—So are you saying that what he did was all right, and the only problem was that he was caught, due to a traitorous friend?
—I’m saying that an environment where everyone has to watch what they say, even when they think they are just talking privately to their circle of friends, is corrosive to the social fabric.
I don’t agree that that is what you said, even in the underlying meaning. But to what you’re now saying, it isn’t an accurate picture of the situation. This isn’t about the government putting listening devices in people’s living rooms. This is a man who took a photo of a co-worker’s child while at work, without permission, and then uploaded it to the internet, also without permission. So your description of the situation completely ignores that. Do you believe that it’s all right for people to take pictures of other people’s children without a parent’s permission, and do you believe it’s then okay to post those pictures on the internet, also without permission?
—You apparently are OK with his being fired, because you disagree with what he did.
I disagree with what he did, like I disagree with what a burglar does. Taking pictures of other people’s children without their knowledge, then posting the photo on the internet, then leaving the photo up when people make racist comments, and adding one himself, and then, finally, being dishonest about it all and not taking responsibility for what he did:
“I just really feel upset, not only with myself, but also the character that was based off the comments that my friends had made. Cayden has been victimized but I have been targeted,” Roth said.”
I’m not even sure what he was trying to say when speaking of “the character that was based off the comments that my friend had made.” But I know he believes himself to be a victim. And he has also been repeatedly untruthful about this.
“Shelton is a single mother and brings Cayden to her job after school. She told FOX 5 she was unaware that Roth took a picture with her son...Roth claims he didn’t think she would mind.”
http://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/30427294-story
In another news story, Roth claimed that he was friends with the mother, and that’s why he thought she “wouldn’t mind.” But from what I’ve seen, the extent of their friendship was that they were co-workers. And IF they were friends, then why didn’t he ever mention to her taking the photo and then show it to her?
“Shelton also spoke to Atlanta Blackstar about what happened, and said the office she worked in with Roth is only 10 people.
She said Roth carried on as normal after posting the picture of Cayden and, even after it started going viral, did not speak to her about it.
‘I was really caught off guard, and the fact the picture had been posted September 16th, and he wasn’t fired until the 29th, and acting like nothing happened,’ she told the website.
‘He just went about like nothing even happened.
‘It went on for days, a week and a half before anyone found out it even existed.’”
His story doesn’t add up, any way you look at it. If he and his co-worker were close enough friends for him to feel he could take a picture of her child without her permission, then he would have showed it to her and not posted it online as he did, and also kept receiving the comments he did, either. And if they weren’t close enough friends for him to take a picture of the child without the parent’s permission or knowledge, then what does that say about him that he did so?
His emailed apology to the mother is included in the Fox 5 Atlanta story, and I don’t believe it is much of an apology.
—Would you feel the same way about it if he was fired for privately expressing an opinion that you agree with (whether support for traditional marriage or Senator Cruz’s presidential ambitions), but which his manager didn’t like?
Again, I don’t believe there’s the slightest basis for you equating what this man did to the sort of example above. They are not the same things, at all. I believe that at the least he knowingly promoted racism, and I most certainly do believe what he did in doing that was morally wrong in any setting, public or private. I most certainly believe it was unchristian. But there are all sorts of things that people do that are unchristian that are not illegal (although some should be) and not firing offenses, either (and they shouldn’t be). This case, though, isn’t one of those. From what he did, to his dishonest answers afterward, he didn’t act ethically, with integrity, and that was why his boss had very good reason to fire him (he reminds me of Hillary Clinton responding on her emails - he thought he was following guidelines, it’s the fault of other people, especially if they misconstrue what he did). His boss can’t trust him to act responsibly as he deals with other people in the course of his work.
Apparently, at least one too many.Was it wrong for him to post a pic of a kid without mom's permission? Yes.Too many people are idiots with social media. In this case, I would guess one of his FaceBook "friends" was a lefty who decided to screw him.
Stay off facebook. Or at least, post with the viewpoint that anything you post WILL be seen by a humorless HR person at your job
Do I think he should be made unemployable as a result? No, but that's what happened. Hence my comment that people should stay the hell off of Facebook and Twitter, as it's too easy to say or do something that will be very damaging to your future employment prospects. The Internet never forgets.
Am I interested in hearing further from you, trying to convince me that what he did was so horrible that he should be forever shunned by mankind? No.