PDA

View Full Version : "Apostolic Christian" gets fired from Walmart...


jediwill83
04-10-2011, 09:10 AM
http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/4692845-417/wal-mart-firing-of-employee-not-religious-harassment-court-rules.html

If her behavior was as reported I woulda fired her too.

sandie
04-10-2011, 11:22 AM
http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/4692845-417/wal-mart-firing-of-employee-not-religious-harassment-court-rules.html

If her behavior was as reported I woulda fired her too.

Where in His earthly ministry did Jesus ever approach someone in this manner?
Goodness....just some good old fashioned common sense should've dictated better behavior.
And apparently, she totally missed it when Jesus said to treat others the way you would want to be treated.

jediwill83
04-10-2011, 11:28 AM
Yeah....its sad....basicly reinforcing the stereotype.

sandie
04-10-2011, 11:31 AM
Yeah....its sad....basicly reinforcing the stereotype.

Someone should have at least taught her some manners. Looks like she learned the lesson the hard way. I would imagine she's got some hefty legal bills?

Sam
04-10-2011, 11:32 AM
Where in His earthly ministry did Jesus ever approach someone in this manner?
Goodness....just some good old fashioned common sense should've dictated better behavior.
And apparently, she totally missed it when Jesus said to treat others the way you would want to be treated.

Jesus was pretty rough with the religious and holiness folks of His time. Read Matthew chapter 23.

sandie
04-10-2011, 11:33 AM
Jesus was pretty rough with the religious and holiness folks of His time. Read Matthew chapter 23.

Yep, no doubt He was.
Guess she missed that part too.

ILG
04-10-2011, 12:47 PM
I read this and thought "For pete's sake, she can have her opinion". It says "they" were in a conversation about gays. Was the woman harassing her? Following her around and stalking her? Or did she just give her her opinion. "Screaming over her" is very relative. It doesn't mean much to me.

budrok
04-10-2011, 07:38 PM
The problem lies in was this the correct attitude to have toward the lost. I have been in the UPC for 31 years and have seen this attitude over and over again. There are at least four great errors this individual made: 1) We can hate the sin but not the sinner. Jesus did not hate the hypocrites in the synagogues. Jesus hated hypocrisy.
2) Let's remember that we must obstain from evil communication, this means gossip, dirty jokes, and debating mute issues that have no productivity. If she were to sit down with the individual who was Homosexual and tell her about Jesus and tell her that Jesus LOVES her and that there were ways for her to feel freedom for her, that would have been profitable. 3) As Christians we need to show Christ in our WORK ETHIC, we need to shine Christ on the work floor and in the break room. 4) we need to remember that as Pentecostal Apostolic's we are being watched at all times, it is our job to present ourselves as a grounded knowledgeable individuals not as ranting hatemongers. This lady's behavior did not reach the high standards we must hold ourselves too, nor was she fired because of religious discrimination she was fired because she has no inner monologue.

budrok
04-10-2011, 07:42 PM
Please forgive the error above. under item number 2) The phrase is MOOT ISSUE, Not MUTE ISSUE, I dislike auto-correct.

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 01:56 AM
I read this and thought "For pete's sake, she can have her opinion". It says "they" were in a conversation about gays. Was the woman harassing her? Following her around and stalking her? Or did she just give her her opinion. "Screaming over her" is very relative. It doesn't mean much to me.
Sounds like a set up...they were already discussing it and she voiced her opinion

jediwill83
04-11-2011, 06:23 AM
I thinki it was the way in which she presented her opinion....I dont think this was a witch hunt.

Digging4Truth
04-11-2011, 07:07 AM
As far as what she said... we should be allowed to voice our opinions on things. These days you can get fired if you voice a religious opinion and that is a crying shame.

The way they say she went about it is the issue that is questionable.

If you're going to discussion religion... especially religion and homosexuality... I say stay out of the Kitchen if you can't stand the heat.

Now... I wouldn't have answered in the words she used. I would have been a little more tactful about it. But lack of tact in wording shouldn't be a firing offense. Lack of tact in execution can get you escorted out.

There isn't much about what she said or the way she allegedly said it that I approve of on a personal level but I'm about tired of this thought police society.

Truthseeker
04-11-2011, 07:12 AM
i'd like to see the situation first hand. Maybe she was wrong or maybe not.

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 07:29 AM
As far as what she said... we should be allowed to voice our opinions on things. These days you can get fired if you voice a religious opinion and that is a crying shame.

The way they say she went about it is the issue that is questionable.

If you're going to discussion religion... especially religion and homosexuality... I say stay out of the Kitchen if you can't stand the heat.

Now... I wouldn't have answered in the words she used. I would have been a little more tactful about it. But lack of tact in wording shouldn't be a firing offense. Lack of tact in execution can get you escorted out.

There isn't much about what she said or the way she allegedly said it that I approve of on a personal level but I'm about tired of this thought police society.

You don't have any rights to free expression while someone else is paying you. They have the right to regulate your speech.

ILG
04-11-2011, 07:30 AM
As far as what she said... we should be allowed to voice our opinions on things. These days you can get fired if you voice a religious opinion and that is a crying shame.

The way they say she went about it is the issue that is questionable.

If you're going to discussion religion... especially religion and homosexuality... I say stay out of the Kitchen if you can't stand the heat.

Now... I wouldn't have answered in the words she used. I would have been a little more tactful about it. But lack of tact in wording shouldn't be a firing offense. Lack of tact in execution can get you escorted out.

There isn't much about what she said or the way she allegedly said it that I approve of on a personal level but I'm about tired of this thought police society.

Yeah, it's the thought police that I have the issue with. And the idea that maybe people can't seem to work with people they disagree with. If the woman was truly harassing the lesbian, (like Westboro does to people) then, she deserved to be fired. However, I dunno. I am not convinced either way. I have seen things happen that have been unjust both directions.

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 07:33 AM
http://courtlistener.com/ca7/26x8/tanisha-matthews-v-walmart/

LUKE2447
04-11-2011, 07:34 AM
Who really know how it went down. Also loving the sinner and hating the sin is also can be incorrect statement. You cannot separate the sin from the sinner as the heart is what defiles. You can love what they can be but you do not love the person they are.

drummerboy_dave
04-11-2011, 07:35 AM
i'd like to see the situation first hand. Maybe she was wrong or maybe not.Maybe there'll be video posted on the walmart freakshow website. :heeheehee

LUKE2447
04-11-2011, 07:36 AM
Barn you are correct. I believe the employer has the right to determine work place social enviroment. IMO for the most part the GOV should stay of it. Of couse the courts have to hear a case but regulation IMO has been overboard.

ILG
04-11-2011, 07:39 AM
http://courtlistener.com/ca7/26x8/tanisha-matthews-v-walmart/

In her statement, Amy reported that Matthews was “screaming over her” that
God does not accept gays, they should not “be on earth,” and they will “go to hell” because
they are not “right in the head.” Five other employees confirmed that Matthews had said
that gays are sinners and are going to hell.

So....hmmmm.....was she screaming like one person said? Or did she just say so like five others said? Most of the rest of the article was just describing things and wasn't really about the initial incident.

So, it might be the thought police or this employee was really a jerk. Maybe the judge was a lesbian out to cleanse Christians from the workplace. We have no idea.

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 07:42 AM
In her statement, Amy reported that Matthews was “screaming over her” that
God does not accept gays, they should not “be on earth,” and they will “go to hell” because
they are not “right in the head.” Five other employees confirmed that Matthews had said
that gays are sinners and are going to hell.

So....hmmmm.....was she screaming like one person said? Or did she just say so like five others said? Most of the rest of the article was just describing things and wasn't really about the initial incident.

So, it might be the thought police or this employee was really a jerk. Maybe the judge was a lesbian out to cleanse Christians from the workplace. We have no idea.

Nope.

Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, RICHARD A. POSNER, ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

All were in agreement.

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 07:46 AM
Nope.

Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, RICHARD A. POSNER, ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

All were in agreement.


Posner, BTW is a legal legend and know for his more Libertarian views.

Including arguing that anyone that would not use torture to get needed info, if that was the only way to get it, should not be in a position of authority.

ILG
04-11-2011, 07:47 AM
Nope.

Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, RICHARD A. POSNER, ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

All were in agreement.

LOL! Alrighty then, maybe they were all liberals. ;)

I am more likely to believe the verdict though with three judges on board, however, there is still a chance that it was discrimination on their parts. I also do wonder why the other five people mentioned nothing about "screaming".

ILG
04-11-2011, 07:48 AM
Posner, BTW is a legal legend and know for his more Libertarian views.

Including arguing that anyone that would not use torture to get needed info, if that was the only way to get it, should not be in a position of authority.

Yikes!

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 07:52 AM
LOL! Alrighty then, maybe they were all liberals. ;)

I am more likely to believe the verdict though with three judges on board, however, there is still a chance that it was discrimination on their parts. I also do wonder why the other five people mentioned nothing about "screaming".

They were also affirming a lower court ruling which means yet another judge was involved.

ILG
04-11-2011, 08:01 AM
They were also affirming a lower court ruling which means yet another judge was involved.

If the Apostolic woman was torturing this girl, she probably should have been promoted to manager. Oh wait, she was a conservative! ;)

sandie
04-11-2011, 08:06 AM
If the Apostolic woman was torturing this girl, she probably should have been promoted to manager. Oh wait, she was a conservative! ;)

Please forgive the change of topic, but, ILG...how's that count going for the supreme court judge in your state?
Haven't heard anything since the numbers were reported incorrectly.

ILG
04-11-2011, 08:31 AM
They could have a recount but most seem to think it was a legitimate mistake.

sandie
04-11-2011, 08:58 AM
They could have a recount but most seem to think it was a legitimate mistake.

Thanks for the update.

riverslivnwtr
04-11-2011, 09:08 AM
Who really know how it went down. Also loving the sinner and hating the sin is also can be incorrect statement. You cannot separate the sin from the sinner as the heart is what defiles. You can love what they can be but you do not love the person they are.


Then Jesus should have just stayed in heaven and just said pfut....

blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy...should be ringing a bell by now,,While we were yet sinners Christ died for us.. :smack:heeheehee

mfblume
04-11-2011, 09:48 AM
Also loving the sinner and hating the sin is also can be incorrect statement. You cannot separate the sin from the sinner as the heart is what defiles. You can love what they can be but you do not love the person they are.Then Jesus should have just stayed in heaven and just said pfut....

blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy...should be ringing a bell by now,,While we were yet sinners Christ died for us.. :smack:heeheehee

Romans 5:8 KJV But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

It most certainly is true that God loves the sinner and hates the sin.

OnTheFritz
04-11-2011, 10:43 AM
This isn't about the "thought police", it's about workplace conduct. I'm glad she was fired. Sounds like she deserved it.

MissBrattified
04-11-2011, 11:19 AM
It doesn't sound like it was a simple conversation where she was asked a question and felt that she had to give an honest answer--albeit politely.

If she was yelling or screaming at a fellow employee, that alone is abusive behavior--it doesn't matter what the content was. That fact that she was attacking someone verbally because of their lifestyle makes it worse, and the fact that she was attacking someone verbally while trying to portray herself as a Christian makes it awful.

Whether this is okay based on "religious freedom" is beside the point for me. I really don't know how that applies to this situation. However, it definitely doesn't sound like she was acting Christlike.

RandyWayne
04-11-2011, 11:20 AM
This isn't about the "thought police", it's about workplace conduct. I'm glad she was fired. Sounds like she deserved it.

And she is no doubt feeling "persecuted for His name" even as we speak.

I wonder if she has had the same sort of argument with other women over cutting their hair?

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 11:34 AM
I thinki it was the way in which she presented her opinion....I dont think this was a witch hunt.
So if she nicely told the lesbian "Yes you are going to hell"? The Lesbian would not of minded? Im just not sure we can know the Lesbian portrayed this other woman the best light possible

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 11:35 AM
You don't have any rights to free expression while someone else is paying you. They have the right to regulate your speech.
Just like being in the Military. Personally though I don't think we should lose some of our freedoms just because we are being paid to work for someone.

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 11:37 AM
Barn you are correct. I believe the employer has the right to determine work place social enviroment. IMO for the most part the GOV should stay of it. Of couse the courts have to hear a case but regulation IMO has been overboard.
I think it's one thing for a woman to volunteer her views to someone else unsolicited...

But in this case this was a group discussion and possibly she was asked for her opinion. IF it was a group discussion on the bible and being gay then they opened the door to her opinion too

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 12:59 PM
So if she nicely told the lesbian "Yes you are going to hell"? The Lesbian would not of minded? Im just not sure we can know the Lesbian portrayed this other woman the best light possible

If you read the court opinion you will see that it was actually someone other then the lesbian that complained about her, it also said she acknowledged that

"none of the other employees involved in the conversation commented about 'someone’s individual status, homosexuality or race,'"

In other words she was discussing it in the abstract she made it personal.

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 01:02 PM
Just like being in the Military. Personally though I don't think we should lose some of our freedoms just because we are being paid to work for someone.

Your not losing your freedom, in the workplace you represent the company you work for and they are responsible for your actions therefore they get to dictate your actions and statements.

Not really to hard to understand, she is in a very real sense an agent of Wal-Mart and when she is acting in that capacity they get to determine her conduct. Outside of work hours she is free to join with pastor Phelps and Westboro friends.

Aquila
04-11-2011, 01:03 PM
If I was drawn into the conversation I'd explain how I believe that every human being needs Christ, yes, even homosexuals. We're all human and are guilty of deplorable sin in God's eyes.

OnTheFritz
04-11-2011, 01:11 PM
So if she nicely told the lesbian "Yes you are going to hell"? The Lesbian would not of minded? Im just not sure we can know the Lesbian portrayed this other woman the best light possible

Frankly, if some idiot who doesn't really know me tells me I'm going to hell for whatever reason, I would mind. I wouldn't try to get them fired, but it doesn't appear that this lady did either. I can think of a very small handful of people who could say that to me and it be constructive and not offensive. "The Lesbian" did not portray the woman it all, it was a third-party who witnessed the incident.

Also, this idea that requiring professional conduct somehow infringes on our free speech is just goofy. Take your free speech about your religious beliefs out on the street corner, and quit doing it on that company's dime.

MissBrattified
04-11-2011, 01:14 PM
Your not losing your freedom, in the workplace you represent the company you work for and they are responsible for your actions therefore they get to dictate your actions and statements.

That makes sense to me. I'm sure there are employers who like to prohibit employees from speaking out in support of certain lifestyles, so that right to restrict employee actions and statements is pretty important. This would probably have turned out differently if she had made the comments off *campus* on her own time.

Not really to hard to understand, she is in a very real sense an agent of Wal-Mart and when she is acting in that capacity they get to determine her conduct. Outside of work hours she is free to join with pastor Phelps and Westboro friends.

She sounds like a good candidate. :foottap

MissBrattified
04-11-2011, 01:17 PM
Frankly, if some idiot who doesn't really know me tells me I'm going to hell for whatever reason, I would mind. I wouldn't try to get them fired, but it doesn't appear that this lady did either. I can think of a very small handful of people who could say that to me and it be constructive and not offensive. "The Lesbian" did not portray the woman it all, it was a third-party who witnessed the incident.

Also, this idea that requiring professional conduct somehow infringes on our free speech is just goofy. Take your free speech about your religious beliefs out on the street corner, and quit doing it on that company's dime.

My husband has a family member who has been fired several times because he insists on reading his Bible on company time. (Not while on break) And of course, when he's fired, he seems proud of it and acts like he's being persecuted for Christ. One time in particular, he took his Bible to work and read it and when he was asked to get back to work, he said that if his coworkers could put up Playboy posters, he should be able to bring his Bible to work. "Bringing" the Bible to work wasn't the problem.... :rolleyes2

pelathais
04-11-2011, 01:31 PM
I guess it was the "screaming over her" part that Walmart management objected to? I can understand that, if the "Apostolic Christian" was truly "screaming over" the lesbian coworker.

There's often a whole bunch of nuances that we miss when reading a news report which comes a couple of years after the fact. Be that as it may, I wouldn't want to work in any environment where my coworkers were permitted to "scream over" anyone for any reason.

coadie
04-11-2011, 01:57 PM
Your not losing your freedom, in the workplace you represent the company you work for and they are responsible for your actions therefore they get to dictate your actions and statements.

Not really to hard to understand, she is in a very real sense an agent of Wal-Mart and when she is acting in that capacity they get to determine her conduct. Outside of work hours she is free to join with pastor Phelps and Westboro friends.

You know what "agency" means?

Ironic you brought up Phelps. he is free speech city. in the 90's I had a conversation with a client of mine in NYC that was followed by one of the actual Phelps clan getting fired from a job. In that case and this case i don't see a warning step. Many employees want a warning meeting and the next time the misconduct occurs, it is termination.

AncientPaths
04-11-2011, 03:59 PM
You know what "agency" means?

Ironic you brought up Phelps. he is free speech city. in the 90's I had a conversation with a client of mine in NYC that was followed by one of the actual Phelps clan getting fired from a job. In that case and this case i don't see a warning step. Many employees want a warning meeting and the next time the misconduct occurs, it is termination.

"Many employees want a warning meeting".

So what? Immediate dismissal for conduct is quite common and is well within their right.

Baron1710
04-11-2011, 06:24 PM
You know what "agency" means?

Ironic you brought up Phelps. he is free speech city. in the 90's I had a conversation with a client of mine in NYC that was followed by one of the actual Phelps clan getting fired from a job. In that case and this case i don't see a warning step. Many employees want a warning meeting and the next time the misconduct occurs, it is termination.

I am betting I have a much better grasp on the nuances of agency than you would even care to know about.

CC1
04-11-2011, 06:31 PM
My husband has a family member who has been fired several times because he insists on reading his Bible on company time. (Not while on break) And of course, when he's fired, he seems proud of it and acts like he's being persecuted for Christ. One time in particular, he took his Bible to work and read it and when he was asked to get back to work, he said that if his coworkers could put up Playboy posters, he should be able to bring his Bible to work. "Bringing" the Bible to work wasn't the problem.... :rolleyes2

Your husbands relative is the kind of nut that is probably going to be surprised when the book of life is opened to his page and judged!

ForeverBlessed
04-11-2011, 06:54 PM
If I was drawn into the conversation I'd explain how I believe that every human being needs Christ, yes, even homosexuals. We're all human and are guilty of deplorable sin in God's eyes.

Have you ever seen the DVD "Lord, Save Us From Your Followers"? It is very eye opening.

Monarchianism
04-11-2011, 07:55 PM
Phft.

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 07:59 PM
If you read the court opinion you will see that it was actually someone other then the lesbian that complained about her, it also said she acknowledged that

"none of the other employees involved in the conversation commented about 'someone’s individual status, homosexuality or race,'"

In other words she was discussing it in the abstract she made it personal.

Your not losing your freedom, in the workplace you represent the company you work for and they are responsible for your actions therefore they get to dictate your actions and statements.

Not really to hard to understand, she is in a very real sense an agent of Wal-Mart and when she is acting in that capacity they get to determine her conduct. Outside of work hours she is free to join with pastor Phelps and Westboro friends.
Very good. :thumbsup

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 08:00 PM
Frankly, if some idiot who doesn't really know me tells me I'm going to hell for whatever reason, I would mind. I wouldn't try to get them fired, but it doesn't appear that this lady did either. I can think of a very small handful of people who could say that to me and it be constructive and not offensive. "The Lesbian" did not portray the woman it all, it was a third-party who witnessed the incident.

Also, this idea that requiring professional conduct somehow infringes on our free speech is just goofy. Take your free speech about your religious beliefs out on the street corner, and quit doing it on that company's dime.
What if it was during a lunch break?

AncientPaths
04-11-2011, 08:26 PM
What if it was during a lunch break?

On premises? Still an agent for Walmart? Still asked to adhere to professional conduct codes?

Personally, I have no sympathy for this type of behavior, so I'll admit I'm going to be hard-pressed to cut her slack.

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 08:36 PM
On premises? Still an agent for Walmart? Still asked to adhere to professional conduct codes?

Personally, I have no sympathy for this type of behavior, so I'll admit I'm going to be hard-pressed to cut her slack.
Assuming it was a casual conversation, not here screaming and standing over the other person as she reported.

If you were at work and a co-worker asked you if you thought a gay person can't be saved unless they repent and change, and your opinion was no they are not saved, would you answer the question?

Arphaxad
04-11-2011, 08:59 PM
Assuming it was a casual conversation, not here screaming and standing over the other person as she reported.

If you were at work and a co-worker asked you if you thought a gay person can't be saved unless they repent and change, and your opinion was no they are not saved, would you answer the question?

I would answer like this "Who cares what I think, what does the Bible say?"


:doggyrun

Praxeas
04-11-2011, 09:05 PM
Hmmm, "Look it up yourself"?

Arphaxad
04-11-2011, 09:39 PM
Hmmm, "Look it up yourself"?

No, if they say " I don't know", than you have an opportunity to offer a Bible study.

:doggyrun

AncientPaths
04-12-2011, 07:07 AM
Assuming it was a casual conversation, not here screaming and standing over the other person as she reported.

If you were at work and a co-worker asked you if you thought a gay person can't be saved unless they repent and change, and your opinion was no they are not saved, would you answer the question?

I would answer the question honestly, I think. And that's a whole different situation.

And I would clarify that I don't know the mind of God, but that the Bible leads me to be believe that is true, yes. And I might suggest discussing more about it after work, over coffee, etc. And leave it at that.

It would also depend on my relationship with that person. Is this the first time they've ever spoken to me? Are we friends? Acquaintances? The way it's handled depends on those factors, I think.

Digging4Truth
04-12-2011, 07:10 AM
I would answer the question honestly, I think. And that's a whole different situation.

And I would clarify that I don't know the mind of God, but that the Bible leads me to be believe that is true, yes. And I might suggest discussing more about it after work, over coffee, etc. And leave it at that.

It would also depend on my relationship with that person. Is this the first time they've ever spoken to me? Are we friends? Acquaintances? The way it's handled depends on those factors, I think.

That sounds like a balanced and wise approach.

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 12:15 PM
I would answer the question honestly, I think. And that's a whole different situation.

And I would clarify that I don't know the mind of God, but that the Bible leads me to be believe that is true, yes. And I might suggest discussing more about it after work, over coffee, etc. And leave it at that.

It would also depend on my relationship with that person. Is this the first time they've ever spoken to me? Are we friends? Acquaintances? The way it's handled depends on those factors, I think.
I'd still be concerned it can be a pitfall at work.

pelathais
04-12-2011, 03:08 PM
No, if they say " I don't know", than you have an opportunity to offer a Bible study.

:doggyrun

Would your "Bible Study" involve getting in their face and "screaming over" them?

Jesus did tell us to "be wise" when confronting "the world" (Matthew 10:16). From my own experience, "screaming over" people is never effective and usually has just one result. A rather unfortunate result for the one who was "screaming."

pelathais
04-12-2011, 04:32 PM
I just came across this pic. I thought it was kind of cute and fits in with the idea of "sending everybody to heck."

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc275/pelathais/nedcondemnstoheck.jpg

Praxeas
04-12-2011, 04:36 PM
Bart can't say heck

Arphaxad
04-12-2011, 06:38 PM
[QUOTE=pelathais;1057448]Would your "Bible Study" involve getting in their face and "screaming over" them?

No, is that how you do them?

:doggyrun