tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post115783798933095962..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1157890817833546842006-09-10T07:20:00.000-05:002006-09-10T07:20:00.000-05:00Everybody has to have a schtik!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1157890770966296342006-09-10T07:19:00.000-05:002006-09-10T07:19:00.000-05:00Everybody has to have a schtik!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1157859161940180682006-09-09T22:32:00.000-05:002006-09-09T22:32:00.000-05:00They originally filed an EEOC complaint with the Indianapolis office. The EEOC concluded that the Star had not discriminated against them because of their religion and issued Patterson and Coffey a right to sue letter. Their attorney, John Price, filed the religious discrimination complaint in the federal district court for Southern Indiana here.<BR/><BR/>Coffey and Patterson were editorial writers hired when the Pulliam family still owned the Star. Gannett's management no doubt took the Star's editorial position towards the mainstream as opposed to the far right positions it took under the Pulliam family. Coffey and Patterson were no longer free to write the knee-jerk, right wing crap they were accustom to writing. They equate that to religious discrimination. Ever newspaper's editorial position has a political bent one way or the other to it. If Coffey and Patterson didn't like it, they should have chosen a newspaper with their ideological bent to work for. To their way of thinking, if the newspaper didn't write right-wing editorials, it was anti-Christian.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1157851544135646312006-09-09T20:25:00.000-05:002006-09-09T20:25:00.000-05:00are you aware that the Star actually accepts advertisements for <B>PORK</B>? In Leviticus, that is sooo forbidden! it just proves that Baal and Mammon have taken over the Star and want to drive out true Christians! <BR/>So now emplyers have to put up with employees doing whatever nutty stuff they wish on the job if somebody somewhere can find Biblical justification for it? Do Pentecostal retail clerks have to put down their snakes around squeamish customers?Wilson46201https://www.blogger.com/profile/06987859307032067229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1157845036699388792006-09-09T18:37:00.000-05:002006-09-09T18:37:00.000-05:00Shocking stuff.<BR/><BR/>But if you remove the local knowledge from this case, it presents some unusual situations.<BR/><BR/>If we push for non-discrimination because of sexual preference, isn't the Coffey-Patterson position (distasteful tho it is), a close cousin?<BR/><BR/>It sure seems like it.<BR/><BR/>And in the hands of a mediocre judge, it might be.<BR/><BR/>If we demand equal treatment and non-discrimination, and IF Coffey-Patterson were fired strictly because they're not ideologically aligned with management's views, isn't that discrimination, too?<BR/><BR/>It's kinda like the ACLU defending the Klan's right to march. You know, hate the message, defend the messenger?<BR/><BR/>As much as I hate the message, this is a tough case. <BR/><BR/>Let's hope they settle out of court. <BR/><BR/>They weren't really good writers, anyway...Russ Pulliam is better, and that's not saying much at all.<BR/><BR/>Do you know Gary, is this a federal case, or county?<BR/><BR/>Excellent post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com