Anti-Pride Bus Driver Fired

[Poison]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

Would you be OK with him refusing to drive a bus that allowed black people on board because it was against his beliefs? I'm just curious where we draw the line for what's allowable bigotry and what's not.

Thats not what is happening in this situation so dont try with the rat trap.
He is within every right not to have to drive a bus promoting a belief or way of life he does not believe or agree with.
Your hypothetical would be blatant racism.
If he refused to let gay people on the bus he drove that too is a totally different situation.
He should not have to be forced to promote or participate in anything he does not believe in.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Poison

Thats not what is happening in this situation so dont try with the rat trap.
He is within every right not to have to drive a bus promoting a belief or way of life he does not believe or agree with.
Your hypothetical would be blatant racism.
If he refused to let gay people on the bus he drove that too is a totally different situation.
He should not have to be forced to promote or participate in anything he does not believe in.

Okay, so if he refused to drive a bus that was promoting interracial couples, you'd be fine with that?

[Regorium]

It's interesting that this case is very similar to the whole "muzzling of scientists and park rangers" controversy.

At basically any place of employment, you're not really allowed to say anything to the media without it being vetted by at least a manager/director or a PR person.

It really is a standard policy, which is clearly a good thing as we see in this particular instance. I just find it interesting the difference in reaction when it's something that's generally perceived as negative (religious lunatics) vs. something perceived as positive (science).

For the record, I think this guy is an idiot and fully deserved his firing.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Okay, so if he refused to drive a bus that was promoting interracial couples, you'd be fine with that?

Excellent question. Looking forward to the awkward answers.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by darklord700

The article says the driver equates driving the Pride bus to promoting homosexuality. And that violates his religious belief.

My problem with this is as a society we are very tolerant to many different beliefs and religious beliefs, why should we not respect this driver's religious belief then? Where do we cut off the line?

At the point where your beliefs actively discriminate against people. I don't get why this is so hard to understand.

[Poison]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Okay, so if he refused to drive a bus that was promoting interracial couples, you'd be fine with that?

Whats with all the hypotheticals? Can you not just stick to the issue at hand?

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Poison

Thats not what is happening in this situation so dont try with the rat trap.
He is within every right not to have to drive a bus promoting a belief or way of life he does not believe or agree with.
Your hypothetical would be blatant racism.
If he refused to let gay people on the bus he drove that too is a totally different situation.
He should not have to be forced to promote or participate in anything he does not believe in.

No rat trap, just confirming that we're drawing the line at racism. Homophobia ok, racism bad. Got it.

The difference is that it seems to still be acceptable to a certain portion of the population to discriminate against gay people. As we move forward hopefully the homophobes will be gradually phased out by the less ignorant portions of society.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Poison

Whats with all the hypotheticals? Can you not just stick to the issue at hand?

Just trying to figure out if your logic is consistent.

[darklord700]

As a tolerant society, this type of things are bound to happen. Sooner or later, we have to draw a line in the sand in that religious and cultural beliefs are your own, you are free to practice it but just park it when you come to work.

[Poison]

Originally Posted by rubecube

At the point where your beliefs actively discriminate against people. I don't get why this is so hard to understand.

You know whats hard to understand? People like you that think a person cant make up their own minds in what they believe in and have enough backbone to stand by it.
Sorry pal one way of thinking doesnt exist. As much as youd like to cram it down everyones throat.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Poison

In this case he has every right not to have to drive this ONE type of bus.

He wasn't asked to drive this bus. He preemptively went to the media to say he would refuse to drive the bus. The the city said if he would have come up in the rotation to drive the bus they would have worked with him to reschedule.

But he didn't do that, he chose to go public first and to press the issue in the media. In other words he wanted a public conflict rather than a reasonable compromise (which he would have gotten if he'd asked for).

I have restrictions about what I can go to the media about with respect to my employment, if I violate those I would expect to be terminated.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Poison

You know whats hard to understand? People like you that think a person cant make up their own minds in what they believe in and have enough backbone to stand by it.
Sorry pal one way of thinking doesnt exist. As much as youd like to cram it down everyones throat.

So you're not going to answer the question then?

[MRCboicgy]

He wasn't fired for not liking gay people, or refusing to drive a bus he was never assigned to...he wasn't fired for his beliefs either.

He was fired for representing his employer improperly with the media instead of handling his issues internally.

If he had gone to the media saying he didn't want to drive the #1 bus because he doesn't like Forest Lawn and Bowness as communities, he would have faced the same consequence. There - that's a legit comparable.

[Poison]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

No rat trap, just confirming that we're drawing the line at racism. Homophobia ok, racism bad. Got it.

The difference is that it seems to still be acceptable to a certain portion of the population to discriminate against gay people. As we move forward hopefully the homophobes will be gradually phased out by the less ignorant portions of society.

Heres the main point. By refusing to drive this bus this guy is actively discriminating against gay people? Or sticking to his own beliefs?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Poison

Heres the main point. By refusing to drive this bus this guy is actively discriminating against gay people? Or sticking to his own beliefs?

In this instance, they're the same thing.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Poison

Thats not what is happening in this situation so dont try with the rat trap.
He is within every right not to have to drive a bus promoting a belief or way of life he does not believe or agree with.
Your hypothetical would be blatant racism.
If he refused to let gay people on the bus he drove that too is a totally different situation.
He should not have to be forced to promote or participate in anything he does not believe in.

Racism and homophobia are merely synonyms for bigotry. And neither is worse than the other.

Openly being a bigot, like he is, creates a hostile work environment. That is a valid reason for termination. But more specifically in this case, both his social media postings and his whining to the media will both fall afoul of his terms of employment with the City. Reading on Reddit from other city workers, as part of being hired, they explicitly agree to be restricted from speaking to the media without prior approval.

In as much as you want to make him a proverbial martyr because you and he share the same bigoted views, I personally doubt he has a leg to stand on.

Originally Posted by photon

I have restrictions about what I can go to the media about with respect to my employment, if I violate those I would expect to be terminated.

Ditto. If I did what this guy did, I would be canned about three seconds after my employer heard about it.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by photon

He wasn't asked to drive this bus. He preemptively went to the media to say he would refuse to drive the bus. The the city said if he would have come up in the rotation to drive the bus they would have worked with him to reschedule.

But he didn't do that, he chose to go public first and to press the issue in the media. In other words he wanted a public conflict rather than a reasonable compromise (which he would have gotten if he'd asked for).

I have restrictions about what I can go to the media about with respect to my employment, if I violate those I would expect to be terminated.

And the city has strict rules about talking to the media. There is a reason companies pay millions for people to talk to the media that represent their company. This guy wasn't fired because of his beliefs he was fired because of what you explained.

[dino7c]

Winston didn't believe in ghosts but he still did his job

[Poison]

Originally Posted by rubecube

So you're not going to answer the question then?

Id prefer to stay on topic instead of satisfying you and your quizzes.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Poison

You know whats hard to understand? People like you that think a person cant make up their own minds in what they believe in and have enough backbone to stand by it.
Sorry pal one way of thinking doesnt exist. As much as youd like to cram it down everyones throat.

So it would be ok to not drive the rainbow bus, but not ok to not drive the mixed race bus?

Just so you know, Calgary's favorite neo nazi is on your side...

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/09/09...ured-pride-bus