Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Why is it so easy to fire this man for saying something politically incorrect and so hard to even investigate this man who writes emails to the enemy, readily discusses his leanings toward faith-inspired violence at work and in seminars and encourages patients to convert to Islam?

69 Comments:

Blogger fred said...

Might the difference be ta]hat the store manager worked for private company and perhaps will sue whereas the army guy wrote to a religious figure who is not in our country and there is (as yet) no evidence that the Imam urged the major to kill fellow soldiers?

1:15 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

I don't know the details of Massachusetts law, but I would surmise it is a hire and fire at will state. This means you can be fired for any reason and for no reason.

1:21 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

fred, you make a good point. I also think that in political terms, gays folks and Muslims have worked hard to become identified as "victims" who cause trouble.

Insult a Christian, they pray for you. Insult a Muslim, they raise hell about discrimination and threaten to sue. While these are of course over-generalizations, I think there is merit to the idea.

Same thing with men and women, insult a man, he ignores you, insult a woman, then you are a bigot.

Or something like that. We have as a culture become afraid of maintaining the truth, or have lost faith that anything is true.

Trey

1:55 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Helen said...

Cham,

"This means you can be fired for any reason and for no reason."

Funny, you seemed to have more tolerance for the women at Earthfare who yelled, "All men are pigs!" in my post on that topic:

http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2009/09/all-men-are-pigs.html

You felt that I should have been "polite" and not "used intimidation" when all I did was tell them I didn't like what they said. Why act so nonchalant about the man who was fired in Massachusetts for not agreeing with the gay lifestyle and not caring much about women yelling "All men are pigs!" ?

2:56 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

Helen:

You should go back and read my post on that thread more clearly.

First, let's talk about employers in hire and fire at will states. I'm not stating that I am opposed or for this type of law. All I am saying is that an employer in these states can do whatever they want. It's the law and that is the way it work.

As far as your behavior in the supermarket, I never stated whether I was opposed or for the position the worker was stating. I was making a helpful suggestion to you, as I often open my mouth and state my opinion when something doesn't seem right. If you wanted to have a positive and enlightening impact on that particular person I find that not using anger and insults goes much further than being confrontational. If you had stepped back and calmly stated your case you could have instigated a discussion that would have made that employee think about her words and the impact they had. Instead, I am sure you left her with a very bad taste in her mouth and made her angrier than she already seemed she was. And, not that it matters at this point, on the "All men are pigs" comment, I am in agreement with you. I wouldn't have left the store either without making a comment but I would have done it very differently.

3:11 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger dr.alistair said...

there is a saying in irish that you shouldn`t try to teach a pig to dance. you`ll get tired and anger the pig.

when i hear a woman say something like all men are pigs, or more commonly, all women are prostitutes, i just keep my mouth shut. you can never appeal to the ego state of the person who makes such a comment by rebuking them, you will get a consistantly parental response back.

generally "mind your own business"...or something stronger.

helen, i understand your evangelical position regarding men`s rights and the difficulty in promoting such an idea, but those women weren`t going to be converted...and in that i agree with cham.

but if you hadn`t made your stand there you would have nothing to write about and we wouldn`t be having this conversation now....so some good has come from the situation.

3:45 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger dr.alistair said...

and i think that gays, muslims, single moms and other groups have successfully become legal victims by default....

..not that it helps them personally mind you, just the groups that lobby for them.

3:47 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

While this guy is clearly very religious, I think the manager was the one really in the wrong here.

I don't circle around gay colleagues and keep repeating, "Hey, you know, I'm MARRIED! I'm STRAIGHT! I'm MARRIED to my WIFE. My FEMALE wife!" I wouldn't. Some people are better-adjusted to those around them than others. Some people feel personally threatened, for one reason or another.

Sure, that's their problem, on one level. I'm not obligated to walk on eggshells all day.

However, in a professional environment, it's also my responsibility not to unnecessarily try to introduce distractions.

4:02 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

Addendum:

She is the manager, there. She is paid to make the most of the imperfect people that apply to work at an airport Brookstone for a few bucks an hour.

I've been such a manager. The manager is paid, in part, to accommodate employees' quirks. It's assumed that these quirks will exist.

4:05 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger DADvocate said...

Gays are part of the perpetual victims group. Drinking is legal too, but stating you disapprove wouldn't get you fired. I disapprove of all sorts of legal activities and approve of some illegal activities.

...no evidence that the Imam urged the major to kill fellow soldiers?

What an idiotic statement. The imam urged all Muslims to wage jihad. I suppose to satisfy your mentality the imam would have to have said or written, "Kill Tom, Dick, Harry,..."

4:49 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger DADvocate said...

More on the imam.

From the imam's "44 Ways to Support Jihad"

But since Abdullah was still a child and therefore couldn’t fight, his father would have him carry a small knife and go around the battlefield searching for injured disbelievers in order to finish them off.

5:04 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Edgehopper said...

I frequently want to yell at co-workers who talk incessantly about their impending nuptials, gay or straight. But that's because they tend to be really annoying, especially to us bitter single people.

5:10 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger br549 said...

Barry, re-read the article (perhaps a little slower), then re-visit your posts.

7:23 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

br549 I'm perfectly capable of reading. What is it that you think I've missed? And you have you ever had a job with any responsibility?

Assuming that Vadala isn't lying...

"Vadala claims the woman, whom he declined to identify, mentioned four times that she had married her partner."

Why would she mention it ever, at all? I don't mention my marriage at work, much, unless it's completely in passing, e.g., "Oh yeah, my wife went to grad school there, but I've never been" or something like that.

Then, allegedly, 'The woman, according to Vadala, then said, "Human resources, buddy — keep your opinions to yourself," before exiting the store.'

Again, maybe he's lying, but assuming he's not, what would justify a manager mentioning her marriage four times for no apparent reason, or perhaps because she wanted to make this guy uncomfortable?

He's a religious nut. That's obvious. He also works retail at the airport.

It's her job to get the most from the company's low-level employees, not to try to stir the political pot.

Maybe you should read my post again, slowly, br549.

She's not wrong for being gay. She's a lousy manager, an insecure person, and unprofessional -- if what he claims about her is true.

I'd fire them both.

But of course, she'd have grounds for a lawsuit as a protected minority in MA, as far as I know, whereas he wouldn't.

7:48 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

Insult a Muslim, they raise hell about discrimination and threaten to sue.

Wow. Generalize much, Trey? The Muslims I have known -- as neighbors and fellow students -- are rather unassuming people, and I'm wondering where you get your data from? Do you know many "insulted" Muslims that they react this way?

Kinda like saying that porky divorced white guys who have to adopt somebody else's kids are inclined to have nose trouble (meaning they stick it where they have no business and think themselves qualified to conclude...)

Say, you're not one of those porky finger-pointing white guys, are ya Trey?

8:45 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

Why do all the divorced hetero's enjoying special rights presume that gays play the victim card anyway? Because they don't roll over and accept different treatment based on their gender, when the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution assures them they deserve equal treatment under the law?


That day is coming, dear Helen and Trey. Please... enjoy your special rights and ability to discrimate while you can! (We're coming for your kids too ... boogedy boogedy!!)


Poor societal victims of progress.... Maybe Trey and Helen can start a professional support group for the new victim class? And special affirmative action to help them compete too. Heh!

8:50 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

ps. The guy working retail left the shop even "briefly" to attend a chapel because he was upset that his manager was (legally) married?

The boy has problems. Good thing he moved to a different state if he didn't like the laws as they were...

That's what the gays need to do too, right? Up and move to Massachusetts, urban areas, or anywhere else that has "special" laws to protect them? No thanks. Voting with your feet, as the retail boy did, is one thing, but being forced to move on to provide for your family ... that's why the Equal Protection clause will eventually end this mess of the statewide begging for equal rights.

They are already guaranteed by the Constitution. Your heterosexual special rights days are numbered; no wonder porky white man is the new victim card -- it's probably hard to compete honestly when so many others have been carrying ya for so long ... (insurance premiums, short absences from work to pick up the kids, visit the chapel, etc. :-)

8:55 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Michael said...

Massachusetts is a forced union state. The guy got canned for being a Christian which should remain legal. Small businesses should be allowed to hire people they feel are consistent with the views of the owners.

We have a president that was raised in a Marxist Muslim environment before becoming a "christian" in a black liberation church (Hate whites, jews and America, and there was this black guy named Jesus killed by rich white people).

Obama is clearly sympathetic to terrorist groups. He says so in his books so the media is going to down play the Muslim view.

But it didn't start with Obama. The media so hated Bush that they couldn't turn out anti-American movies and shows fast enough.

10:23 PM, November 11, 2009  
Blogger Roman Wolf said...

Yes, Mary. I love going to trailer parks to see all the "privileged" white men. I also love the Vietnam War Memorial where I can see all those "privileged" men who had the "privilege" to die in that war.

You are correct Mary. There probably will be a day where gay marriage is legal in all states...

...however, I also know that there will be a day when some nice men from the middle east decide to emigrate to our fair land. And unlike the more tolerate Judeo-Christian society, they believe all gays should get free haircuts, from the neck up.

What I am saying is you're probably right...but prepare for unforeseen consequences.

12:28 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Michael said...

It's good to see your in touch with your inner hate.

12:47 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Michael said...

Funny, you seemed to have more tolerance for the women at Earthfare who yelled, "All men are pigs!" in my post on that topic:

http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2009/09/all-men-are-pigs.html

Kinda of a funny subject. Fabius Maximus has a bit of a debate going on about your husband having sex with machines. On the up side, no one is taking the position that you're the machine.

12:56 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Daveyone said...

http://www.daveyonefamilylawman.blogspot.com/ Thought you might enjoy my perspective!

5:31 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Fen said...

Mary: "Wow. Generalize much, Trey? The Muslims I have known -- as neighbors and fellow students -- are rather unassuming people, and I'm wondering where you get your data from?"

From all the "unassuming" Muslims declaring Jihad and Fatwa over a few cartoons.

If you disagree, then please explain why those the terms Jihad and Fatwa are now part of common speak?

You think we learned them from a movie?

6:37 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

From all the "unassuming" Muslims declaring Jihad and Fatwa over a few cartoons.

If you disagree, then please explain why those the terms Jihad and Fatwa are now part of common speak?

You think we learned them from a movie?


See Fen, the problem is when you make the HUGE leap that our neighbors who are Muslim-Americans (and have lived in the US for generations) are the ones speaking of Jihad and Fatwa.

I assure you, you didn't learn about those things from our neighbors and their children. They are as American as you or I, except they are not Christians and worship as Muslims.

Do you really think we need to be suspicious of those who work, contribute to the community with their time, and participate in many of the same activities as the Christian and Jewish families?

Trey wrote, "Insult a Christian, they pray for you. Insult a Muslim, they raise hell about discrimination and threaten to sue. While these are of course over-generalizations, I think there is merit to the idea. Same thing with men and women, insult a man, he ignores you, insult a woman, then you are a bigot."

I called him on his "over-generalizations". Does he really believe what he's typing is true? Has he ever met a Muslim-American, well rooted in our country's social fabric? (How about a healthy independent woman even, interested in competing on merit, not who she's sleeping with or whose kiddos she's raising?)


Be against Muslim extremists and terrorists all you want. Just please, don't be so stupid as to run your mouths insinuating that all Muslims are a threat to Christians, Americans, etc. Even for cheap blog conversation, you come off looking stupid.

Target the threats, not the undesirable groups who have displayed no such negative behavior. Ditto with homosexual troops serving their country with dignity and keeping their private sex lives private. Target the behavior, not the group.

Yes you can distinguish the types!

8:32 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

Roman,

You're not playing the fear card, are you?

Something about your tone tells me you expect fear to be the response, and that American homosexuals should just be thankful that y'all are letting us keep our heads on straight.

Eh, I'll risk it.

I also know that there will be a day when some nice men from the middle east decide to emigrate to our fair land. And unlike the more tolerate Judeo-Christian society, they believe all gays should get free haircuts, from the neck up.

8:35 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Nick said...

I'm trying to figure out why the guy felt the need to say something to this woman. Seriously. She mentioned she was getting married several times... and that's a problem? Most brides to be get very excited at the prospect of upcoming nuptials. Why should she be any different... just because she's gay?

And generally, most people, if they disapprove of a marriage between two people (even heterosexual couples where you think the person is marrying a dirt bag) will usually say nothing unless they are very good friends, just to be polite.

9:19 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

BarryD wrote: "He's a religious nut."

Hey Barry, do you mean he is a committed Christian or he is mentally unbalanced or both? Really, I would like to hear your thoughts on the matter and expound upon why you think he is a religious nut. No flames from me, I am genuinely interested in your thoughts.

Trey

9:46 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Oligonicella said...

I love the smell of religious napalm in the morning.

10:15 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Roman Wolf said...

Mary,

You're the one making the huge leaps. Sure, not all Muslims are radicals, but very few of them ever speak up against the radicals within their own communities. Most seem content that with Wahhabist Imam(funded thanks to Saudi Arabia) indoctrinating their kids.

Furthermore, to ignore the violent tendencies in Islam is to ignore Muslims in France, Holland, and my native Britain who have repeatedly rioted and intimidated other populations.

Oh, and Mary. You gave the answer I expected. Petty posturing. Well, you've been warned to examine your own actions(however clumsily I do it). I can do no more.

10:25 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger DADvocate said...

There probably will be a day where gay marriage is legal in all states...

Then they won't be so "gay" any more. Divorce, property settlements, etc. will take their toll. My youngest sister is gay. She owns two houses and other nice stuff. She's also on her third break-up of long term relationships. Had she been legally married she would have lost much of this despite being the primary wage earning in every relationship.

Be careful what you wish for.

10:34 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

Petty posturing. Well, you've been warned to examine your own actions(however clumsily I do it). I can do no more.

Thanks for the warning, bub. Keep your eyes open for all them Muslim Americans and gaylords out there, eh? And don't shoot yourself in the foot, sheriff.

10:59 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

Gays are part of the perpetual victims group. Drinking is legal too, but stating you disapprove wouldn't get you fired. I disapprove of all sorts of legal activities and approve of some illegal activities.

Wow, DAD. Your baby sister with the two homes and three breakups sounds like a real victim... Does she drink too?

*Stepping out to the chapel to pray for her -- poor thing. Y'all keep the shop running while I'm gone frying bigger fish here, ok? Back in a jiffy...*

11:07 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Topher said...

edgehopper -

I am quite suspicious of people who talk up their impending nuptials and view it as a big, fun party rather than a solemnization of commitment focused on them and their spouse. Perhaps I am judgmental but I wonder if they are getting way too wrapped up in the "fun" aspects of it to really understand what's going to happen on the other side. Usually there is an undertide of "I'm getting MARRIED so that means someone LOVES me and I can feel like a WINNER!"

I view marriage as one of those "for those who doubt, no proof will suffice; for those who believe, no proof is necessary" situations. For those who aren't in a healthy, mutually supporting couplehood, many seem to think that having a ceremony called a wedding can magically "stick" them together and make it work. On the other hand, for people who are truly committed, the marriage ceremony is a formality, a public restatement of what they already know to be true.

If I'm annoyed by nuptial chatter, I'm usually good to remind myself that there's a significant chance they won't be married in a few years' time, and those over-focused on a materialistic and scmaltzy wedding plan instead of their life with their spouse are probably more likely still.

11:27 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Oh Olig, you know me better than that! No napalm from me, I am interested in what Barry meant.

For the record, I do not see what the guy was going for in stating his religious belief to the woman. Did he think she would forswear lesbianism?

If I had been irritated, I would have talked a lot about what was going on at church around her and let that bug her. Or look up some stuff about the people who think you can cure homosexuality and talk about that. But neither would not be a very Christian thing to do!

Trey

11:43 AM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

I can't stand people who talk about weddings, homosexuality or religion. But I also work in a hire/fire at will state, and I know getting into a confrontational disagreement at work doesn't do much for job security or peace of mind. I might also add I can't stand conversations about drinking, golf, church, family gatherings, child birth, toddlers, divorce, baseball, football and moral superiority. For this reason I have found that finding some work to do and doing it allows me to gracefully remove myself from any offending conversation.

12:26 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Cham, what exactly do you like to talk about???

Trey

1:14 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

I almost included that paragraph,but I was in a truncating mood, Tmink.

I like to talk about place people visit, projects that people take on, hobbies, volunteering, and interesting people that my coworkers know. I'll be happy to discuss politics as well, as long as the discussion doesn't devolve into a heated one-sided speech.

1:23 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Scott said...

No Cham.....You cannot be fired for any reason, in any state. Under no circumstances and under penalty of law you cannot fire someone because of race, sex, age, many disabilities,OR religion. If this gentleman sues it will be up to a jury to determine if he was fired because of religion. Personally I wouldn't want to be Brookstone.

2:11 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Cham said...

Well, Scott, I suppose this fired individual could try to sue Brookstone on the basis he was fired for religious reasons. But all Brookstone would have to do is say this man was fired because he spent too much time talking to other employees and not enough time doing his job. If the fired employee insisted on explaining the conversation that he had with another Brookstone employee on company time, he would be proving Brookstone's POV.

3:08 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

TMink-

I think he is quite maladjusted. I can't say he's mentally unbalanced, because I'm not his shrink.

Realistically, no matter what he thinks of her lifestyle, he's not going to convert someone who is married to her gay partner to accept his form of Christianity and become straight, by chatting with her in a Brookstone, when she outranks him and didn't ask for the chat.

He went to the chapel -- why? Could he not deal with her presence?

As I said, as a supervisor, I would have fired them both.

She shouldn't have brought this stuff up; it has nothing to do with their professional relationship. She apparently did it either to make him uncomfortable, or because she wanted attention.

He should have nodded and gone on with his day. If he wants to sell her on his beliefs, his only realistic option is to demonstrate them by example. If, one day, she asks him about his faith, and shows an interest, he can tell her.

In 2009, it's not like someone can't find out about Christianity in Massachusetts, either. He's not a missionary telling some isolated tribe about Jesus or something. What good would come of his condemning her?

He's a religious nut in my view, because he has no concept of how he is perceived by other people, and because he believes he has the right to condemn them.

5:13 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: Dr Helen
RE: Cham Has a Point....

....about 'at will' state law.

Remember my observation of the guy who was assaulted by a woman manager in a managers meeting and HE got fired.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.....]

5:43 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: BarryD
RE: Your 'View'

In 2009, it's not like someone can't find out about Christianity in Massachusetts, either. He's not a missionary telling some isolated tribe about Jesus or something. What good would come of his condemning her?

He's a religious nut in my view....
-- BarryD

You're obvious VERY 'ignorant'. The question is are you "proud of it"?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Stupid, adj., Ignorant and proud of it.]

5:44 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

Chuck, perhaps you could enlighten me, WRT how what you quoted there implies any sort of ignorance?

Or pride?

You sound like the one who's proud of... Well, something...

5:50 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: BarryD
RE: Enlightenment

Chuck, perhaps you could enlighten me, WRT how what you quoted there implies any sort of ignorance? -- BarryD

I already cited it. What's YOUR problem? English as a tertiary language? Or something much, much worse?

RE: Pride, Anyone?

Or pride?

You sound like the one who's proud of... Well, something...
-- BarryD

Or is it rather a matter, in YOUR missive, of 'projection'?

What do I have to be 'proud' of? Other than the fact of recognizing 'ignorance' and—with this additional evidence of 'projection', on your part—'pride', when I see it?

There's darn little I have to take 'pride' in, other than the acclaim of my compatriots. And you are certainly NOT one of their ranks.

Hope that helps....but....as you've probably guessed....I have SERIOUS doubts.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[A man's pride shall bring him low: but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit.]

6:18 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

P.S. I'm hardly 'proud' of being 'ignorant'.

YOU....on the other hand....

6:19 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

Chuck, read your post and perhaps you can explain WTF you're talking about.

It does not make sense to someone who is reading English as opposed to Chuck's mind.

Sorry, can't read minds.

6:23 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Joe said...

I would have fired him for being a self-righteous ass and her for being a whiny bitch.

6:31 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: All
RE: Evasion, Anyone?

Chuck, read your post and perhaps you can explain WTF you're talking about. -- BarryD

Actually....

...I read my post. A couple of times before hitting the 'Publish' button.

But then again....

....those who wish to remain 'ignorant' are probably much more 'prideful' than others are.

Something to do with denial, I suspect.

'nuff said.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. If BarryD were REALLY interested in removing their 'ignorance', they'd have maintained a different 'tact'.

6:34 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: Joe
RE: Heh

I would have fired him for being a self-righteous ass and her for being a whiny bitch. -- Joe

Why do you remind me of that bishop in the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre who reputedly said....

Kill them all. Let God sort it out.

....or words to that effect?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Tolerance is the virtue of those who have no convictions.]

6:38 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

"P.S. If BarryD were REALLY interested in removing their 'ignorance', they'd have maintained a different 'tact'."

Chuck, seriously, that sentence does not make sense.

Your use of quotes implies that you have some meaning that you're not stating. Only you know what it is.

Did you mean "tack" instead of "tact"? Tack is a sailing metaphor in this case, BTW. Tact doesn't make sense in the sentence.

Why do you remind me of that bishop in the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre who reputedly said....

Kill them all. Let God sort it out.


Because you're flirting with insanity, perhaps?

It was the Beziers massacre, I believe, a few hundred years earlier.

But again, what the hell are you talking about?

8:11 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

Oh, and to whom does "they" refer?

Being neither royal nor Rastafarian, I tend to be a singular noun, so it can't refer to me.

8:43 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: All
RE: BarryD....

....is truly 'pathetic'.

'nuff said.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Those who refuse to comprehend....will NEVER comprehend.]

8:49 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger BarryD said...

Chuck, seriously. Refuse to comprehend WHAT?

Sentence fragments calling me names? Pronoun references to nothing at all?

If you are the ultimate troll, I commend you. Otherwise, I sincerely recommend some serious self-examination before you call anyone else "pathetic", "ignorant", or any other such thing.

8:53 PM, November 12, 2009  
Blogger Fen said...

Mary: Wow. Generalize much, Trey? The Muslims I have known -- as neighbors and fellow students -- are rather unassuming people, and I'm wondering where you get your data from?

Fen: From all the "unassuming" Muslims declaring Jihad and Fatwa over a few cartoons.

If you disagree, then please explain why those the terms Jihad and Fatwa are now part of common speak?

You think we learned them from a movie?

Mary: See Fen, the problem is when you make the HUGE leap that our neighbors who are Muslim-Americans (and have lived in the US for generations) are the ones speaking of Jihad and Fatwa.

Never said that. You're stroking a strawman. And you dodged my question - if you think Trey is generalizing, then please explain why the terms Jihad and Fatwa have become part of our common speak

BTW, are you the transexual Mary who used to troll Althouse? You're a guy, right?

6:16 AM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

BarryD, thanks for taking the time to respond to my question. I think much the same way.

Fen, I think you make the mistake of reading Mary's posts. Once I figure out someone is just contentious, I stop reading them. No point in it.

My grandmother had a wonderful saying: Don't wrestle with a pig. You will just get dirty and the pig enjoys it.

Trey

9:20 AM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

It's that attitude of being comfortable in your ignorance, Trey.

You don't like to meet people who challenge your views. And you don't like the mild "pushing back", when it rubs against the borders of your own family.

Understood. And remember: I'm praying daily for your growth. God bless!

(and namecalling isn't very Christian, nor manly either. Is that what you're teaching your snowflake sons?? ;-)

9:36 AM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

Hiya Fen!

Sure, I'll play: I am what you say I am. (Does it make it more fun for you that way?)

pictures at the link -- sorry, no pajama shots though. Have a swell weekend, boys. Go get some!

9:39 AM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger michael farris said...

In defense of the manager in Mass. Since this is massachusetts we're talking about, the likelihood of having married gay customers (who may mention the fact directly or indirectly) is hardly trivial. You could make a case that if he would make that comment to a manager he might to a customer as well.

If that was the case a more appropriate response would be to remind him to keep such opinions to himself on company time when customers might be around.

10:23 AM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger TMink said...

Michael, I bet he knew the difference between a customer and a co-worker, but I agree with your last sentence entirely.

Trey

11:55 AM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: michael farris
RE: Not Knowing....

If that was the case a more appropriate response would be to remind him to keep such opinions to himself on company time when customers might be around. -- michael farris

....his 'priors', with respect to reprimands he may have received from superiors, nor corporate policy, I agree with you.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Based on what little I DO know about the situation, I think he has grounds for a law suit....

12:32 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Fen said...

Mary: "Sure, I'll play: I am what you say I am."

Okay. So why do you post under a woman's name if you're a male? You're some kind of weirdo aren't you?

1:40 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Fen said...

Mary: "I assure you, you didn't learn about those things from our neighbors and their children. They are as American as you or I, except they are not Christians and worship as Muslims."

Yah right, like this guy:

Police arrested 22-year-old Abdul Walid Hamid of Hayward on the evening of Wednesday, Nov. 4, after he reportedly tore a crucifix from a person's neck and scared others at Stoneridge Shopping Center.

Hamid, an employee at a mall kiosk near Starbucks, has been charged with battery, terrorist threats and grand theft.

According to reports, Hamid was yelling "Allah is power" and "Islam is great" while holding a pen in a fist over his head. Witnesses said he shouted anti-Christian comments, said police.


http://www.danvilleweekly.com/news/show_story.php?id=2339

6:41 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Mary said...

So why do you post under a woman's name if you're a male? You're some kind of weirdo aren't you?

Does that excite you Fen? Thinking about my naughty bits? (I could refer you to some better sites, if that's your kink...)

And surely your link proves that all Muslim Americans are terrorists to be feared? Maybe you and Trey could find a bunker to hide out in together while the storm passes?

*not that there's anything wrong with that...*

6:54 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: Mary
RE: Heh

Thanks for substantiating my opinion of you....and your ilk.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Gay is a one-word oxymoron.]

7:03 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Alex said...

For me the scariest part was when the lesbian co-worker said "Human resource buddy, keep your mouth shut". She had him fired because he insulted her. So it's ok to fire Christians who don't keep their pie-hole shut, but lesbian who chatters on and on about lifestyle is A-ok....

7:35 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Fen said...

Mary: "And surely your link proves that all Muslim Americans are terrorists to be feared?"

It proves that Trey was not generalizing. Strawman and whitewash all you want. Trany trash.

9:09 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger Fen said...

Or simply look at the media coverage. The fact that you didn't hear about it earlier, that it wasn't plastered across CNN, speaks volumes about how common its become.

Muslims violence in America? Yawn. Not newsworthy.

9:35 PM, November 13, 2009  
Blogger michael farris said...

"For me the scariest part was when the lesbian co-worker said "Human resource buddy, keep your mouth shut"."

I'm a little prone to interpret this as a .... provocation. Companies do (or at least used to) send people under various degrees of cover, at one time called 'bulldogs' IINM, to provoke employees to see how they react under stress.

If he doesn't pursue this, I'd say the chances are 50/50 that he had some priors and this was a test that he failed.

5:46 AM, November 14, 2009  
Blogger Chuck Pelto said...

TO: michael farris
RE: As I Was Saying....

If he doesn't pursue this, I'd say the chances are 50/50 that he had some priors and this was a test that he failed. -- michael farris

....I don't know his 'priors'. And 'yes', failure to pursue this on his part would be an interesting 'indicator'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out....]

2:30 PM, November 16, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home