University course and anti-gay Facebook post.

[Mister M]

I think it doesn't in the old testament.

 

It does, I've checked - if this website is to be believed then lots of things are punishable by stoning

http://gphhawkinsrationalistsociety.weebly.com/laws-of-the-old-testament-which-demand-the-death-penalty.html

Small wonder that everybody wasn't stoned to death in the days of Methuselah....

[sutty27]

It does, I've checked - if this website is to be believed then lots of things are punishable by stoning

http://gphhawkinsrationalistsociety.weebly.com/laws-of-the-old-testament-which-demand-the-death-penalty.html

Small wonder that everybody wasn't stoned to death in the days of Methuselah....

 

Sorry that should have said does, not doesn't.

 

---------- Post added 29-02-2016 at 22:22 ----------

 

I think social workers effectively support lots of people with different views, many of which they disagree with. They just don't post about it on Facebook.

I'll bet that some social workers may have personal views which are discriminatory; I think part of being professional is recognising those views as your own, and not letting them interfere with your practice.

 

So you would be happy for a social worker to be sacked for expressing the view on face book that racists are aberrant.

Edited February 29, 2016 by sutty27

[ECCOnoob]

I think social workers effectively support lots of people with different views, many of which they disagree with. They just don't post about it on Facebook.

I'll bet that some social workers may have personal views which are discriminatory; I think part of being professional is recognising those views as your own, and not letting them interfere with your practice.

 

Absolutely spot on.

 

This is the crux. There are criminal lawyers who in their minds deplore everything about their client and who would bet their house on them being guilty. BUT they still know their professional duty is to act in their client's best interests and instructions.

 

There are police officers with hugely prejudiced, offensive and inappropriate views. However, they keep their mouths shut and keep away from spouting such online because they have a professional duty.

 

Even shop assistants and service workers who inside think their customer is a cow or fatso shouldn't be ordering dessert or ugly face looks a dog in that dress, BUT they maintain their professional appearance and would know better than air such opinions in a public forum.

 

All aspects of the working world have unwritten and written rules such as this. Obviously the more professional and regulated ones have even stronger rules.

 

Its about being an adult and being in the working world.

Edited February 29, 2016 by ECCOnoob

[the_bloke]

Why do you think it was aired in public? The article in the Mail states he posted it privately.

[El Cid]

I think social workers effectively support lots of people with different views, many of which they disagree with. They just don't post about it on Facebook.

I'll bet that some social workers may have personal views which are discriminatory; I think part of being professional is recognising those views as your own, and not letting them interfere with your practice.

 

I believe they all need to have a degree, so u would think that they would be bright enough to stay within the rules.

He is appealing.

[sutty27]

Absolutely spot on.

 

This is the crux. There are criminal lawyers who in their minds deplore everything about their client and who would bet their house on them being guilty. BUT they still know their professional duty is to act in their client's best interests and instructions.

 

There are police officers with hugely prejudiced, offensive and inappropriate views. However, they keep their mouths shut and keep away from spouting such online because they have a professional duty.

 

Even shop assistants and service workers who inside think their customer is a cow or fatso shouldn't be ordering dessert or ugly face looks a dog in that dress, BUT they maintain their professional appearance and would know better than air such opinions in a public forum.

 

All aspects of the working world have unwritten and written rules such as this. Obviously the more professional and regulated ones have even stronger rules.

 

Its about being an adult and being in the working world.

 

A social worker gloated about having three children taken into care on her publicly accessible Facebook page and bragged about the power she felt.

 

However, she has not been struck off. Instead, she must be closely monitored by a line manager for a year.

 

 

Google is full of stories about police officers, social workers posting on social media, some are sacked and some are not most posted far worse than a bible quote. The above story stood out.

[I1L2T3]

The person in question was given the boot (I assume) because he failed to promote equality (part of the code of conduct) but aren't Muslims who teach their children that homosexuality is a crime guilty of the same thing? How big does the target audience need to be before the preaching of discrimination is a problem?

 

I don't like religions that preach this sort of nonsense but I also don't like this politically correct encroachment into peoples personal lives. If a person is able to put aside their personal prejudices in order to do their job in accordance with company policy and instruction then what's the problem? On the basis of this decision, all Muslims should be barred from employment with any organisation that has an equalities policy (most). As much as I like things that discourage religion, I don't think this is right.

 

The problem is in this case that he didn't put his prejudices aside. He made them public. It's got nothing to do with Muslims either.

[sutty27]

The problem is in this case that he didn't put his prejudices aside. He made them public. It's got nothing to do with Muslims either.

 

The fact that most believe that homosexuality is a sin must also make them unsuitable to be social workers, its claimed that his beliefs would make him a unsuitable to be a social worker, so everyone with the same beliefs would also make be unsuitable. If prejudice makes someone unsuitable then everyone would be unsuitable, not that his opinion could in anyway be described as a prejudice, he didn't express a preconceived opinion about anyone.

[Eric Arthur]

he didn't express a preconceived opinion about anyone.

 

Except that homosexuals are sinners (who will be damned to burn in the flames of hell for all eternity) but apart from that, no preconceived opinions about anyone.

 

I'm feeling a bit sorry for him that we're discussing him like this but apparently he's the one who went to the press to get it talked about, so he's reaping what he's sown and it will remain online for all eternity or until Sheffield Forum doesn't pay the server invoice. It's almost a biblical punishment, but I prefer to think of him as more of a Sisyphus.

[sutty27]

Except that homosexuals are sinners (who will be damned to burn in the flames of hell for all eternity) but apart from that, no preconceived opinions about anyone.

 

I'm feeling a bit sorry for him that we're discussing him like this but apparently he's the one who went to the press to get it talked about, so he's reaping what he's sown and it will remain online for all eternity or until Sheffield Forum doesn't pay the server invoice. It's almost a biblical punishment, but I prefer to think of him as more of a Sisyphus.

 

A preconceived opinion is formed before having the evidence for its truth, so he didn't express it without evidence because he actually posted the evidence in the form of a quote from the bible. You and I might believe the Bible and Koran are a load of old crock but to the believers they are truth.

 

I wonder what would happen if he had said the Bible and Koran are abominations.

Edited March 1, 2016 by sutty27