Fireman suspended for Gay Parade refusal

iBrian

iBrian

Peace, Love and Unity
Veteran Member
Messages
6,572
Reaction score
85
Points
48
Location
Scotland
Pretty sad, really - Scottish firemen were instructed to attend a Gay Parade to hand out fire-safety leaflets.

10 objected about being ordered to attend so they refused:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/5192976.stm

If this were America, and firemen were ordered to attend a Christian gathering and some refused, the secularists would be declaring freedom of choice.

In Britain, it's simply "do as you're told" even if you actually have a strong opinion on the matter.
 
Do you think this little story about Naaman and Elisha has any relevance?

2 Kings 5:18 (NIV)
But may the Lord forgive your servant for this one thing: When my master enters the temple of Rimmon to bow down and he is leaning on my arm and I bow there also—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the Lord forgive your servant for this.”
“Go in peace,” Elisha said.
​
 
I said:
Pretty sad, really - Scottish firemen were instructed to attend a Gay Parade to hand out fire-safety leaflets.

10 objected about being ordered to attend so they refused:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/5192976.stm

If this were America, and firemen were ordered to attend a Christian gathering and some refused, the secularists would be declaring freedom of choice.

In Britain, it's simply "do as you're told" even if you actually have a strong opinion on the matter.
Click to expand...
Hmm, forcible suppression of opposition:
"Fascism is always descending in America but it only actually lands in Europe."
--Tom Wolfe
Click to expand...
 
I don't see the "what if" scenario to be a valid argument in this case, on several levels. One, a Christian gathering would be seen to the general public as being a wholesome activity, therefore a majority opinion would have to be dealt with. Second, since we construct an imaginary scenario with the "what if" fallacy we are only intellectualizing, not approaching anything nearing the truth.
Plain and simple , a public servant doesnt choose who is served by his or her organization. Just because it happens to be a marginalized sector doesn't make it noble or right regardless of the ancient text one might use to pull stories from.
 
I'm thinking of the role of the fire department and the reason to pass out flyers.

Could it be possible that the higher ups deemed this an opportunity to reach a community they don't normally get to in their current campaign?

I think any time that someone in a job objects doing something that is part of their job they risk reprimand...
 
i beleive everyone should have the right not to celebrate something as this, if they don't agree with it.

i don't see the need why they have to attend this event to do their job, it would be different if someone there was in need of their help.

i doubt they would be asked to attend some nazi, racist, anti jewish, or even anti gay parade or march of some sort.

i doubt they would even be aksed to attend some anti abortion demonstaration.

the police may need to attend these events, not to support them, but that they are needed there to do their job.

i don't know how much a part of their job this is, i would be concerned of if this is a normal part of their job, which they would be asked to do of all other events where a certain beleif is promoted which they may not agree with.

if this was so, and they would normally do this of all such events, then the firemen themselves are being discriminative, in my opinion.

but if they would not be asked to do so of other such events, then surely it is hypocrisy to ask them to do so for this.
 
paul, everyone is entitled to the protection of the fire safety services, regardless of their personal opinion. you surely don't expect firemen to ask people's opinions before rescuing them, do you? and shouldn't the same go for educating them?

fire safety education is very much a part of these guys' jobs and they have absolutely no right to refuse to do it because they don't happen to like the group that they're educating. should muslim firemen then be entitled to refuse to attend a fire at the offices of a zionist charity or even to hand out fire safety leaflets there? should jewish firemen then be entitled to refuse to hand out fire safety leaflets at a meeting of the british national party?

to sum up - they would be asked to do this at any type of event and it is discriminatory for them to claim that this was somehow a breach of their rights.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
I noticed in the article about concern on behalf of the firefighters of being harassed. It seems that there have been 162 reported acts of violence against Strathclyde firefighters while on duty in the passed 12 months.
-source-

Notice the date for this new administration--July 20, 2006. It seems this is a new policy.
http://www.strathclydefire.org/news/showitem.asp?NewsID=131

It seems to me that there is more than immediately meets the eye, here.
 
bananabrain said:
paul, everyone is entitled to the protection of the fire safety services, regardless of their personal opinion. you surely don't expect firemen to ask people's opinions before rescuing them, do you? and shouldn't the same go for educating them?

fire safety education is very much a part of these guys' jobs and they have absolutely no right to refuse to do it because they don't happen to like the group that they're educating. should muslim firemen then be entitled to refuse to attend a fire at the offices of a zionist charity or even to hand out fire safety leaflets there? should jewish firemen then be entitled to refuse to hand out fire safety leaflets at a meeting of the british national party?

to sum up - they would be asked to do this at any type of event and it is discriminatory for them to claim that this was somehow a breach of their rights.

b'shalom

bananabrain
Click to expand...

if what you say is true, you will see from my post i agree with you.

i just don't know if it's true that they would be asked to attend other such events, like an anti gay parade of some sort for example.

was this the firemen being forced to do something to promote something against their beleifs, or are the firemen in the wrong, i don't know.
you tell me the firemen where in the wrong from what you say.
i would think the firemen would be in a better position to beable to judge this.

bananabrain,
do you have some experience, or proof of what you say is true, or is it just your opinion?
 
seattlegal said:
I noticed in the article about concern on behalf of the firefighters of being harassed. It seems that there have been 162 reported acts of violence against Strathclyde firefighters while on duty in the passed 12 months.
-source-

Notice the date for this new administration--July 20, 2006. It seems this is a new policy.
http://www.strathclydefire.org/news/showitem.asp?NewsID=131

It seems to me that there is more than immediately meets the eye, here.
Click to expand...

This is absolutely inexcusable behavior, I agree with you SG, but in light of the topic it seems somewhat Non Sequitur.
 
My bad - the way I read the original report I was under the impression that the gay pride parade had been specifically targeted for "PC" reasons.

However, I've contacted the Press Officer for the Strathclyde fire service, and apparently they try to target any large public event in the city centre for distribution of fire safety information - encouraging people to set up smoke alarms, etc, and invite fire services to help demonstrate ways to protect themselves in the home - and that this is an additional concern for Strathclyde because of a higher incidence of domestic fires in Scotland and England.

So on reviewing my original post, they were indeed performing a general public duty as was expected of them in that sense, as they would have at any large public gathering in the city.

I guess that leaves the discussion question as to whether the men would have a valid claim that their religious beliefs, even rights, were being compromised if being seen to support a cause they felt they should not?
 
Namste Bri...

That is the way I read it...they were providing leaflets...fire safety..not supporting any parade or cause...

If they were asked to march in the parade...with construction workers, police, cowboys and indians....then I could see their concern.
 
i don't think the fire brigade would request their employees to do this at an anti gay parade, i think many firemen who support homosexuality may refuse.

i thnk many may refuse of other such parades of something they felt strongly opposed to.

should anyone really be forced to attend such an event they feel strongly against?
should they have to be there while they celebrate such things they so strongly oppose?

if people have the right to organize, and attend such an event, shouldn't people also have the right not to?
 
paul said:
i don't think the fire brigade would request their employees to do this at an anti gay parade, i think many firemen who support homosexuality may refuse.

i thnk many may refuse of other such parades of something they felt strongly opposed to.

should anyone really be forced to attend such an event they feel strongly against?
should they have to be there while they celebrate such things they so strongly oppose?

if people have the right to organize, and attend such an event, shouldn't people also have the right not to?
Click to expand...
So where do you draw the line? Would you feel it ok for a fireman to object going to a fire if it were a gay bar?
 
wil said:
So where do you draw the line? Would you feel it ok for a fireman to object going to a fire if it were a gay bar?
Click to expand...

of course not, but i could see why they would object to having to stay in a gay bar all day handing out leaflets, couldn't you?
 
paul said:
of course not, but i could see why they would object to having to stay in a gay bar all day handing out leaflets, couldn't you?
Click to expand...
countering hyperbole with hyperbole, I deserved that.

So we have a line, two both ends of the spectrum as a matter of fact.

No, I wouldn't send fireman to the bar to hand out the safety flyers, not the volume or coverage that a parade would have.

But we do agree, they are obligated to do their job, fight fires, and promote fire safety.

So the question is, we have a parade sponsored by what is questionable to some of the department, however the higher ups have thought the event will bring enough of a crowd to make it worthy of marketing their safety material. Now all those in the crowd won't be gay, many will be there for the spectacle, some will be family members...all deserve to get the flyers and reduce fires, hence it is thier job...and this may be a crowd that is not reached in their other marketing exploits.

It isn't that I don't see the issue, or wonder if their isn't an equitable way to allow some not to attend and honor thier concerns. But I still see this as their job and understand managements side.
 
InLove said:
hire more gay firefighters?:)
wil said:
Nice try but we've already determined they'll fight the gay fires.:D
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I suppose that really is a separate issue....

An event of this scale, if it is operating within the law, is entitled to the same public service announcements as any other that is being conducted within the same parameters of the law, even if the service involved is handing out pamphlets rather than putting out the fires that might possibly result from ignorance of fire safety hazards. 'Course, that's the way it supposedly is on this side of the Atlantic....

Peace&Love
Click to expand...
 
my point about the gay bar, never mind if it had the amount of people who attend a gay parade or much more, should a fireman be forced to have to stay in a gay bar all day handing out flyers?

some people may not like what happens in a gay bar, may not like what happens at a gay parade and what it stands for.
mostly people would answer if you don't like what goes on don't attend.

but these firemen are not given this option.

if people don't have the right not to attend such an event, then it is hypocriscy the event has a right to occur.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top