Posted on 12/30/2003 6:56:51 AM PST by Zender500
Albert A. Buonanno of Denver had worked at AT&T Broadband for two years. But in a 2001 reorganization, the company directed employees to sign a "certificate of understanding." The document said employees must "fully recognize, respect, and value the differences among all of us," including "sexual orientation."
Buonanno, who attends a Baptist General Conference church, told his supervisor in a letter that he wouldn't discriminate against or harass homosexuals. But he also said he couldn't sign the statement because it contradicted the Bible. Buonanno's supervisor fired him the next day.
The Rutherford Institute, a religious liberties organization based in Charlottesville, Virginia, is representing Buonanno, 47, and a handful of others. They all lost their jobs for refusing to condone employment policies they found biblically immoral.
The culture war over homosexuality in America has moved to a new front—the workplace. Christian observers say millions of employees are being commanded not just to tolerate homosexual behavior but also to respect and even promote it.
"There are certain things you can't say, or joke about, in the name of tolerance," Rutherford Institute founder John W. Whitehead told Christianity Today. "It's not so much the gay groups as much as the big corporations wanting to make sure they are above criticism."
Legal landscape
According to the Human Rights Campaign, the largest pro-homosexual political organization in the country, at least 300 of the companies in the Fortune 500 have included sexual orientation in their nondiscrimination policies. Heterosexual employees who balk at such rules are punished, sometimes severely.
In October, the Rutherford Institute filed a federal suit against the Department of the Interior on behalf of Kenneth P. Gee Sr., a Bureau of Reclamation job training teacher in Nampa, Idaho. In 2000, Gee, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, received a directive from his employer to "observe gay and lesbian pride." The e-mail contained a link to a website that said, "Morality is simply the attitude we adopt toward people we personally dislike."
In an e-mail to his supervisor, Gee responded that he believed homosexuality is sinful, and he didn't want to celebrate it. Three supervisors subsequently informed Gee that his inappropriate e-mail violated federal policies and embarrassed the Bureau of Reclamation. Gee said he later received a counseling memo about inappropriate use of a government computer. The memo warned him not to express disagreements in the workplace.
The Department of Interior is one of 38 federal departments and agencies to have adopted a sexual non-discrimination policy, according to the HRC.
Gee's suit seeks relief at the federal court in Idaho, and is based on the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). According to Rutherford attorneys, RFRA applies to all levels of government, local, state, and federal. The Supreme Court in Boerne v. Flores in 1997 struck RFRA down at the federal level, arguing that RFRA was an unconstitutional expansion of power under the 14th Amendment, which only applies to the states.
Most federal courts since then have held that RFRA still applies to federal agencies, and hence requires those agencies whose actions substantially burden religious exercise to justify such restrictions by demonstrating that a compelling interest exists and that no less restrictive means are available to further that interest.
According to Gregory S. Baylor, director of the Christian Legal Society's Center for Law and Religious Freedom in Annandale, Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court's 1977 Trans World Airlines vs. Hardison decision weakened the Title VII religious accommodation provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The court ruled the airline couldn't be forced to give an employee Saturdays off for religious reasons because it created an "undue hardship" for the company.
However, Baylor noted that the Workplace Religious Freedom Act (S.893) was introduced in the Senate in April, with bipartisan support. He said the legislation would require employers to prove they would sustain significant expense regarding such hardship.
Few speak up
So far, there has been relatively little backlash among rank-and-file employees against the pro-gay agenda in corporations. "Gay activists are pressuring from within, and often they meet with barely any resistance, including from Christian groups at the corporation," said Peter LaBarbera, founder and president of the Washington-based Americans for Truth, a lobbying group opposed to the gay-rights agenda. "When you have a very loud and demanding gay employee group and not much opposition, the tendency is to cave in, and that's what's happened."
LaBarbera said the diversity and tolerance propaganda promoted by corporate human resource departments have intimidated and worn down many Christians. "Christians shouldn't feel guilty about taking a stand," LaBarbera said.
On the other hand, many Christians have no problems signing company statements because many such statements ask for no more than to refrain from discrimination or harassment of people of many categories.
Whitehead said Christians shouldn't discriminate in terms of religion, race, or sexual orientation, but neither should they be forced to deny their faith. "In the workplace you need to be fair to everybody," Whitehead said. "But Christians shouldn't sign something that is clearly contrary to the Bible. If you compromise your faith, you deny the Lord."
Those Christians who defend their rights sometimes win. The Rutherford Institute negotiated an out-of-court settlement for Denise Maynard, an AT&T Broadband worker in Florida fired for objecting to a pro-homosexual personal e-mail circulated companywide. Another settlement involved New Yorker Anne E. Coffey, terminated by Verizon after refusing to sign a company code condoning homosexual behavior.
"[Some] Christians are sticking to what they believe the Bible says about homosexuality," Whitehead said. "They don't want to be forced to agree with a handbook or a policy."
Whitehead believes Buonanno's suit, scheduled to go to trial in February, will be a test case.
"These cases are really important because certain people are being told they can't have free speech anymore," Whitehead said. "It's the most frightening thing I've seen in my 30 years of law practice."
The one thing I learned is that listed corporations, even if they can't afford an adequate staff of people who actually do the work and, consequently, have the worker bees do the job of 1.5 to 2 others, they always manage to afford someone in HR or training or whatever other department is assigned to insulate them from lawsuits against the PC nazis-- often by hiring one.
It's not about displacing global corporations lol, nor was that my initial argument. All I'm saying is for those who prefer not to go into work everyday and be forced to sign pledges etc, as we both agree are abhorrent, there are alternatives such as opening up your own business.
You stated the only thing to sell on the internet are wedges and I was pointing out to you that's not true, almost everything is being sold now and small businessmen are getting rich. There's nothing wrong with that and if people want freedom, independence and piece of mind without political correctness shoved down their throats that's one way to go.
There's another way to "escape the pc corporate mentality." Most people just ignore it.
Absolutely, but as you can see in this story some are not able to completely ignore it and are offended. One person filed a lawsuit in federal court, and I hope he wins. But there are other ways to fight the pc crowd too, including negative public exposure, boycotts, and word of mouth. There are also legislative possibilities like electing more conservatives to Congress and state legislatures to put a stop to it.
By the way, if you think you're out there on the net, being free and pure, why don't you post your BELIEFS about controversial subjects right on your business homepage, and only buy from and sell to those who believe as you do.
Why would I want to do that? I'm selling something commercial, it's not a political webpage.
Check your e-mail.
You can carve out your own little niche that's totally free of corporate control.
I think this is one of the reasons the Amish have been so selective about using technology. They know the more they depend on the outside world the more they become subservient to it. And the less they need the more they are free.
By the way, if you think you're out there on the net, being free and pure, why don't you post your BELIEFS about controversial subjects right on your business homepage, and only buy from and sell to those who believe as you do. Yeah, that's what I thought.
That's actually a pretty good idea. I would be more likely to buy from someone who believes as I do.
Are you sure that is true? I thought homosexuals were one of the demographic groups that Hitler and his thugs sought to exterminate.
True, but they killed Jews and some of the Nazis were part Jewish. I think there was even speculation that Hitler was. It's just that no one in Germany would dare mention it.
Quite a few Amish live not too far from me in the area, and you are right, they are very independent. The last I heard they were farming honey bees. People can make a nice living just doing that and selling it on the internet.
Get a job someplace else then, or become a large enough shareholder to effect policy change, or start your own business.
Your feelings should not dictate company policy beyond the consideration that the owner himself decides to give to your feelings.
You don't have a right to have a job that automatically comports with your personal beliefs or lifestyle choices, regardless of what the law claims for this special interest group or that.
So yes, you check it at the door, regardless of what it is. You do at my business, anyhow, and that's a right every employer should have, even if the law says otherwise.
It's also easy to give a flip response like 'find another job'. I LIKE my job, I LIKE my company. They're one of the largest corporations on the face of the planet, and they treat their people well. I have a responsible position and am good at what I do. I have no desire to leave it.
I also reserve the right to NOT play along with the PC nonsense that occasionally gets passed down. Here's a clue: most don't play along. They give it a surly "yeah yeah; right", then press on doing their jobs. I have the luxury of doing just that.
Not all do. It's grossly unfair, and if you believe that it is perfectly ok for a corporation to shove the latest gay-loving or other ultra-hip-PC crap down their employees' throats while, at the same time, you insist that employees check their beliefs at the door.......then God help you if you ever grow to be a large company.
I wonder how your employees would feel if you publicly posted your stance on this by the water cooler.
Good for you. But if they start a policy you don't like and you can't effect change through the proper processes, then you shouldn't bitch. The company is not there to make you happy. It's there to make money for its shareholders.
I also reserve the right to NOT play along with the PC nonsense that occasionally gets passed down. Here's a clue: most don't play along. They give it a surly "yeah yeah; right", then press on doing their jobs. I have the luxury of doing just that.
Then all the better for you. But that doesn't change the fact you work at their pleasure, and they can require anything of you they please. Sure, it may be a bad move on their part in that it alienates key employees, but businesses shouldn't be protected from making bad decisions.
Fact is, a business should be run exactly as the owners wish it.
Not all do. It's grossly unfair, and if you believe that it is perfectly ok for a corporation to shove the latest gay-loving or other ultra-hip-PC crap down their employees' throats while, at the same time, you insist that employees check their beliefs at the door.......then God help you if you ever grow to be a large company.
I believe everyone should check their agendas at the door - gay, religious and whatever. It's a place of business, not a sewing circle. You don't like company policy, get a job elsewhere.
I wonder how your employees would feel if you publicly posted your stance on this by the water cooler.
They are all perfectly well aware of my position.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.