ask, do you think it’s appropriate for a supervisor to fire someone because they don’t like how that person participated in a perfectly legal political act? (or, for that matter, because of a headache?)
Jim Burroway
April 28th, 2014
For that matter, why should Democrats not demand that employers fire registered Republicans? Or vice versa?
This really isn’t an abstract question. I know of a Lesbian blogger who, when anti-gay activists found out where she worked, demanded that she be fired for making “anti-Christian” statements. Now, you’re right, her employer could have gone ahead and fired her for any number of reasons. But was the call to have her removed representative of the kind of society we want?
Chris McCoy
April 28th, 2014
Eric Payne wrote:
Actually that right is specifically mentioned in the First Amendment. “[T]he right of the people…to petition the Government for a redress of grievances“.
Baker
April 28th, 2014
Eric & Jim, “at will” can be a state’s default employment arrangement, but that does not mean the default arrangement cannot be modified by contract. For example, CEOs often have special employment contracts. Many companies don’t want their CEO walking out the door “at will”, and CEOs like to have special $afeguard$ as well. It’s generally the little guys without a contract that tumble with the wind.
Eric Payne
April 28th, 2014
@Jim Burroway,
You asked me:
“And so I have to ask, do you think it’s appropriate for a supervisor to fire someone because they don’t like how that person participated in a perfectly legal political act? (or, for that matter, because of a headache?)”
As someone who was terminated by National Water Management on the Tuesday following San Jose’s first Pride parade, no, I don’t believe anyone’s employment should be at risk for engaging in any legal activity that is unrelated to their job performance.
On the Thursday before that Pride parade, I received an excellent job review, and was told I was in-line for a promotion.
On Sunday, I marched with San Jose Queer Nation in the parade.
I took Monday off.
Tuesday, I was told “things weren’t working out,” and was terminated, first thing in the morning.
At that time, even if the company admitted to my face I was fired because I was gay, I had no legal recourse (and still wouldn’t, in the majority of American states). Since I was given no reason beyond “it’s not working out,” I still would have no recourse.
But (there’s that word again), the situation with Eich is completely different. For all intents and purposes, Eich “was” Mozilla during his brief tenure as CEO (and still would be, if he hadn’t resigned).
When given the chance to state his personal beliefs would have no bearing on his day-to-day management/operation of Mozilla, he declined to do so. When questioned about a possible “evolution” of his personal views, he dodged the question. He was significantly noncommittal enough that some of his own employees expressed their concerns, publicly, with other employees and Board members just as publicly resigning.
I have to conclude those persons are better informed than I regarding Eich’s suitability for his position. I have to agree Eich, himself, is the best arbiter of that suitably. He must have found himself wanting… and so, I keep coming back to my main point: Eich resigned… and there’s been absolutely nothing released, by either Mozilla or Eich, that his resignation was anything but voluntary.
Baker
April 28th, 2014
Sometimes an employee’s extracurricular activities “unrelated to their job performance” can sour a company’s business relationships in the marketplace, leaving an employer with the unpleasant choice of either losing millions in business dollars or letting go an employee that doesn’t “fit”. Businesses are generally in business to make money, not to be martyrs.
Merv
April 29th, 2014
Sometimes, I don’t think it’s such a bad thing that our opponents get a taste of the feeling of job insecurity most gay people have had to live with their whole lives. It might bring them some awareness of the position of privilege they’ve been enjoying.
Leave A Comment