If you thought the case in Texas was bad wait until you read this. http://www.christianheadlines.com/blog/georgia-pastor-forced-to-hand-over-sermons-to-the-state.html This is where political correctness is taking us. If he loses this sets a dangerous precedent for all of America.
He wanted the job over HIV/AIDS and then lost it when he got ratted out. Now he's filing a discrimination suit while withholding documentation of his anti-LGBT leanings. It's likely to turn out that he was not the victim in all of this. He just got his religious feelings hurt because he chose the wrong position to advance his power. Don't let the fox guard the hen house.
More about the Pastor here http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/20/p...ms-he-was-fired-for-sermons-on-homosexuality/
This material is not some fishing expedition where respondants are just looking for anything to smear him with .He is suing the state claiming that these sermons were the reason for his termination. That makes their content relevant and material in the proceedings. He cannot possibly expect a court to refuse to entertain a discovery motion by the respondent party to the lawsuit he filed. there is no conceivable evidence more vital to this civil case than the precise content on which he was allegedly discriminated against. He can refuse to provide the court and opposing council those manuscripts as his clear constitutional right, but he risks a summary judgement against him in the suit.
Let's first take a look at some of his "personal feelings". http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/gen...m-from-being-head-of-public-health-department The two statements highlighted above disqualify him from adminstering public health services. He is entitled to hold those beliefs and even to preach to others about those beliefs and no one is denying him those 1st amendment rights. However when it comes to holding public office it is against the law to discriminate. In essence what he preaches is a violation of the oath of office to uphold the constitution. Freedom of religion and speech is protected but We the People are entitled to a secular application of the government OF the people and FOR the people.
Yes. This: Should be enough to disqualify him from any position that has the words "advisory" and "HIV/AID" in its title.
Well, to be fair, only a subset of Americans have a problem comprehending the concept of a secular government.
Absolutely!!! It would be the equivalent of putting an Anti-vaccine proponent in charge of child welfare
The second one is questionable, but what does his views about homosexuality have anything to do with AIDS? How is he discriminating? If anything he's the one being discrimated. How so? I'm not sure about secular but what makes you think he's not of and for the people? - - - Updated - - - How is he discriminating?
This is interesting. It's not about political correctness, but if the government can interpret religious documents for proof of a persons' beliefs when hiring for a job. Generally the government can't because it is then interpreting religious documents. But if there is a compelling government interest it can. So does protecting minorities count as one? Of course. So then it boils back to are religious documents admissible for job hiring? In this case, yes it makes sense. So he has to turn them over to show that the case had compelling interest in firing him.
He has disqualified himself for the secular government position. Would you put someone who hates small children in charge of a daycare center?
Sorry but I thought the government is allowed to be selective about hiring those clearly in the category of "Bat(*)(*)(*)(*) crazy" Here’s some of what he believes: • Oprah Winfrey is harboring the spirit of the anti-Christ; • The prophet Muhammad, founder of Islam, was influenced by Satan; • The devil set up Catholicism; • Acceptance of homosexuals is a satanic ploy to destroy America; • Rapper Jay Z is a disciple of Satan; • Single mothers are ruining their children; • Disney movies, which are loaded with violence, sex and magic, are a satanic ploy to split up families; • Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is a “satanic belief”; • The distribution of condoms to a public in need leads to higher AIDS rates; • The pope is the anti-Christ. From DT's link http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/gen...m-from-being-head-of-public-health-department
Try me. - - - Updated - - - How can you see it. Did he act upon his beliefs by disce imaging against homosexuals at his job or something? - - - Updated - - - But did he act upon them?
According to you guys gays have nothing to do with AIDS so I don't see how is his views on homosexuality relates to his job. As to your question if he's good at his job then yes. All I care about is if he can fake loving children for the duration of his job. But where did the pastor said he hated gays?