A female university employee emails a male colleague about viewing a Lesbian film. The recipient of the email sends her an email saying that he believes homosexuality is wrong and an abomination to God. She complains to the university. He gets reprimanded.
On March 7, Arlene Holpp Scala (search), chair of the Women's Studies Department, sent Daniel an unsolicited e-mail announcement of an upcoming film event: "'Ruthie and Connie: Every Room in the House,' a lesbian relationship story." Scala advised those who wished to respond, "Please do not hit reply, click here," thus directing messages to her university e-mail address.
On March 8, Daniel clicked to privately reply, "Do not send me any mail about 'Connie and Sally' and 'Adam and Steve.' These are perversions. The absence of God in higher education brings on confusion. That is why in these classes the Creator of the heavens and the earth is never mentioned." [His message is quoted in full. No other communication with Scala ensued.]
Read the rest of the story here.
So, only pro-gay speech is protected. The rest of us aren't allowed to express our views. Good to know.
I wonder where the ACLU is?
What's absolutely sickening is that this woman raised the issue on her own volition
and contacted Mr. Daniel first
. His "threatening" email was simply an elongated refusal to attend her gay love-fest seminar. The only reason the Chairwoman complained is that she's a holier-than-thou, hypocritical, completely incompetent biatch.
Posted at 10:35 am by DeoDuce
|John K |
July 27, 2005 12:19 PM PDT
You know EXACTLY where the ACLU is right now. Filing a lawsuit against Mr. Daniels because of his Christian beliefs.
|Director Mitch |
July 27, 2005 08:22 PM PDT
Actually, Mr. Daniels is Muslim. Check the story on Fox.
July 28, 2005 04:00 AM PDT
I think she acted correct. Being anti-homosexuality is discrimination.
And hypocritical? If a professor at the uni of Istanbul would say 'All Americans are stupid and ignorant and Allah isn't in their midst.' Would YOU say 'oh, he's wrong, but he's expressing his personal beliefs so we should let him'?
|Jim Clay |
July 28, 2005 07:14 AM PDT
"I think she acted correct. Being anti-homosexuality is discrimination."
I can be anti-anything-I-want and that is perfectly legal. He can be anti-homosexuality and they can't (or at least shouldn't) do a thing about it. That changes when it comes to things like hiring decisions.
"Would YOU say 'oh, he's wrong, but he's expressing his personal beliefs so we should let him'?"
Yes, that's exactly what I would say. Have you even heard of the concept of free speech? If you disagree, you criticise his speech with your own speech.
Freedom really does work, you know.