Dallas Officer Reassigned After Alleged Harassment on ‘Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day’

[vz71]

There is a huge difference between “any outward sign” and preaching. People at my workplace have items in their cubicles that clearly speak to their beliefs. None of that is banned.

Nope, only those things that provide an outward sign of faith have been banned.
And of course it is in the name of keeping everyone ‘comfortable.’

So when do you suppose they will start examining beyond just a thing that makes others uncomfortable and start looking at the person?

An I am still curious, where is God in all of this comfort?

 

[Seeker1961]

Nope, only those things that provide an outward sign of faith have been banned.
And of course it is in the name of keeping everyone ‘comfortable.’

So when do you suppose they will start examining beyond just a thing that makes others uncomfortable and start looking at the person?

An I am still curious, where is God in all of this comfort?

In YOUR workplace, but clearly not everywhere. I have never worked in any office that banned ALL outward signs of faith, and I’ve had a few jobs in the last 20 some years. I spent 10 years working for the federal government and there was no ban there either.

I find that alarmist attitudes weaken an argument.

God is in the same place He has always been. You think He leaves because you can’t wear a medal?

 

[vz71]

In YOUR workplace, but clearly not everywhere. I have never worked in any office that banned ALL outward signs of faith, and I’ve had a few jobs in the last 20 some years. I spent 10 years working for the federal government and there was no ban there either.

Great. It is fortunate that it has not gone too far as yet.

I find that alarmist attitudes weaken an argument.

Only alarmist to those that do not believe it can happen to them.
There are many that can testify to the reality that is.

God is in the same place He has always been. You think He leaves because you can’t wear a medal?

No, I know better then that.
I believe that if we willingly give up outward signs of our faith in God for the sake of the comfort of others, we cease to be faithful servents of God.

 

[yellowbird]

If the rules apply to all how can you claim that it’s about banning anything that reminds anyone of God?

I find the restrictions at my workplace help provide a comfortable environment for EVERYONE. People know I’m Catholic, but they aren’t allowed to condemn me for it or preach at me that their evangelical faith is right and mine is wrong. My co-workers who disdain religion in all its forms are not allowed to preach at me about that. And in return, I don’t preach at them about my faith being the only true faith. We’re together for 50-60 hours a week, and if those simple rules can make the environment more pleasant each day I can certainly learn to live with them.

If the restriction on the Catholic medal is too much for you to bear, perhaps you should look for an employer that will allow you to wear it.

In this specific case-I still feel that if EITHER side was making a deliberate attempt to denigrate the other then it is inappropriate behavior for the workplace.

I agree with all of your posts.

We don’t know the full story, but if the guy was being a jerk about why he bought the chicken sandwich and making a point during the meeting to single out the women, he’s creating a hostile work environment. I don’t know that he should be fired… maybe he just needs some diversity training? youtube.com/watch?v=9aVUoy9r0CM

 

[yellowbird]

And yet you are on a Catholic forum.

That was sort of snarky, don’t you think?

I wish MORE people who aren’t Catholic would join the forums. Hopefully they’d get a better understanding of our faith and realize that although are beliefs are different from theirs, we are interesting, normal people who are friendly and welcoming to everyone.

When we aren’t being snarky.

 

[Seeker1961]

I agree with all of your posts.

We don’t know the full story, but if the guy was being a jerk about why he bought the chicken sandwich and making a point during the meeting to single out the women, he’s creating a hostile work environment. I don’t know that he should be fired… maybe he just needs some diversity training? youtube.com/watch?v=9aVUoy9r0CM

And the same goes for the women-if they instigated the situation then they are the ones that need training. The world is a messy diverse place and we have to learn to live together in some sort of peace even when we disagree.

 

[vz71]

That was sort of snarky, don’t you think?

I wish MORE people who aren’t Catholic would join the forums. Hopefully they’d get a better understanding of our faith and realize that although are beliefs are different from theirs, we are interesting, normal people who are friendly and welcoming to everyone.

Snarkiness was not my intent.
My intent was to point out the irony in claiming that one does not care for the religion, does not want to hear about it, and that they find it annoying; all while participating in a forum dedicated to the church.

I have provided the specific response below that I was responding to:

Because sins don’t exist to me, or to lots of other people. I don’t want to hear about what your religion says of me. I don’t care, and it’s annoying.

I agree wholeheartedly, we need more people joining so they can learn more of the faith.
But if such has determined they have no intent to learn and do not care for the church teachings, then why exactly are they here?

I am sure you can appreciate the irony.

 

[yellowbird]

Snarkiness was not my intent.
My intent was to point out the irony in claiming that one does not care for the religion, does not want to hear about it, and that they find it annoying; all while participating in a forum dedicated to the church.

I have provided the specific response below that I was responding to:

I agree wholeheartedly, we need more people joining so they can learn more of the faith.
But if such has determined they have no intent to learn and do not care for the church teachings, then why exactly are they here?

I am sure you can appreciate the irony.

Yes, I appreicate the irony.

I also know as a convert, I protested the loudest against the Church before I finally gave in to the work the Holy Spirit was trying to do in my life.

I don’t think we should ever question why someone is here - they might not even know… and if even it’s to disagree, so what? We can take it. And maybe in the process their hearts will change.

 

[yellowbird]

And the same goes for the women-if they instigated the situation then they are the ones that need training. The world is a messy diverse place and we have to learn to live together in some sort of peace even when we disagree.

Yes. Without question. We just don’t know the whole story. I’d like to think that he wouldn’t get fired for simply eating a sandwich because that would be ridiculous, so I guess we have to trust those who DO know the whole story have made the right decision.

 

[vz71]

Yes, I appreicate the irony.

I also know as a convert, I protested the loudest against the Church before I finally gave in to the work the Holy Spirit was trying to do in my life.

I don’t think we should ever question why someone is here - they might not even know… and if even it’s to disagree, so what? We can take it. And maybe in the process their hearts will change.

Point taken.

 

[yellowbird]

Point taken.

 

[pnewton]

I agree with all of your posts.

Ditto. Sometimes Seeker and I are on opposite sides, sometimes not. But on this I agree, not that this was harassment, but that it is possible that it could be harassment. I do not think we should be in such a rush to defend the officer against the lesbians that we ignore facts, or in this case, the absence of facts. It is totally possible to be rude enough at work to people that it qualifies as harassment.

A reassignment might well be in order, or even standard procedure. On the other hand, everyone who is uncomfortable around these two lesbians can complain if they cross the line and discuss their sex life.

 

[pnewton]

On the other hand,
“The DPA views a reassignment to a midnight shift at the Lew Street Justice Center as punishment”
inquisitr.com/297612/dallas-cop-reassigned-after-argument-with-lesbian-officers-over-eating-a-chick-fil-a-sandwich/

If this is true, then the Dallas PD did act inappropriately in punishing someone without a hearing. Harassment can happen and needs to be addressed but it also provokes over-reaction by over zealous advocates. Would the LGBT advoctate be so supportive of the DPD if the two lesbians been moved to the night shift pending review?

Actually, around here, there are lots of people who would love to get to work nights.

 

[flameburns623]

I believe that there was a federal law passed under Reagan to protect certain expressions of religion in the workplace. One cannot use the workplace as a pulpit. However, you cannot be threatened with consequences for things such as having a Bible on one’s desk, wearing a religious symbol, or speaking to one’s co-workers about faith during breaks or meals. There are exceptions: if your job legitimately requires a uniform, the employer can forbid religious symbols on that uniform. Also, if you work in an environment where jewelry poses a safety threat to you or others (necklace might get caught in a machine, some portion of a ring or pin might fall into a product and contaminate it). You can’t continue to discuss religion with a co-worker who has asked you to stop. Etcetera. Ultimately, workplaces are not “free speech zones” and you cannot expect to express your views in a way detrimental to your employer’s business. But neither can the employer wholly suppress your rights as a Christian.

 

[Seeker1961]

I believe that there was a federal law passed under Reagan to protect certain expressions of religion in the workplace. One cannot use the workplace as a pulpit. However, you cannot be threatened with consequences for things such as having a Bible on one’s desk, wearing a religious symbol, or speaking to one’s co-workers about faith during breaks or meals. There are exceptions: if your job legitimately requires a uniform, the employer can forbid religious symbols on that uniform. Also, if you work in an environment where jewelry poses a safety threat to you or others (necklace might get caught in a machine, some portion of a ring or pin might fall into a product and contaminate it). You can’t continue to discuss religion with a co-worker who has asked you to stop. Etcetera. Ultimately, workplaces are not “free speech zones” and you cannot expect to express your views in a way detrimental to your employer’s business. But neither can the employer wholly suppress your rights as a Christian.

I posted another thread asking people if they were allowed to express their religion in the workplace and not one person posted anything contrary to what you’ve said above.

So I have to conclude-once again-that the refrain of “we can’t express our faith! Our faith is being outlawed!” is hyperbole. Now,people might think that’s harmless, but it really isn’t. The continual drama and exaggeration of things that aren’t really happening make our arguments about things that ARE a problem get ignored. People stop listening to you altogether when they continually hear you scream about things that simply aren’t true.

 

[cmforte]

Seeker1961

Quote:
Originally Posted by **flameburns623 **

I believe that there was a federal law passed under Reagan to protect certain expressions of religion in the workplace. One cannot use the workplace as a pulpit. However, you cannot be threatened with consequences for things such as having a Bible on one’s desk, wearing a religious symbol, or speaking to one’s co-workers about faith during breaks or meals. There are exceptions: if your job legitimately requires a uniform, the employer can forbid religious symbols on that uniform. Also, if you work in an environment where jewelry poses a safety threat to you or others (necklace might get caught in a machine, some portion of a ring or pin might fall into a product and contaminate it). You can’t continue to discuss religion with a co-worker who has asked you to stop. Etcetera. Ultimately, workplaces are not “free speech zones” and you cannot expect to express your views in a way detrimental to your employer’s business. But neither can the employer wholly suppress your rights as a Christian.

I posted another thread asking people if they were allowed to express their religion in the workplace and not one person posted anything contrary to what you’ve said above.

So I have to conclude-once again-that the refrain of “we can’t express our faith! Our faith is being outlawed!” is hyperbole. Now,people might think that’s harmless, but it really isn’t. The continual drama and exaggeration of things that aren’t really happening make our arguments about things that ARE a problem get ignored. People stop listening to you altogether when they continually hear you scream about things that simply aren’t true.

I worked janitorial, cleaning a California state government building and on almost every desk was a christian symbol. Plus, there was even a writing about the Israel-Palestine conflict from a pro-Israeli point of view posted on a wall in a public spot there. I wondered how they were able to get away with it!! Though I was Catholic even then, I joked with my boss that I should sue them for it!!

-Chris

 

[vz71]

I posted another thread asking people if they were allowed to express their religion in the workplace and not one person posted anything contrary to what you’ve said above.

So I have to conclude-once again-that the refrain of “we can’t express our faith! Our faith is being outlawed!” is hyperbole.

I would have posted otherwise.

It would seem foolish to base your study of the event upon a single question placed in a very large forum.

 

[Seeker1961]

I would have posted otherwise.

It would seem foolish to base your study of the event upon a single question placed in a very large forum.

I would think a forum like this would be the perfect place! After all, here are all these people who are very committed to their faith who would be the most likely to have issues in the workplace with expressing that faith. This is also the place where I have heard the complaints about restriction of religious expression the most, so I would think that if this restriction were so rampant, I would have heard many stories about the problems that people have. The post made it to the highlighted side column, and I know I look there every time I visit to find questions that might interest me. Where were all those persecuted Catholics and other Christians-you would think they would have jumped on that thread right away!

and you didn’t post otherwise BTW…that would have made TWO people who had a problem.

 

[vz71]

The post made it to the highlighted side column, and I know I look there every time I visit to find questions that might interest me. Where were all those persecuted Catholics and other Christians-you would think they would have jumped on that thread right away!

and you didn’t post otherwise BTW…that would have made TWO people who had a problem.

It is a large forum.
Threads readily get lost in the shuffle and do not always gain the attention the original poster thinks they should.

Your own behavior may have been perfect to see the thread every time, but it is foolish to think that the thousands of other people on the forum scan threads the same way.

It is much more likely that of any 5 posters, you will find 5 different ways the threads are scanned through.

Still, it is your conclusion.
Based upon faulty fact finding, but nevertheless yours.

I prefer reality.

 

[Seeker1961]

It is a large forum.
Threads readily get lost in the shuffle and do not always gain the attention the original poster thinks they should.

Your own behavior may have been perfect to see the thread every time, but it is foolish to think that the thousands of other people on the forum scan threads the same way.

It is much more likely that of any 5 posters, you will find 5 different ways the threads are scanned through.

Still, it is your conclusion.
Based upon faulty fact finding, but nevertheless yours.

I prefer reality.

So show me the reality. If I am so wrong, prove how right you are.