(12-19-2013 03:32 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:26 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  A week ago many of the posters here were saying it is fine for a private school to fire a person for being gay. Now you are upset because a person says he was fired from a private school for being straight. At least be consistent.

Logic fail.

Fired for being gay
Fired for being straight

FIRED FOR BEING {INSERT TERM}

FIX YOUR DAMN LOGIC DR TORCH...

(12-19-2013 12:20 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Age discrimination, gender discrimination, marital status discrimination....I'm sure the ACLU lawyers are tripping over themselves to defend this guy.

to be fair to the ACLU.. they have taken these kind of cases in the past. So I'm not ready to rip ACLU until they say there's nothing wrong with what happened.

However, as noted, this is a private school... so I'm actually going to stand with the school with this one _IF_ it can be proven he violated his contract.

(12-19-2013 03:37 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:32 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:26 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  A week ago many of the posters here were saying it is fine for a private school to fire a person for being gay. Now you are upset because a person says he was fired from a private school for being straight. At least be consistent.

Logic fail.

Two people claim to be fired for their sexual orientation. You are saying one is fine and the other is an outrage.

I don't recall saying anything on either matter.

But your assertion is factually incomplete, and avoids the crux of the distinction.

A half truth is a logical fallacy. A willful half truth is just plain dishonest. So **** you.

(12-19-2013 04:05 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:37 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:32 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:26 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  A week ago many of the posters here were saying it is fine for a private school to fire a person for being gay. Now you are upset because a person says he was fired from a private school for being straight. At least be consistent.

Logic fail.

Two people claim to be fired for their sexual orientation. You are saying one is fine and the other is an outrage.

I don't recall saying anything on either matter.

But your assertion is factually incomplete, and avoids the crux of the distinction.

A half truth is a logical fallacy. A willful half truth is just plain dishonest. So **** you.

Wow, don't really know why you have to resort to cursing me but ok.

What is my half truth? Two individuals claim that they were fired from their jobs based on their sexual orientation. Individuals on this board have said that one is ok while the other is not.

I apologize for saying "you" in my previous comment when you hadn't commented on either story. I assumed you agreed with the aforementioned individuals from your comment directed toward me.

(12-19-2013 04:10 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 04:05 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:37 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:32 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:26 PM)EpicNiner Wrote:  A week ago many of the posters here were saying it is fine for a private school to fire a person for being gay. Now you are upset because a person says he was fired from a private school for being straight. At least be consistent.

Logic fail.

Two people claim to be fired for their sexual orientation. You are saying one is fine and the other is an outrage.

I don't recall saying anything on either matter.

But your assertion is factually incomplete, and avoids the crux of the distinction.

A half truth is a logical fallacy. A willful half truth is just plain dishonest. So **** you.

Wow, don't really know why you have to resort to cursing me but ok.

What is my half truth? Two individuals claim that they were fired from their jobs based on their sexual orientation. Individuals on this board have said that one is ok while the other is not.

That's only half of the truth. I didn't say it was untrue. But it's only half true.

(12-19-2013 03:06 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 02:27 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  So Tom In Lazy should be OK with LGBTs being canned for the same thing?

He doesn't have to be OK with it. He can raise a stink, ***** and moan, whatever he wants. Their arrangement should be able to end at any time, for any reason (unless it breaks the contract).

(12-19-2013 02:27 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  So you'd be fine with the straight AD firing the gay gym teacher, right? For consistencies sake, of course.

Sure. You can't legislate morality.

Legislate morality. Hunh. Interesting answer, sort of.

So, it would be immoral for the straight AD to fire the gay teacher? Is that the logical extension we have here?

But the straight teacher needs to suck it up and find another job, correct? Solely cause he wasn't wanted?

You don't see a problem here?

(12-19-2013 02:16 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  Meh. Go get another job. They didn't want you there. The "why" shouldn't matter.

My reaction, as well.

But that's also my reaction whenever someone says they were fired for "being" lesbian or unmarried or old or ugly or any other reason.

Can we all agree that nobody should be fired for being anything legal?

(12-19-2013 05:09 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Can we all agree that nobody should be fired for being anything legal?

Only on condition that we also agree that laws should not require employers to hire or keep employees they don't want.

(12-19-2013 05:09 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Can we all agree that nobody should be fired for being anything legal?

I get what you're saying, except it isn't illegal to be incompetent.

So we may have to tighten that proviso up a bit.

The married heterosexual gym teacher doesn't understand office politics. You shut up and coach the three sports. You get friendly with the parents. You nonchalantly put the heat on her. "Boy it sure would be nice if our AD would think about the kids and help out some." She's probably too busy with her single family and all. "My three kids are the managers for the team so I can spend some time with them." I told my wife she could quit her second job with all the extra money I'm making coaching three extra curriculars. It's tough but it's for the kids. Damn Suzie and Jenny are such nice kids. You can tell they have great parents.

I just wish I could do a better job with them in the offseason but the AD wants me to coach three sports. I'm wearing too many hats and the poor kids are paying for it. Suzie and Jenny could really use some offseason tutelage.


I'd have her ass in such hot water within a year......................... This guy deserves to be fired for stupidity......

(12-19-2013 05:20 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 05:09 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Can we all agree that nobody should be fired for being anything legal?

I get what you're saying, except it isn't illegal to be incompetent.

So we may have to tighten that proviso up a bit.

Dang. Just when I'm trying to be smart.

(12-19-2013 02:57 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 02:53 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  War on marriage.

Who's said that?

so, you're okay with this kind of thing if true?

We all make choices. The family is next after we destroy Xmas.

Sorry Mach, but I'm thinking you're completely in the wrong on your arguement for the termination purposes

(12-19-2013 05:26 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The married heterosexual gym teacher doesn't understand office politics.

If you're fired for office politics, I'd say you have a good case to go to court over.

Quote:You shut up and coach the three sports.

Which he did, per the article.

Quote: You get friendly with the parents.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the article says he was liked prior to the new AD?

Quote:Kenney, who lives with his wife and three young children in LI, says he was a well-liked employee at the elite institution that counts Truman Capote, Ivanka Trump and Eric Schneiderman as alumni, until a gay athletic director named Pat Krieger took over in 2009.

The "get friendly" argument doesn't seem to fly. Guy has a contract, he's abided by the contract.

If the AD wanted to refuse to renew the contract after it ran out, I'd say the school would be in the complete clear. As they revoked the contract (or so it seems), right now I think he's got a wrongful-termination suit locked up.

I'm just sayin'. It's very easy to get an administrator in hot water. When they apply pressure you back channel pressure on them. If you are half way decent at your job it's fairly easy.

(12-19-2013 06:30 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I'm just sayin'. It's very easy to get an administrator in hot water. When they apply pressure you back channel pressure on them. If you are half way decent at your job it's fairly easy.

Easy? the only way it's easy is to find them breaking the rules somewhere.

If they don't break the rules, then I don't see it as being 'easy'. (see the stories about the "white room" (or whatever it was called) for NY public school teachers who are under accusations of malfeasance.

(12-19-2013 04:55 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 03:06 PM)RaiderATO Wrote:  

(12-19-2013 02:27 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  So Tom In Lazy should be OK with LGBTs being canned for the same thing?

He doesn't have to be OK with it. He can raise a stink, ***** and moan, whatever he wants. Their arrangement should be able to end at any time, for any reason (unless it breaks the contract).

(12-19-2013 02:27 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  So you'd be fine with the straight AD firing the gay gym teacher, right? For consistencies sake, of course.

Sure. You can't legislate morality.

Legislate morality. Hunh. Interesting answer, sort of.

So, it would be immoral for the straight AD to fire the gay teacher? Is that the logical extension we have here?

But the straight teacher needs to suck it up and find another job, correct? Solely cause he wasn't wanted?

You don't see a problem here?

You have trouble with your reading comprehension.

Both need to suck it up and find another job. I don't find either firing immoral (assuming neither employer broke the contract they had mutually agreed on).

All laws regarding "equality" attempt to legislate morality. The law does not change one's opinion. In fact, it often provides a scapegoat for one's bigotry.

N/M. Not worth it.

(12-19-2013 05:26 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The married heterosexual gym teacher doesn't understand office politics. You shut up and coach the three sports. You get friendly with the parents. You nonchalantly put the heat on her. "Boy it sure would be nice if our AD would think about the kids and help out some." She's probably too busy with her single family and all. "My three kids are the managers for the team so I can spend some time with them." I told my wife she could quit her second job with all the extra money I'm making coaching three extra curriculars. It's tough but it's for the kids. Damn Suzie and Jenny are such nice kids. You can tell they have great parents.

I just wish I could do a better job with them in the offseason but the AD wants me to coach three sports. I'm wearing too many hats and the poor kids are paying for it. Suzie and Jenny could really use some offseason tutelage.


I'd have her ass in such hot water within a year......................... This guy deserves to be fired for stupidity......

Or... you know... they could have honored the contract which said two sports..

(12-19-2013 05:09 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Can we all agree that nobody should be fired for being anything legal?

A noble request, indeed, but not entirely practical. Right off the bat, in states where pot is legal companies would fire employees with it in their system. Violations of company policy are often not criminal acts. There are many examples, but you get my drift.