A Christian named Christian... that's original :) On 7/6/05, Christian Bollmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 06 July 2005 19:48, Rick Reumann wrote: > > Hi, > > > Daniel Perry wrote the following on 7/6/2005 12:49 PM: > > > Hah, it's the business use of web/email they fire you for. Go read > > > your terms of employment, and the reference to "IT acceptible use > > > policy" that you inadvertantly agreed to. > > > > (the below has nothing to do with Mark).. > > > > For the record, I'm not against an employer firing an employee for > > 'whatever' reason they deem fit. If they don't like the way you wear > > your hair, I think they should have the right to fire you if they > > want. (The public also has a right to know about it based on the use > > of the press etc). > > Now though I'm clearly not in the position to get fired anytime soon, > I still think as long as I'm doing my job right and don't blame the > company I work for, what I do in my leisure time is not my > employer's business. Including my haircut, age, religious beliefs > or whatever. What I sell are my skills, work performance and > last but not least a significant part of my lifetime, but neither > my soul nor my private life. In Germany, it's not quite that easy > to get rid of someone who, lets say, just got older because of > working for you. And I think this is just. Stealing silver spoons, > including deliberately breaking company rules in terms of > e-mail usage and the like is another issue. > > > Personally, if I owned a company and someone was using the company > > email domain name to post on sites such as "swingers" or > > "transvestitepride," I think I should have right to terminate his or > > her's employment. What I have a problem with is ... > > > > 1) The inconsistency in what is protected. For example everyone today > > talks about "tolerance." But what does this mean? What it ends up > > meaning is "There are no moral absolutes so the only valid belief > > system protected is one that doesn't espouse moral judgments." But > > what about being tolerant to the idea that someone might feel > > otherwise? Why is state sanctioned secularism the only valid > > religion (and yes secularism is a belief system - a religion). It's > > sort of funny that those whom often claim to be the most 'tolerant' > > are often the most vicious when it comes to attacking someone that > > disagrees with their view of "tolerance." There are many views I > > could state that would get me labeled as being 'intolerant,' yet, > > somehow it's supposedly not offensive to state "All views on X,Y,orZ > > are equally acceptable." To me, and many others, that later position > > can be considered extremely offensive. Why is only one view (secular > > humanism) considered 'non offensive' but other religious views are > > some how bigoted and intolerant. It's pure hypocrisy. > > In Germany, in a major part thanks to the US (I mean it!), religious > freedom, for instance, is granted to everyone in our Constitutional > Law (Art. 4 GG). Getting fired just because of one's religious views > is impossible by law. So I, who believes in Jesus Christ as my personal > saviour and follows the Bible as his above-all-worldly-wisdom guide > can happily work together with Hindus and common atheists, in- > cluding my boss. I can even tell them if they're on the road to > eternal doom, the same as they may tell me I'm ridiciously wrong, > and still keep my job. And in fact, the Bible is quite intolerant when > confronted with modern secularism, but what's my choice? As > for general opinions and secular beliefs, we have Art. 5 GG > which grants freedom of speech. So there's no need for > hypocrisy here at all. On the other hand, I definitely never > would use a company e-mail address for anything other > than business communication, and whoever deliberately > chooses to do otherwise may just have to face the fruits > of his dauntness. Or his dumbness, if you will. > > > 2) Someone taking the time on the list to 'complain' to someone's > > employer. Sure you have the right to do so, but I think it's lame. > > Quality never goes out of style, but good manners may. Possibly > a matter of education and attitude. I won't judge. > > -- Christian. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
