Is it okay for a catholic businessman to discriminate against gays?

[Bill_Martin]

Following the last few pages of posts regarding hiring, should this man have been fired for his behavior?

If his employer decided that he either didn’t want an idiot like that working for him, or didn’t want his company associated with that guy, then sure.

 

[St_Francis]

It doesn’t “bother” me in the least.

If a person who works for a company in the service industry exhibited “anti-social” (for lack of a better term) behavior by rejecting any overture of his/her customers and/or co-workers to build an interoffice dynamic where all concerned were comfortable with one another…I don’t think that “very private” person would work well in this social dynamic where it is important for the well being of office morale and business that employees “get along” with one another…the “anti-social” person would most likly be dismissed for being disruptive to the morale of the company AND bad for business.

It’s just a reality we have in many if not most businesses.

I rarely go out with my co-workers…and have never had any of them…other than my boss and his significant other who is co-owner(man and woman in case anyone is curios) over to my house once for a bbq…it’s part of our social-psycho dynamic of business operations.

My boss isn’t married to his significant other of over 12 years…would be a “bad business move” on my part to criticize his/her living arrangements.

And if the psycho-social dynamic is mostly young secular singles who are pro-choice and pro-SS"M," and when asked what he did that weekend and answers prayed the Rosary in front of the abortion clinic, went to a Tea Party conference, or lobbied against honosexual “marriage,” how does that work out?

 

[RobbyS]

" Best fit" is a term that is legitimately used and is a valid reason for a hiring decision. But again, for the last time, if an a potential employee brings legal action suggesting they were discriminated against in the hiring/firing process and the state has discrimination laws it would be the burden of the business owner to demonstrate that making the “best choice” and/or the “best choice” was not legally discriminatory

Showing why Barry Goldwater voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, even though he detested segregation. The use of government power to compel private persons to associate with/or do business with others may have been necessary as an emergency measure to break the segregation regime, but NOT for ordinary purposes. For the segregation regime aimed to deny to the PARTICULAR group of persons whom the 14th Amendment was designed to protect, which is to say, blacks males --ala Dred Scott. The amendment did not even apply to black women, as the women’s rights people found out when they went to court. In general the principle was that EXCEPT for black males, the states were free to discriminate. For the government to prevent a business from denying employment to a person whom the employer believes to be of bad character is an act of arbitrary government. The state has no intrinsic/constitutional right to say what is or is not moral; it can only pronounce on what society is persuaded is moral. Or have we got to the point where the state is granted the former role of a state church?

 

[timwatt]

Is it okay to discriminate against people who committed premarital sex?

Is it okay to discriminate against a single mother with a child, who was never married?

How would you know the person was a homosexual? Through stereotypes?

And even if you were absolutely certain he/she was a homosexual, how would you know that person was living the gay lifestyle? Do you think it’s right to automatically assume that all**** homosexuals live the gay lifestyle? How about the Catholic homosexuals who live in chastity? Is it fair to discriminate against them solely because they have same-sex attractions?

 

[djames99]

For example, if I run a business, would the church be okay with me not hiring gay people, even if they are more highly qualified than other employees? What about banning gays from patronizing a business?

Only in so far has we are commanded to distance ourselves from those who are obstinate in their mortal acts. The list includes those who live in common,thieves,liars,etc.

 

[Corki]

Is it okay to discriminate against people who committed premarital sex?

Is it okay to discriminate against a single mother with a child, who was never married?

How would you know the person was a homosexual? Through stereotypes?

And even if you were absolutely certain he/she was a homosexual, how would you know that person was living the gay lifestyle? Do you think it’s right to automatically assume that all**** homosexuals live the gay lifestyle? How about the Catholic homosexuals who live in chastity? Is it fair to discriminate against them solely because they have same-sex attractions?

Putting the legal issues aside, if a job applicant told the employer that he/she was engaged in any immoral activity, the employer SHOULD be allowed to take that into condideration when making a hiring decision. Most employers look for employees of good character as well as those that have good skills.

That being said, having a child out of wedlock, may or may not have involved any sinful activity. Being a person who identifies as a homosexual isn’t an activity at all, so that’s a moot point.

 

[buffalo]

Is it okay to discriminate against people who committed premarital sex?

Is it okay to discriminate against a single mother with a child, who was never married?

How would you know the person was a homosexual? Through stereotypes?

And even if you were absolutely certain he/she was a homosexual, how would you know that person was living the gay lifestyle? Do you think it’s right to automatically assume that all homosexuals live the gay lifestyle? How about the Catholic homosexuals who live in chastity? Is it fair to discriminate against them solely because they have same-sex attractions?

The homosexual act is always intrinsically evil. The others do not rise to that level.

A chaste homosexual has no reason to declare his struggle with anyone. SSA is not intrinsically evil, the homosexual act is.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Putting the legal issues aside, if a job applicant told the employer that he/she was engaged in any immoral activity, the employer SHOULD be allowed to take that into condideration when making a hiring decision. Most employers look for employees of good character as well as those that have good skills.

I’ll tell you what would be a red flag for me in the above paragraph: a candidate who offered inappropriate personal information during an interview. Here are some highly inappropriate themes for a job interview:

~sexual orientation
~past mistakes (bad choices) that are not an issue for this job (such as, having had a child out of wedlock)
~age
~religious affiliation – unless the job is a religious environment, such as a diocese, parish, religious school
~personal hobbies unless directly relevant to the job and illustrated by the candidate as a form of experience or expertise for this job (photography, for example, even in some cases reading habits which may shed light on a level/length of interest in the field). Other than that, what you do in our spare time (good or bad, moral or immoral) is not a subject for a job interview.
~personal tastes, such as spending habits, favorite TV shows, other personal preferences
~marital status: in itself, and without a context for the job, this is not conversational material

IOW, the same information you should be eliminating from your resume is the same information that should neither be offered at a job interview nor introduced by an interviewer.

And I would have a hard time justifying, if an employee later revealed “immoral activity,” firing that employee unless

(1) the immoral activity were a reportable activity (crime). Crime rises to a different level than private immorality. Someone who admits promiscuity is not the same thing as someone who admits commercial promiscuity (prostitution or pimping). Someone who plays The Lotto irresponsibly & recklessly is not the same thing as someone who admits illegal forms of gambling, including conspiratorial gambling (cheating).

or

(2) the employee brought conversation about the activity into the workplace, affecting the office atmosphere and distracting him from his professionalism or performance

and/or

(3) the employee brought the activity itself into the workplace. (Phone calls on the job related to gambling activity; internet searches for dates, and phone calls about those, during work time)

So again, discretion is a huge consideration to me when I do interview. If you have not the judgment to leave your personal life behind you, both at the interview and later, at work, then you would not be “an ideal candidate,” haha, to me. Whether you are heterosexual or homosexual.

 

[Corki]

So again, discretion is a huge consideration to me when I do interview. If you have not the judgment to leave your personal life behind you, both at the interview and later, at work, then you would not be “an ideal candidate,” haha, to me. Whether you are heterosexual or homosexual.

 

[RobbyS]

So tell me…how “realistic” does your post reflect what occurs in your work place? I’m sure you have co-habbitating men and women who work with you…when they speak of going away for the week end to a B&B with their BF or GF…do you immediately tell them you have no wish to hear about their ‘sex lives’…even though they never mentioned what they do in the bedroom…just that they are going away for the week-end together…do you lecture them on the “near occasion to sin”?

Seems to me, what “straight” people want is for gay and lesibian people to NEVER speak about their lives…their vacations…their joys of buying a new home with their loved one…or hear about the great time they had when on vacation with their partner…but think nothing…NOTHING of listening to a “straight” co-worker explain how he and his live-ing girlfriend took a trip to Vegas and the fun they had…or hear about the co-worker who went to the coast and spent the night with their BF…

What constitutes discussing “sexual activity”? Seems to me, for a gay person all it takes to yell “sexual activity” is to hear they have a partner…and went on vacation…or the movies…or went to dinner…or bought a house together…but an eye is never blinked when the co-habitating co-worker shares what a great time she/he and his/her GF/BF had at the coast this week-end…

Speak for yourself. I blink a lot and just keep my thoughts to myself.

 

[buffalo]

More behavioral workplace issues:

Watch Your Mouth: Cursing in the Workplace Could Get You Fired

Whether it’s the printer that jams every time you’re on deadline or the employee who messed up a project for the fourth time this month, there are many things in the workplace that can rile us to the point of exploding. But even if you’re at your boiling point, it’s best if you hold your tongue if you want to keep your job.

A new study by CareerBuilder.com shows that 81% of employers believe cursing brings an employee’s professionalism into question.

The study showed that 64% of employers think less of an employee who swears repeatedly, and 57% said they are less likely to promote someone who using curse words. A further 71% of employers said that swearing shows a “lack of control,” while 68% says swearing demonstrates a “lack of maturity.” Perhaps most interestingly, says CareerBuilder.com spokesperson Jennifer Grasz, is that 54% of employers said that swearing made their employees appear “less intelligent.”

“It’s all about perception, and cursing does influence how managers view people,” says Grasz. “If it’s a one-time thing, it’s not going to be a big deal, but if cursing becomes a pattern, then it starts to show a lack of intelligence and can show that you’re someone who doesn’t have the ability to handle a tough situation.”
Read more: foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/08/02/watch-your-mouth-cursing-in-workplace-could-get-fired/#ixzz22gbqhGn9

%between%