Allstate fires manager for Christian beliefs concerning homosexuality

AFA and World Net Daily ^ | June 28, 2005 | American Family Association

[ICE-FLYER]

Allstate has fired a manager because he expressed his Christian beliefs concerning homosexuality. Matt Barber was a manager in Allstate's Corporate Security Division. On his own time, and without identifying himself as an employee of Allstate, he wrote a column posted on several websites which was critical of same-sex marriage.

An outside homosexual group complained to Allstate about the column. Because of their support for the homosexual agenda, Barber was immediately fired and ushered off company property.

The message is clear: To work for Allstate one must not publicly express their Christian belief in the Bible's teaching on homosexuality. Barber was fired because he did. Homosexuals can criticize and condemn the Bible's teaching and they are welcomed, but Christians must remain silent.

TAKE ACTION

Allstate has sent a message to all their agents: If you are a Christian and believe the Bible's teaching on homosexuality, you will be fired. While Allstate touts its diversity, that diversity does not include Christian beliefs on homosexuality.

First, send Allstate Chairman Edward M. Liddy an email to register your complaint demanding both a public apology and reinstatement for Mr. Barber with back pay. Then call your local Allstate agent and tell him or her you will not be purchasing any insurance from them.

You can find a listing of Allstate agents in your area by clicking here . Tell the Allstate agent you will tell your friends about their disdain for Christians who believe the Bible's teaching on homosexuality.

Email Allstate Chairman Liddy Now!

Sincerely,

Don

Donald E. Wildmon, Founder and Chairman American Family Association

[Sam the Sham]

What he wrote WAS traditional Christian doctrine for the past 2,000 years.

[gdani]

It prohibits religions discrimination in employment. Indeed it, or current interpretations of it, currently require employers to make reasonable accommodations for employees' religious practices

Right - now define "reasonable".

And keep in mind that Title VII is applicable only if it does not impose an undue hardship on the employer. Now define "undue hardship".

My guess is that Allstate will argue, in response to the lawsuit, that the article in question will or could cause them to lose business among a targeted demographic (gays) and/or that it created a hostile work environment for their gay & lesbian employees. Those, among other defenses they will surely use.

Finally, guess who usually wins these things - the employer or the employee?

[Melas]

But you are right that if all they did was exercise their freedom of speech, then that makes it harder to sue. Not impossible, though.

True enough, you can sue for anything. I just don't see any grounds to sue the guy who told. If you're writing a web column, by what am I supposedly bound by that prevents or should prevent me from divulging (to anyone) to anyone the details of your column? Even if you used a screen-name, and my understanding is that this guy used his real name, I don't see the problem. When you write something, and put it up in a public forum, you have to assume it's well...public.

Yet, you seem to think that the guy who told did something wrong. I can't fathom that. He brought a column that was posted on a public forum to the attention of an individual? It's almost scary that you find that actionable. Is there something I'm missing here? I hope so.

[HostileTerritory]

I found his column and these are some of the paragraphs:

You may have noticed that you're barraged on a daily basis by the left's self-righteous indignation, as they wax eloquent about the harm caused by tobacco, pollution, drugs, alcohol - fatty foods - name your poison. Countless lawsuits have been filed under the pretext of recovering damages to cover health care costs relative to these vices. And they are vices, no doubt. But, these vices are fair game; they don't fall within a PC protected class. Consider this: When was the last time you heard about the dreadful and preventable health related pitfalls, which stem from the homosexual lifestyle? You don't - you won't - you can't - you shan't - Don' t confuse the left with the facts. That's "insensitive!"

As a result of the concerted effort by liberals to mask the devastating effects of the gay lifestyle, many people are shocked to learn that the average life expectancy of a homosexual male is only about 45 years old - 30 years younger than that of a heterosexual male.

One study determined that homosexual males have from between 20 to 106 sexual partners per year. It's no wonder that homosexual men account for over 50% of all hepatitis cases, and still account for over 50% of all AIDS cases despite the fact that they only make up 1 - 3% of the population. Homosexual men and women share a markedly increased risk of contracting nearly all forms of STD. The men frequently suffer from other sodomy related injuries, and are far more likely to be murdered (likely by another homosexual) than their heterosexual counterparts; this, due to the typically raucous and oft anonymous nature of the gay lifestyle.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is not copied from the Book of Common Prayer. You can argue that he is motivated to write against homosexuality because of his religion, but this is not religious writing or content or even particularly Christian. He's citing studies and talking about the political atmosphere in the country. I don't see Christ in there.

[Nathan Zachary]

" David Gibbs III, who represented Terri Schiavo's family, is representing him."

If that's the case, i take my last statement back. He will loose. Gibbs made so many legal blunders it was pathetic.

[HostileTerritory]

See my post #84.

[libstripper]

What he wrote was an expression of his religious beliefs, no different than standing up in church and confessing them. It was an inherently religious act, just as all other forms of prostelizing are. If the courts don't see this, they're ripping the insides out of the Title VII prohibition against religious discrimination.

[wideawake]

OK.

So your argument is that he was fired for expressing his own personal opinions on his own time.

Still quite unAmerican and of dubious legality.

[HostileTerritory]

If this is an expression of religious beliefs, so is a column about marginal tax rates. There's no confession of faith here--he's making an argument and talking about sex studies and statistics and politics. It's not "God believes homosexuality is wrong."

http://across.co.nz/IntoleranceNotTolerated.html

[Nathan Zachary]

Maybe he's going on the premise that marriage is a Christian belief, and he was arguing his Christian beliefs in the article.

[Fred Hayek]

Thae same happened to a project manager at an engineering company that I worked for 13 years ago. He was active in pro-life activities in Houston - on his own time, on his own dime - when some witch at Planned Parenthood found out where he worked. One phone call, he was fired.

[HostileTerritory]

So your argument is that he was fired for expressing his own personal opinions on his own time.

It's because he was caught explicitly associating those beliefs with his employer. Even if they were purely religious, his firing would still be legal, but I agree, more troublesome. I think it muddies the waters for people to pretend that he was reciting the Lords' Prayer when he was doing something else entirely.

[HostileTerritory]

And my point was that he was doing far more than that.

But it doesn't really matter in the end.

[Melas]

I have very mixed feelings.

As a Christian, I don't want to see Christians fired for their religious beliefs. One of the fundamental freedoms we enjoy is the freedom to express our religous beliefs. I'm a firm believer that no American, not a Christian, not a Jew, not a Muslim (yep, even them), not a Wiccan, not anyone should have to hide their religious affiliations.

As a capitalist, I don't want a company like Allstate to have to put up with anyone, Christian or otherwise, who's activities might drive customers away. I see clearly how it's in the best interest of the bottom line for anyone in business to want to employees who do their best to offend no one. Politics and religion breed strong feelings, and strong feelings are often at odds with customer relations, and that's just a fact.

As an individual, I like freedom period. I like the idea that this guy was free to choose to work for Allstate, and I like the idea that Allstate was free to fire him. The idea that government can force anyone to hire or retain anyone else just rubs me the wrong way.

[Blood of Tyrants]

He was not on company time and he did not identify himself as an employee of Allstate yet he was fired for expressing a political and religious view. Looks like his right to free speech and religion and freedom of association were violated to me.

[Sybeck1]

He'll still have his "24" gig I guess.

[Modernman]

His writing was an expression of his religious beliefs.

Then he gets to live with the consequences of expressing beliefs that his employer might not share.

If he was a Muslim expressing his religious support for homicide bombers, would Allstate be able to fire him? Of course.

[ShadowAce]

And my larger point is that I think private employers SHOULD be allowed to hire or fire employees for any reason, ...

ANY reason? Such as voting for the "wrong" candidate, or refusing to divulge who you voted for?

[libstripper]

Homosexuals are not protected by Title VII. The history of Title VII and, quite possibly, its text, in include the point that a customer's objections to dealing with a person of a particular employee's race or religion is NOT a legitimate basis for an employer refusing to hire, promote, or retain an individual. The concept of "reasonable accommodation" is a generally intrusive one that applies to what an employer has to do with employees' on the job religious demands, such as a Jew requesting Saturdays off. In this case the employer needed to do no more than leave the employee alone on the employee's own time.

The employee did not advocate any illegal actions against homosexuals; he only expressed and defended his scripturally correct religious beliefs about homosexuality. What he did is no different than saying the Ten Commandments require children to honor their mothers and fathers and write an article saying how children should do so.

[gdani]

He was not on company time and he did not identify himself as an employee of Allstate yet he was fired for expressing a political and religious view. Looks like his right to free speech and religion and freedom of association were violated to me

Well, then you should really familiarize yourself with the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment offers no protection whatsoever against the actions of private entities, businesses or individuals.

And, while he may not have identified himself as an employee of Allstate, the publication did. In the end, that publication may have screwed him unintentionally.