Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-06-2010, 10:58 AM
 
Location: Lansing, MI
2,948 posts, read 6,997,944 times
Reputation: 3271

Advertisements

My complaint is very simple. He is in a position that he needs to be able to objectively interpret the law for the citizens of the state. How can he do his job adequately if he is borderline breaking the law with stalking, harrassment and cyber bullying (per the state's legal description) on his personal time?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-06-2010, 11:34 AM
 
Location: On the brink of WWIII
21,088 posts, read 29,070,272 times
Reputation: 7812
WOW...and he still has a job? The AG must really be upset about the primaries huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Grand Rapids Metro
8,882 posts, read 19,779,462 times
Reputation: 3920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldjensens View Post
My understanding of what is referred to as the radical gay agrenda is the concept that Gay are one of th emost important social issues of our time, that Gays should be a specially protected group like minorities or wmen and that Gays should be entitled to special rights and laws because they are so repressed by society.

Personally I do not see why Gays should get any more attention or prvileges than adulturers, beastialityists (is that even a word?), polyamourous persons (those who commit to more than one partner at once even if they are not married), etc etc. What they chose to do is their own business, but the government has no business getting involved based on their sexual preferences one way or another. Persoanlly I do nto think that there should be any laws protecting or restricting persons based on their sex lives (with the exception of pedophiles).

This guy has a right to express his veiws and opinions. However singling out one person to target in an attempt to direct hatred at that person is repugnant (although permitted). He is not entitled to a job. This is an at will employment state and unless he has a contract, they do not need a reason to fire him. They can fire him just becasue they do not like him. However they cannot fire him for a wrong reason (like his exercise of his right to free speech).

Thus, while they could fire him becuase they do nto like the clothing that he wears, they may have a problem firing him for making anti gay statements (just as they could have a problem firing someone for making pro-gay statements).

What this guy has shown is that he is immature and irresponsible. I do not see why they do not just fire him for that reason. He may sue them, but they can probably find a lawyer to defend the decision somewhere.
Adulterers = involves breaking a marriage contract protected by law, generally causes strife and the break up of marriages and families, costs taxpayers money

Beastiality = having sex with an animal is against the law

Polygamist = having more than one married partner is against the law in all states, although one could argue it's not really hurting anyone

Pedophiles = an adult having sex with a minor who is not of consenting age is illegal, and should be

So how do any of those line up with two adults having consensual sex with each other, who just so happen to be of the same sex? Any answer that does not involve your own personal religious beliefs would be great.

This guy certainly has a right to post his blog, but he certainly does not have a right to represent the state of Michigan, and certainly does not have the frame of mind to be making fair and impartial judicial decisions.

You people with your "radical gay agenda" stuff crack me up. <insert ominous music>

Last edited by magellan; 10-06-2010 at 02:52 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 02:57 PM
 
1,489 posts, read 3,588,270 times
Reputation: 711
People do have a right to their ignorance and bias. however, they are not immune from the consequences when they make their private views public on the internet. Those ramifications are more and more often affecting the job...ask the schoolteacher who was fired after a racy photo was posted, or the blogger who accidentally gave away some company secrets in their blog and lost their job. Employers are increasingly aware of their employees' internet activities, even of the clock.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-06-2010, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
217 posts, read 605,424 times
Reputation: 354
My gaydar is going off on Clay Aiken levels in Andrew Shirvell's direction.

Shirvell has a right to free speech, however if he chooses to make his views known publicly, like he did, then he better be ready for the consequences and any heat he will face.

To me the major issue with this isn't his First Amendment right. The more serious matter is his constant harassment and alleged stalking of Chris Armstrong. Following him to every event he goes to shout out his message and make a scene and even following him to his house (!), sorry, I don't care what your views of gays are, that's going too far, in my opinion, and I hope Armstrong gets his personal protection order against Shirvell so he can live life without having to look over his shoulder every waking moment.

If Mike Cox wants to defend Shirvell's First Amendment right, that's all good and well, but he's totally ignoring the constant harassment and stalking. For a state official that's suppose to be an upholder of the law to be using his rights to diminish and belittle others whose views he does not share, whether on his own time or not, and to constantly harass and possibly be stalking them certainly doesn't look to be in the best interests of the people of Michigan...or anyone for that matter.

Funny that Shirvell's "Chris Armstrong Watch" blog is now only open to invited readers only. If you can't take the heat...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Michigan
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top