← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · PaleoconAvatar
Thread ID: 7026 | Posts: 3 | Started: 2003-05-31
2003-05-31 01:55 | User Profile
"...after a black co-worker complained," the article mentions...Damn, this story is infuriating! The state of affairs in this country is so maddening at times...why does this Black guy get to have his complaint take precedence over all else?
...A Clue for the Court and the employer: Blacks are ALWAYS complaining--once you cater to them on this, they will never stop and they'll keep pushing forever until you have to start doing things like taking George Washington's name off of high schools...wait, they've already done that in New Orleans.... :afro: :taz: :gun:
[url=http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-sou--cotap-confederat0530may30,0,1044208.story?coll=dp-headlines-virginia]Court upholds firing of man who displayed flag stickers[/url]
By the Associated Press
May 30 2003
RICHMOND, Va. -- A federal appeals court Friday upheld a South Carolina dairy's firing of a mechanic who displayed Confederate flag stickers on his toolbox.
Matthew Dixon claimed that Coburg Dairy Inc. in Charleston violated his First Amendment rights and state employment laws when it fired him in 2000 for refusing to remove the stickers after a black co-worker complained. The dairy said the stickers violated its policy against harassment.
A three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that Dixon has a constitutional right to display the flag, but said that right is not unlimited. For example, his employer could not fire him for attending a pro-flag rally at the state capitol on his own time.
"Dixon, however, chose to display the Confederate flag on the tool box he used at his workplace," Judge Roger Gregory wrote. "For Dixon to prevail, this court would be required to find that the First Amendment gives him the right to move the flag rally from the capitol to the Coburg Dairy garage. Such a finding would lead to the absurd result of making every private workplace a constitutionally protected forum for political discourse."
Judge James H. Michael Jr. joined in the opinion, which affirmed U.S. District Judge C. Weston Houck's dismissal of Dixon's lawsuit.
Judge Joseph R. Goodwin wrote in a separate opinion that Dixon's state law claims should have been resolved in state court. The majority opinion stated that federal court jurisdiction was proper because of the underlying constitutional issue.
Michael and Goodwin are not regular members of the appeals court but were designated to hear the Dixon case.
On the Net:
Appeals Court: [url=http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov]http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov[/url]
Copyright é 2003, Daily Press
2003-05-31 16:15 | User Profile
A disappointing, but not surprising, decision.
Until we stop groveling at the blacks' feet begging for forgiveness, their complaints will get louder and more ridiculous... and until Whites grow a spine and stop collapsing under threads of being branded "racist" the chip on the blacks' shoulders will only grow bigger.
2003-05-31 20:11 | User Profile
**Such a finding would lead to the absurd result of making every private workplace a constitutionally protected forum for political discourse." **
So now having a politically incorrect opinion or simply displaying a politically incorrect "symbol" is just cause for firing you ( if your a white male).
Now assume that the white worker had complained about a mexican having a aztlan sticker on his toolbox, or a black having a black panther sticker - think that would have led to the firing of the minority?