Firefighters ordered to be in San Fran Gay pride parade

[CantGetRight]

http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/418868.aspx

July 30, 2008
CBNNews.com (http://cbnnews.com/) - Outside of gay marriage, another legal battle is brewing in California
Four San Diego firefighters ordered to work a gay pride parade are suing the city for ****** harassment and the violation of their freedom of speech.
"Me and my crew were given a direct order to be in that parade," captain John Ghiotto said.

Ghiotto had served with the San Diego fire department for 19 years before receiving parade orders for the first time. He says he and his fellow crew members feared retaliation if they refused to go along. "My engineer was on the captain's list. I was on the battalion chief's list, and if you go against any type of order I would be suspended on the spot," he explained.
The crew went ahead with orders. Pictures from the day show an event charged with ****** activity and nudity.
"The stuff that goes on in that parade, if I was to go out and take pictures of some of that stuff we saw out there and hang it in the fire station, I would be disciplined," Ghiotto said.
The firefighter's lawsuit charges the city of San Diego with ****** harassment, violation of freedom of speech and retaliation.
The San Diego city attorney called the retaliation charges "petty" and "not true."
City officials did admit, however, they got "caught short" on the day of the parade and asked Ghiotto's crew for help.
Now the city has an explicit parade policy-- strictly volunteer.
The fire department has participated in the annual gay pride event for 15 years with no complaints until now.









wow, just wow

[Fade]

Something like this happened in San Diego last year, I think...same incident (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=117796)?

[BW2]

And this is when I DO have a problem with gays! Do what you like in the comforts of your own home but prance around in a bloody parade and worse force non-gays to be there, is way over the f**ken line!

[noname]

The parade must have been flaming if they had firefighters there.p-)

[nullterm]

And this is when I DO have a problem with gays! Do what you like in the comforts of your own home but prance around in a bloody parade and worse force non-gays to be there, is way over the f**ken line!

The "gays" didn't force them, their own Fire Dept did. It's still BS though.

[Winger]

Sounds like a good day for everyone to call in sick.

[Col.O'neill]

That is so gay!

[little icebear]

Why do they order Firefighters to take part?

If I had a word in this issue, I´d send them construction workers, india... uhm, I mean: native americans, leather-clad bikers and policemen. And maybe sailors. Wonder if bd popeye still got his uniform... p-)

[Hot Lips]

Homophobia at it's best.

As a Firefighter, if you save someone who sleeps in the **** from burning to death it's not ****** harassment because you were exposed to a naked person. If a gay couple is in danger, it's not ****** harassment to expect you to do your job... save them. And if public events require the presence of Firefighters and it is part of their employment to work public events... it's not ****** harassment to make available human resources perform the duties of their job - IMHO.

Hank or someone more knowledgeable can speak about the law, but I figure it comes with the job. It's the polices job to address inappropriate public behavior and exposure (they too get exposed to the same antics) which can happy at ANY event, not just "gay" events.

[gaijinsamurai]

This is a good example of the double standard that a lot of politically-correct liberals have. I wish these firefighters luck. Personally, I don't give a sh*t if the gays want to have a parade, but if I were ordered to take part in one, I'd be pissed as hell.

[Hot Lips]

Double standard in what way? Do gay Firefighters not work events comprised of primarily straight participants whether they want to or not? Do African-American public servants not work events for organizations that blatantly discriminate against them because it's their job? Do you assume all gay people condone illegal activies at public events?

[Macs.]

The article doesn't clearly state; did they take part in parade as in stand on a truck and expose themselvs or did they work there and help set up things etc.

Because that would have been totally gay. Seriously, it's part of the job. A police officer can't go home if he has a homless hobo wank off infront of his nose.

[Backwoodshunter]

Double standard in what way? Do gay Firefighters not work events comprised of primarily straight participants whether they want to or not? Do African-American public servants not work events for organizations that blatantly discriminate against them because it's their job? Do you assume all gay people condone illegal activies at public events?

I'm going to have to side with the fire fighters, but theres more that needs to be known about the incident. Mainly captain John Ghiotto said "Me and my crew were given a direct order to be in that parade." So I'm guessing they were made to march in it. Therefore it would be hypocritical of you and our great nation to force them to march in a parade they don't agree in. Otherwise if they were forced to work it, i.e. provide safe supervision, it would be another story.

Another line of the article, "receiving parade orders for the first time". So by the wording I'm guessing his crew was ordered to march. They have every right to not want to march in a parade they don't support. Its wrong to make them march if they don't want too.

[California Joe]

We're here, we're queer, we're on fire, get used to it.

[Hot Lips]

I'm going to have to side with the fire fighters, but theres more that needs to be known about the incident. Mainly captain John Ghiotto said "Me and my crew were given a direct order to be in that parade." So I'm guessing they were made to march in it. Therefore it would be hypocritical of you and our great nation to force them to march in a parade they don't agree in. Otherwise if they were forced to work it, i.e. provide safe supervision, it would be another story.

Another line of the article, "receiving parade orders for the first time". So by the wording I'm guessing his crew was ordered to march. They have every right to not want to march in a parade they don't support. Its wrong to make them march if they don't want too.


If part of my job is taking turns with other employees holding a banner for the sake of public relations at a function the company supports as part of their diversity initiative, it's not ****** harrassment IMO nor a violation of my freedom of speech to expect me to take turns just like every other employee in the company. The banner is THEIR message (the organization), not mine personally. Contrary to that, ask me to say "I approve of... I agree with..." and I actually don't that's another matter. I doubt very much they were asked to do anything of the kind. They were human resources representing their employer and getting paid to do it. I still don't agree with them.

A racist could make similar claims about working a corporate public event supporting racial diversity. They'd be just as wrong.

Get a new job if you can't support the initiatives of your organization.

[Backwoodshunter]

Their job is to fight fires and save lives, yes they are probably required to march in parades on holidays and certain occasions, but if fire fighters don't agree with a parade especially a non essential one(i.e. not a holiday, civic/town celebration) they shouldn't have too. They aren't stepping away from their posts, refusing to save gay victims, or protesting their cause or principles.

They are humans, and marching in such a parade is just extra to their job. I say let them be, and personally it sounds as if alot of lewd conduct went on at such a parade, if the firefighters feel that the cops didin't do their job by keeping crowds in order, then a repeat show by the fire fighters shouldn't be required.

And I doubt any of their superiors, or even most of the town officials who are usually at parades were there. Therefore they should especially not be held accountable to go, it should be purely voluntary.

[gaijinsamurai]

Double standard in what way? Do gay Firefighters not work events comprised of primarily straight participants whether they want to or not? Do African-American public servants not work events for organizations that blatantly discriminate against them because it's their job? Do you assume all gay people condone illegal activies at public events?

When did I ever write that gay folks condone illegal activities?
Like I wrote earlier, I have no problem with gay pride parades. But if someone does not feel comfortable participating in one, they shouldn't have to. We all know that there happens be a lot of overt ******ity at such parades, and I don't have a problem with that, as long as everyone involved wants to be there and doesn't have a problem with it. However, if I were to show up at my office wearing a g-strig and gyrate my pelvis in front in the presence of a female co-worker, I'd be promptly disciplined, and rightly so.
If these firefighters are being forced to participate in the parade, it is therefore considered their work place, and they should have the same protection from being subjected to a hostile work evironment as anyone else.

[SBL]

When did I ever write that gay folks condone illegal activities?
Like I wrote earlier, I have no problem with gay pride parades. But if someone does not feel comfortable participating in one, they shouldn't have to. We all know that there happens be a lot of overt ******ity at such parades, and I don't have a problem with that, as long as everyone involved wants to be there and doesn't have a problem with it. However, if I were to show up at my office wearing a g-strig and gyrate my pelvis in front in the presence of a female co-worker, I'd be promptly disciplined, and rightly so.
If these firefighters are being forced to participate in the parade, it is therefore considered their work place, and they should have the same protection from being subjected to a hostile work evironment as anyone else.

x2. I see nothing wrong with a right to opt-out.

[Hot Lips]

Both men were on lists for advancement according to the article and that's why they agreed to work the parade. If you discriminate against a segment of the population you shouldn't be a public servant.

Will need more details, but neither in the article nor in the video does he claim to have voiced any objections when he was asked to work the parade. But rather followed "orders" due to an assumed consequence (e.g., not getting a promotion he wanted).

Hank would know more, but if you verbally / non-verbally agree to ****** behavior/talk in the workplace (in this case an event) and don't voice any objections... I don't think you get to cry foul about it later.

If the firehouse has participated for 15 years (and therefore long time employees would know what to expect) without complaint and these man voiced no opposition before hand... I don't see how it's ****** harrassment nor a violation of their rights.

[Calanen]

Homophobia at it's best.



I disagree. If the California Bar Association directed me to go in the Gay Pride Parade on the lawyers float, I'd tell them to go jump using florid language.

The Fire Fighters in San Diego have (or had dont know if she is still there) a militant lesbian Commissioner who was flexing her muscles to direct the firefighters to go in the parade, which really is a political event. That's not the Firefighters job, and they are paid to fight fires. Not wage the proxy political battles of their Commissioner.

[Hot Lips]

When did I ever write that gay folks condone illegal activities?
Like I wrote earlier, I have no problem with gay pride parades. But if someone does not feel comfortable participating in one, they shouldn't have to. We all know that there happens be a lot of overt ******ity at such parades, and I don't have a problem with that, as long as everyone involved wants to be there and doesn't have a problem with it. However, if I were to show up at my office wearing a g-strig and gyrate my pelvis in front in the presence of a female co-worker, I'd be promptly disciplined, and rightly so.
If these firefighters are being forced to participate in the parade, it is therefore considered their work place, and they should have the same protection from being subjected to a hostile work evironment as anyone else.

I didn't say you wrote that. I posed a question, easily identified by the "?" at the end of the statement.

And yes, as an employee you would be disciplined for doing that in the workplace. You are an employee bound to company policy in place to protect other employees. But other participants in the parade were not employees of the Firehouse. They were members of the public. The company has no control over what a public servant will be exposed to when they go out into public.

I don't believe a company can be held accountable for the actions of individuals in the general public. These individual employees could likely file charges against parade participants that committed illegal acts, but I don't see how you can hold the employers of parade participants responsible.

That would be like football players suing the NFL because someone in the crowd stripped down and streaked across the field.

Sorry, no sale.

[Hot Lips]

I disagree. If the California Bar Association directed me to go in the Gay Pride Parade on the lawyers float, I'd tell them to go jump using florid language.

The Fire Fighters in San Diego have (or had dont know if she is still there) a militant lesbian Commissioner who was flexing her muscles to direct the firefighters to go in the parade, which really is a political event. That's not the Firefighters job, and they are paid to fight fires. Not wage the proxy political battles of their Commissioner.

And if (admittedly need more info than article supplies) they didn't voice any opposition before hand and simply agreed to work the event because of a "fear" of consequences?

[vinny_121_ND]

california tax dollars at work.

[Calanen]

And if they didn't voice any opposition before hand and simply agreed to work the event because of a "fear" of consequences?

The Police and the Fire Brigade are paramilitary organisations. When you are given an order by a superior, you follow it (within reason, of course). If there are problems with what was done, then, you do what you have to and after you've followed the order, you say, 'hey i shouldnt have been directed to do that because of x, but yes, as a fireman, if my captain, lieutenant or whoever tells me to do something, I know I have to do it...' Their manuals, orders, disciplinary procedures would say in categorical terms - you do exactly what you are told, and if you wish to make a complaint..you do so, *later*. And being good firemen, thats what they did.

So they did exactly the right thing. They obeyed orders and then took the appropriate steps elsewhere to get it corrected. What you are missing is, that they should never have been ordered to attend in the first place. It is entirely inappropriate for the fire fighting service, who represents everyone, not just the homo****** lobby, to be directed to attend in a political event. If people freely volunteer and the Commissioner supports it (and she obviously does) then fine. But no one should be pressured, coerced, let alone ordered to attend.

[Hot Lips]

You didn't really answer my question. Maybe I didn't ask correctly. You may know you have to follow an order, but that doesn't prevent you from voicing that you are opposed to it and consider it ****** harrassment before hand. If the organization has ****** harrassment policy they couldn't just shrug that off lightly. If they had, the organization would have been aware of their feelings and would have had a reasonable opportunity to changed the situation before it happened.

Voicing displeasure is not the same as refusing to follow an order. 15 years without a complaint about the organizations participation wouldn't have given then any reasonable reason to think these employees would consider it ****** harrassment to follow in the footsteps of their peers and superiors.

They (seemingly) agreed to participate without voicing dissent for fear of screwing up their chances for promotion without (seemingly) any reason to think their promotional opportunities were at risk and now want to cry foul. Seems like BS to me.

[Calanen]

You didn't really answer my question. Maybe I didn't ask correctly. You may know you have to follow an order, but that doesn't prevent you from voicing that you are opposed to it and consider it ****** harrassment before hand. If they had, the organization would have been aware of their feelings and would have had a reasonable opportunity to changed the situation before it happened.

No, they did the right thing. Keep your mouth shut and do what you are told. They could have been written up if they had 'voiced disapproval' - military style services are not chatfests like a regular office. You do what you are told, and you do it without comment.


Voicing displeasure is not the same as refusing to follow an order.

You don't 'voice displeasure' either.


They (seemingly) agreed to participate without voicing dissent for fear of screwing up their chances for promotion without (seemingly) any reason to think their promotional opportunities were at risk and now want to cry foul. Seems like BS to me.

Nope - they have a militant lesbian commissioner who is vocal about gay issues. They are directed to attend a gay parade. They then did what they were required to do, which was follow orders - and protected their positions by being entirely blameless, and avoiding being written up for 'questioning a superior' or something similar, by doing what they are told.

The ridiculous spin the Fire Department has come up with, 'Oh they didnt kick up a stink when we gave them the order' of course they didnt! They have been trained to obey orders without question. They also ensured that the wider community knew about the issue before they could be managed out as 'subversives'. They played it exactly the right way, and if they called me on the cell and said, what do we do - i would have said to do ...exactly what they did.

[gaijinsamurai]

I didn't say you wrote that. I posed a question, easily identified by the "?" at the end of the statement.

And yes, as an employee you would be disciplined for doing that in the workplace. You are an employee bound to company policy in place to protect other employees. But other participants in the parade were not employees of the Firehouse. They were members of the public. The company has no control over what a public servant will be exposed to when they go out into public.

I don't believe a company can be held accountable for the actions of individuals in the general public. These individual employees could likely file charges against parade participants that committed illegal acts, but I don't see how you can hold the employers of parade participants responsible.

That would be like football players suing the NFL because someone in the crowd stripped down and streaked across the field.

Sorry, no sale.

The "question" clearly implied that I was suggesting that gays promote illegal activities. You know it, I know it, and everyone else knows it. To deny it only makes you look like an idiot.
No, the city cannot control what non-employees do at the parade, but if they order their workers to participate in something they know fully well will consist of acts that wouldn't be approved in the work place, they are guilty of forcing their employees to work in a hostile environment. By making them participate in the parade, they are making the parade the firefighters' workplace.
And to suggest that the sole reason they don't feel comfortable participating in such an evet is due to homophobia is political correctness at its worst. Perhaps they are indeed homophobic, but even if they are they should not be forced to participate. A few of my very best friends are gay, and I support their right to express themselves fully. However, I would not want my boss to tell me to walk in such an event, unless the performance of my duties as a peace officer demanded it.

[Mofreaka]

We're here, we're queer, we're on fire, get used to it.

I lol'd :D

[Hot Lips]

That sounds like a strategy for someone that has a lawsuit in mind in advance... setting up a situation where you can willingly participate and then pretend to be a victim for the sake of filing a lawsuit.

They could have filed a lawsuit for being disciplined after voicing dissent without disobeying orders in regards to ****** harrassment. Of course, that would have given the organization the opportunity to do the right thing and/or prove they didn't care about upholding ****** harrassment policy.

[Hot Lips]

The "question" clearly implied that I was suggesting that gays promote illegal activities.

The only thing it and the other questions "clearly" implied was that your statement was not clear in regards to "double standards" by "politically correct liberals" (anyone that doesn't side with the Firefighters?).

What did the employers know for a fact would take place? That homo******s would be there? That on a summer day there might be shirtless men in shorts or what amounts to swimwear present and that men who share a locker room and showers would somehow take offense?

Did they know someone would expose themselves to the firefighters (if that happened)? Can any employee willingly participating in marketing and PR efforts with the public be protected from the acts of rogue individuals in the public? Police were on hand for crowd control. Is that not a reasonable effort to protect parade participants?


Perhaps they are indeed homophobic, but even if they are they should not be forced to participate. A few of my very best friends are gay, and I support their right to express themselves fully. However, I would not want my boss to tell me to walk in such an event, unless the performance of my duties as a peace officer demanded it.

Do you mean you support your "best" gay friends rights, but only from a distance?

Or you just don't want to be asked to lend a hand to your employer while you are on company time to earn your wages by doing anything other than your primary job responsibilities? I get wrangled into working marketing and PR events when we are understaffed. It's legitimate company work for employees on the clock to perform.

[gaijinsamurai]

So what does me writing about double standards have to do with gays being involved in illegal activities? You still have yet to explain yourself. Perhaps it would just be easier to admit your "question" was an error, instead of digging yourself into a deeper hole. We all make mistakes when we become involved in heated debate, myself included. The adult thing to do is admit it, instead of perpetuating the bullsh*t.

So, are you saying that if I don't march in my city's annual Gay Pride parade, I don't support my gay friends?

I'm a veteran, and if a Jehova's Witness or pacifist were to object to taking part in a Veterans Day parade, I might be personally offended, but I would respect their right to decline to participate in something that might clash with their personal beliefs, or make them feel uncomfortable.

[muck]

Here in Berlin they forced dozens of officers to attend a ceremony where the gay pride flag was hoisted infront of the Berlin police departement headquarters.
Officers who secretly criticised the fuss had their eMails read and were dealt pretty hard with, including disciplinary measures and a lawsuit for libel.

Reading this story from the US now makes me wonder what sort of world we live in. Is everything done for the sake of political correctness nowadays?

[gaijinsamurai]

The only thing it and the other questions "clearly" implied was that your statement was not clear in regards to "double standards" by "politically correct liberals" (anyone that doesn't side with the Firefighters?).

What did the employers know for a fact would take place? That homo******s would be there? That on a summer day there might be shirtless men in shorts or what amounts to swimwear present and that men who share a locker room and showers would somehow take offense?

Did they know someone would expose themselves to the firefighters (if that happened)? Can any employee willingly participating in marketing and PR efforts with the public be protected from the acts of rogue individuals in the public? Police were on hand for crowd control. Is that not a reasonable effort to protect parade participants?



Do you mean you support your "best" gay friends rights, but only from a distance?

Or you just don't want to be asked to lend a hand to your employer while you are on company time to earn your wages by doing anything other than your primary job responsibilities? I get wrangled into working marketing and PR events when we are understaffed. It's legitimate company work for employees on the clock to perform.

I'm surprised you haven't chimed in on this one:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=138896

[WarriorMonk]

I thought this was old news...

if you're straight and can't stand being around gay people (unless if they're being annoying) to the point where you need to actually go and sue somebody...

are you really secure about your ******ity?

[gaijinsamurai]

^ Now, that's a valid question!

[muck]

^ Now, that's a valid question!
It is not. I'm quite sure about my (straight) ****** preferences and think its free to everyone to decide about theirs on their own. To each their own, that's for sure. Nonetheless I would not want to be forced to join one of those parades who are utterly silly by nature. Despite being hold to claim the rights of homo****** people, they usually effect the opposite and just lead to a feeling that "they" are really different from "us".

[gaijinsamurai]

Muck, sorry if I implied that everyone who is "homophobic" or feels less than comfortable around a bunch of ifeminate choreographers, hair stylists, or florists is insecure in their ******ity. It just so happens that I know a few guys who are SO homophobic (they won't even laugh at gay jokes) that it makes me wonder about them.

[Bombtrack]

At the Pride parade here there's a demo/participants from the Fire Service that are openly gay. And have a funny demo where they tap a hydrant. Or so I'm told by a few people that were there.

[muck]

Muck, sorry if I implied that everyone who is "homophobic" or feels less than comfortable around a bunch of ifeminate choreographers, hair stylists, or florists is insecure in their ******ity. It just so happens that I know a few guys who are SO homophobic (they won't even laugh at gay jokes) that it makes me wonder about them.
Fair enough, and the points I've made were totally not about homophobia anyhow. Let's "translate" it to a political level: As an avowed conservative, I would never ever join a rally of communists.
With gay pride parades, it is just the same. Of course one can join them as a hetero as well just to emphasize one's support for the rights of homo******s. If anyone is forced into them though, it is really a violation of one's basic rights in my eyes.

[Bombtrack]

Fair enough, and the points I've made were totally not about homophobia anyhow. Let's "translate" it to a political level: As an avowed conservative, I would never ever join a rally of communists.
With gay pride parades, it is just the same. Of course one can join them as a hetero as well just to emphasize one's support for the rights of homo******s. If anyone is forced into them though, it is really a violation of one's basic rights in my eyes.

Gay isnt a political group.

For instance:
http://www.google.com/search?q=gay+conservative&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLJ

[gaijinsamurai]

I understand Muck's point, and I agree. It's all about the employer respecting your right not to participate in something which has nothing to do with your occupational duties, and is in opposition to your beliefs or creates an uncomfortable atmosphere. And yes, if an employer can ban the open display of girlie calendars and internet ****, they should not make the employees attend off-site functions which may be equally offensive.

[muck]

Gay isnt a political group.

For instance:
http://www.google.com/search?q=gay+conservative&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGLJ
I'm aware of that, although I'd state it has turned to a political lobby. It was only a comparison, gaijinsamurai perfectly pointed out what I had meant.

[Hot Lips]

So what does me writing about double standards have to do with gays being involved in illegal activities? You still have yet to explain yourself. Perhaps it would just be easier to admit your "question" was an error, instead of digging yourself into a deeper hole.

Reading 101: I did explain myself. I exlpained that your statement was, IMO, vague and was seeking clarification with a series of questions regarding what you may or may not have meant. No error in the intentions of my questions nor the explaination. I asked you to clarify what "double standards" exist - which you evade answering.

What double standards were you referring to?



So, are you saying that if I don't march in my city's annual Gay Pride parade, I don't support my gay friends?

Again, a question is not a statement. I didn't make a statement, I asked a question to seek clarification. You claim to support some of your best gay friends rights... but would seemingly be offended by being asked to work in a parade that supports your best gay friends rights even it would be done simply as a PR/Marketing representative if your company were short staffed as part of your paid employment. I find that puzzling.

[TR1]

When did I ever write that gay folks condone illegal activities?
Like I wrote earlier, I have no problem with gay pride parades. But if someone does not feel comfortable participating in one, they shouldn't have to. We all know that there happens be a lot of overt ******ity at such parades, and I don't have a problem with that, as long as everyone involved wants to be there and doesn't have a problem with it. However, if I were to show up at my office wearing a g-strig and gyrate my pelvis in front in the presence of a female co-worker, I'd be promptly disciplined, and rightly so.
If these firefighters are being forced to participate in the parade, it is therefore considered their work place, and they should have the same protection from being subjected to a hostile work evironment as anyone else.

nice.woot.............

[Hot Lips]

I'm surprised you haven't chimed in on this one:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=138896

I'm not surprised to find that you did nor that despite supporting your very best gay friends rights, not only would you seemingly be offended to be asked to represent your employer in a parade that also supports your very best gay friends rights... as part of your paid employement.... but you are also are upset that some of your very best gay friends friends might be offended by a national advertisement that pokes fun at them.

"So it's non-PC, lighten up!" you say to your very best gay friends community.

Then why not say "so it's just a public parade full of [your] very best gay friends peers with a few having some non-PC fun on the side, lighten up" to the Firefighters?

Even if these tough men saw a stray ***** in the crowd from the distant safety of a company sponsored parade float... wouldn't they run the risk of seeing a stray ***** more frequently in the Firehouse lockeroom/shower as part of the job as well?

Are you sure these gay friends of yours are friends, let alone very best friends of yours?

Very difficult to make sense of your vague and seemingly contradictory statements.

[chauncy republicans]

I wonder what would happen if queer firefighters were ordered to participate in a christian oriented pro-life rally?

[Hot Lips]

I wonder what would happen if queer firefighters were ordered to participate in a christian oriented pro-life rally?

Do you think there are no pro life homo******s? Do you think there are no homo******s that believe in God or Christ? Are there any lawsuits filed by homo******s that feel discriminated against for having to earn their wages by temporarily performing pr/marketing work at a company endorsed event?

[gaijinsamurai]

I'm not surprised to find that you did nor that despite supporting your very best gay friends rights, not only would you seemingly be offended to be asked to represent your employer in a parade that also supports your very best gay friends rights... as part of your paid employement.... but you are also are upset that some of your very best gay friends friends might be offended by a national advertisement that pokes fun at them.

"So it's non-PC, lighten up!" you say to your very best gay friends community.

Then why not say "so it's just a public parade full of [your] very best gay friends peers with a few having some non-PC fun on the side, lighten up" to the Firefighters?

Even if these tough men saw a stray ***** in the crowd from the distant safety of a company sponsored parade float... wouldn't they run the risk of seeing a stray ***** more frequently in the Firehouse lockeroom/shower as part of the job as well?

Are you sure these gay friends of yours are friends, let alone very best friends of yours?

Very difficult to make sense of your vague and seemingly contradictory statements.

My gay friends would be the first to laugh at something like that!!
Don't assume that all homo******s are uptight, overly-sensitive, and look for things at which to find offense, as you clearly do.

[Russian_dude]

Homophobia at it's best.

As a Firefighter, if you save someone who sleeps in the **** from burning to death it's not ****** harassment because you were exposed to a naked person. If a gay couple is in danger, it's not ****** harassment to expect you to do your job... save them. And if public events require the presence of Firefighters and it is part of their employment to work public events... it's not ****** harassment to make available human resources perform the duties of their job - IMHO.

Hank or someone more knowledgeable can speak about the law, but I figure it comes with the job. It's the polices job to address inappropriate public behavior and exposure (they too get exposed to the same antics) which can happy at ANY event, not just "gay" events.

Imagine if paramedics decide they want to have a say as to which part of the town they are sent to.

[SBL]

Imagine if paramedics decide they want to have a say as to which part of the town they are sent to.
Pardon me, but this isn't a case of Firefighters being required to go for security reasons as Hot Lips erroneously suggested. This is a case of firefighters being required to go at the behest of their higher-ups, for reasons other than public safety.

[gaijinsamurai]

In the performance of my duties in law enforcement, I've had to go into many ****o shops and strip clubs, in order to make arrests and distribute warnings about dangerous felons. On a couple of occasions, fellow officers who were religious accompanied me. They didn't bitch about it, because they were performing their duties as peace officers. We all understood that in order to do the job, we had to be professional and look past that which might be offensive.
On occasion, I had to search people I was arresting who were known to keep their drugs hidden behind their ********s. With the best straight face I could muster (especially in the presence of my smirking co-workers!), and wearing latex gloves, I'd check behind thier nutsacks. Did it make me feel uncomfortable? Of course, but I still did my job, because it was required.

[LongShot]

Its not a parade without a fire truck.

[Moriarti]

LOL - yeah...and Shriners on little motorcycles!

But - making firefigters (or *any* public servant for that matter) participate in a parade that may be contray to their mores or ethics *is* teh ghey.

[WARPIG]

Homophobia at it's best.

As a Firefighter, if you save someone who sleeps in the **** from burning to death it's not ****** harassment because you were exposed to a naked person. If a gay couple is in danger, it's not ****** harassment to expect you to do your job... save them. And if public events require the presence of Firefighters and it is part of their employment to work public events... it's not ****** harassment to make available human resources perform the duties of their job - IMHO.

Hank or someone more knowledgeable can speak about the law, but I figure it comes with the job. It's the polices job to address inappropriate public behavior and exposure (they too get exposed to the same antics) which can happy at ANY event, not just "gay" events.


I think you missed the mark dear. Execution of your job as a firefighter shouldn't have to include attending gay parades. It shouldn't have to include attending 4th of July parades either..so, I get what you're saying. There's a difference though. Most 4th of July parades don't include nudity or ******ly charged activity. Although I also think the lawsuit is petty, ****** harassment is a very real possibility. Firefighters, EMT's, Police, etc also have homo****** members. But, the instant those members feel they are being ******ly harrassed or are being treated unfairly because of their ****** lifestyle, the legal charges start flying. Why "breeders" don't get the same consideration is similar to the way men don't get the same consideration as women when it comes to ****** harrassment. But, whether you're gay, straight, male or female, being ordered to attend a ******ly driven event, being exposed to nudity, and possibly cat calls, and other ****** advancements.. probably seems pretty harrassing. Call it homophobia if you want.. but whatever the reason these firefighters felt uncomfortable in a ******ly oriented parade, I think it's justified. It's a bit different than having to perform CPR or put handcuffs on a naked gay gay.

Speaking of homophobia, if this were a religioius function, racial, political.. wouldn't it be understood if the firefighters didn't want to attend? Why is it such a bad thing to feel uncomfortable about ******ly based lifestyles?

[little icebear]

With the best straight face I could muster (especially in the presence of my smirking co-workers!), and wearing latex gloves, I'd check behind thier nutsacks. Did it make me feel uncomfortable? Of course, but I still did my job, because it was required.

That´s the spirit! :)

[WARPIG]

Pardon me, but this isn't a case of Firefighters being required to go for security reasons as Hot Lips erroneously suggested. This is a case of firefighters being required to go at the behest of their higher-ups, for reasons other than public safety.

Here's the kicker, public servants do just that. They look past most of the bull**** and do their job. If a femal cop is making a bust or on patrol and get's her ass grabbed, whistled at, or generally given a hard time by the public because she's a female... well, most female cops go into the job understanding they will have to endure some of that. But, that doesn't mean she wasn't ******ly harrassed. If she's told to pose for a "hot police chicks" by her superiors, then I think it's pretty clear she's got a justifiable complaint. I don't see how firefighters paraded around for a homo****** community event is much different.

Again, not having all the facts, I think there is some politics involved in this rather than the ominous homo conspiracy that's being portrayed.

I do find it ridiculous the way all things homo****** seems be treated like some sort of protected species of wildlife. Anything that might be slightly offensive or risks disturbing the sensitivity of homo******s or people who know homo******s is automatically homophobic or a hate crime.

[WARPIG]

Not sure if another mod closed this or if I closed it inadvertantly. I'm reopening it however.