News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.



NY: Employee canned by bible-beating boss after coming out

by: Pam Spaulding

Fri Jul 06, 2007 at 08:00:00 AM EDT


The clash between church and state -- religious conservatives claiming employing LGBTs infringes on their religious beliefs versus  anti-discrimination laws -- is in stark relief in a case in NYC.

A Queens jewelry manufacturer, Ted Doudak, head of Riva Jewelry Manufacturing, is appealing a decision by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Carol Edmead to force him to testify in a discrimination case about his motive for firing John Fairchild, an employee who revealed to Doudak that he was gay. Fairchild was let go the next day.  (365gay):

The lawsuit alleges that Doudak called gays and lesbians "repulsive" and that he regularly quoted biblical passages at work.

During a pretrial hearing before a master rather than a judge, called discovery, Doudak refused to answer questions by Fairchild's lawyer about the allegations claiming his views are constitutionally protected religious beliefs.

William Kaiser, Fairchild's attorney, objected and went to Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Carol Edmead. Edmead ordered Doudak to answer Kaiser's questions.

She ruled that no one can use their right to religious freedom "as a cloak for acts of discrimination.

In an interview with the New York Daily News Kaiser said that "a lot of discrimination against homosexuals has a religious motivation." Kaiser said that the ruling means: "People who hold those views have to know they can't act on them with regard to employment."

In 33 states, it is legal to fire someone simply because of his or her sexual orientation; in 42 states you can be terminated based on gender identity. That's why the Employee Non-Discrimination Act is sitting up there on the Hill, waiting to be voted on by Congress.

However, we know what's coming -- Doudak's attorney is already bleating the fundie line -- the judge's action is setting a precedent that personal religious beliefs/affiliation are under attack.

"You're attacking perceived religious affiliation in an attempt to make a claim," [Todd] Krakower told the Daily News. "He's trying to prove a case through religious affiliation, and that's improper."
Back in the day, many people of faith including leaders such as the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, supported segregation and opposed interracial marriage, citing their religious beliefs and the bible to justify discrimination. The civil rights movement and a hailstorm of lawsuits moving up to the high court eventually resulted in equal protection under the law.

Doudek would have been asked about his religious views then and he would have no right to fire Fairchild, or to appeal on the grounds that he is using today. ENDA simply adds sexual orientation or gender identity to already protected classes. Perhaps Doudek would like gender, race and religion to be struck from existing laws.

Might I quote this gem:


"We do have freedom of religion in this country -- but freedom of religion, like all of our other rights, is not a right that dominates everything else. That is, in the process of exercising your freedom of religion, you can't be advocating or promoting violence against the United States and our people, or otherwise inciting people to riot, or to destroy or break the law."
-- American Values head (and failed presidential candidate) Gary Bauer. He was referring to the right of feds  to monitor Islamic religious materials and "worship areas" being used by inmates, but those words ring true for all sorts of circumstances, such as this one. Thanks Gary.
Pam Spaulding :: NY: Employee canned by bible-beating boss after coming out
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Fine, don't quote God then
I can understand that there would be a problem in a court of law if it were insinuated that because he is a Christian, he is automatically a homophobe. But that just isn't what is happening here. He is being asked about his specific statements concerning gay people, and he was the one who tied those in to his religion. If he wants to stop putting his words in God's mouth and take responsibility for his own opinions, that changes nothing.

There is no additional penalty for behaving in a discriminatory way because of your religion. In fact, many people, and many juries, seem to think that it gives you a free pass.

What the hell was I doing in Oaxaca in 1992, on the eve of the Zapatista revolution?


Bible-beating boss
It's up to the legal system to stand up to faith-based discrimination.  That is the lie promulgated by those who would call this a Judeo-Christian (whatever that is) country.  The judge hit in right on the nose.

"You are the rest of the world."

I don't have to testify in court...
...because I'm superstitious!  I deserve special rights!

I don't think it works that way under any reasonable system of justice.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto


plus
i don't have to recognize the authority of some woman judge.  eve was created from the rib of adam in order to be his servant, sex slave, and personal property.  deuteronomy and exodus lay out PLENTY of laws that this sassy little miss should be adhering to.  in the meantime, she can't tell me what to do or she's impinging on my religious freedom of expression.

The gays stole my lunch money

[ Parent ]
refusing to recognize authority
That reminds me of a case in UK last year. A fundie was released from jail and when he found out that his parole officer was a transwoman, he sued claiming that having to be under the authority of such a sinful person violated his religious rights. The judge told him that prisoners don't get to choose their parole officers and his only choices were to work with the officer assigned, or go back to jail and finish his sentence.

[ Parent ]
HAHA!
A convicted criminal laying judgment on others.  Now that's rich. LOL!

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.


[ Parent ]
Its not "perceived religious affiliation"
Its not "perceived religious affiliation."  Its behavior - behavior that constitutes discrimination based on religion.

The EMPLOYER'S religion.

I've never understood why more GLBT folx don't go right for what the dicrimatory act actually is - particularly in places with no GLBT rights laws.

If an employer spews religious hate at you before firing you (or refusing to hire you in the first place) because you're GLB or T, then its discrimination based on religion.

Kat

>^..^<


Enough with their double talk!
"personal religious beliefs/affiliation are under attack"

How conveeeeeeeeeeeeenient.  NOT!

Gay/Lesbian people are underattack plaine and simple.

And by whom?  Well not by Christian.  In fact it is RELIGIOUS FANATICS who are attacking gays/lesbians.

Again, these freaks of nature are NOT Christian no matter what they say.


No...
"these freaks of nature"

No - there's nothing natural about them.

Kat

>^..^<


[ Parent ]
good point!
I think I will just call them FREAKS!
:-)

[ Parent ]
Keep pushing LGBT folks
Keep pushing LGBT folks, it will eventually flare up in a way you can't handle. Other folks have tried to exterminate, silence, and deny us justice....we're STILL HERE, and the outrage and seething is right under the surface....something will be the tipping point, some pitifully lame sentencing of a Hate Crime murderer, some SOB trying to take a lesbian couple's children, some MOTHF*CKER hitting bar patrons with an axe....AND BAM! it begins...no military, no police, and no courts will stop it.

The risk is in tipping the wrong way
We are not the modern Day equivalent of thermopolae.

If this conflict escalates to a point similar in terms of mass violence equal to the race riot of the 60's, then it will not be pretty.

And we will lose more than we will gain.

Worse -- if it happens while they are still in power (they being those who would like to see us erased) as they are now, then they will succeed, and theonomy will become the law of the land.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


[ Parent ]
These actions don't happen when we are being reasonable
The flash point will be raw and emotional, and if that's the way they want it, that's what they'll get.
You are concerned with longterm losses or gains after the event.

[ Parent ]
No, long term will be even worse.
I'm concerned with short term impacts.

Martyrdom is not an admirable goal.

If it tips too raw, you'll have your choice of them -- for about 6 months.

They may not have the numerical superiority, but they have all the tools of the system at their disposal.

Violence before the changeover in '08 will simply play into their fear mongering. Consider the reaction to "gun toting lesbians", the whole myth of "forcible conversion", the hysteria over child molestation.

We're demonized by those in power -- and when the demons get violent, it gives them all the excuse they need.

If, after the '08 elections there's a significant shift to a democratic congress and administration, then they will be the demons for two years.

And the loss will deeply affect their organization.  The extremist theocons are potent because they can deliver votes. IF they fail to deliver those votes, then they will lose favor -- giving a very different type of republican a chance to claim the party back from them.

And I'm not talking about "log cabin" types. They are joke not only here, but within their own party.

But until then, outbreaks of violence are what they *want*.
It will give them justification.  They've made their advances by using fear, ignorance, laziness, and lies -- all of which demonize LGBT people. Violence would simply give them something to point at and say "see"?

There is a time for violent rebellion. This is not it.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Join the Blend Chat Room



Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox