161 replies to this topic

[Beckys_Mom]

eight bits, on 23 November 2011 - 10:48 AM, said:

Even from the one-sided complaint, however, a few things can be sorted out. Here's a repost of the link:

I doubt it ever will get sorted out using a  one sided complaint...If it were so easy, the man would never face any gross misconduct, they would just take his word for it and that would be it... There is more to this than the man is letting on  Looking at a story that is one sided and basing what you can from the little evidence you see is too easy... try doing it with all the evidence

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 23 November 2011 - 02:52 PM.

[eight bits]

_Kratos_

Quote

So... Who are we going to believe here... What's written in the bible or the claims of a worker looking to get a pay out?

Beats me. By law, proceedings begin with a complaint, somebody telling the court their side of the story. That's as far as things have gotten.

Quote

Damn atheists quoting the exact words of the bible!

I didn't say anything about damnation. What I pointed to was absurdity.

Of what relevance to this thread are "the exact words of the Bible?" There's nothing in the complaint that says Mr Hyatt is a Biblical literalist. On the contrary, he explains to the court how he interprets the pertinent passages of Revelation. Differently from you. Go figure.


BM

Quote

I doubt it ever will get sorted out using a one sided complaint...If it were so easy, the man would never face any gross misconduct, they would just take his word for it and that would be it... There is more to this than the man is letting on Looking at a story that is one sided and basing what you can from the little evidence you see is too easy... try doing it with all the evidence

I agree that there's more to the story, like the whole other side, but I don't know whether we get more. The court usually puts a lot of pressure on both parties to settle. If the parties do settle, a frequent provision is that both sides agree never to discuss the case again, there is no mention of how much money changes hands, and neither side admits any wrongdoing.

So, we could just be left hanging. Happens all the time here.

[__Kratos__]

eight bits, on 23 November 2011 - 03:23 PM, said:

_Kratos_


Beats me. By law, proceedings begin with a complaint, somebody telling the court their side of the story. That's as far as things have gotten.


I didn't say anything about damnation. What I pointed to was absurdity.

Of what relevance to this thread are "the exact words of the Bible?" There's nothing in the complaint that says Mr Hyatt is a Biblical literalist. On the contrary, he explains to the court how he interprets the pertinent passages of Revelation. Differently from you. Go figure.

Quite a lot of relevance one would think.

Revelation 13:16 "It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads,"

That's what the book he follows to be a christian says.

If he's not using his christian faith to justify his claims of being fired, then... He was fired for being a bad employee.

[Beckys_Mom]

eight bits, on 23 November 2011 - 03:23 PM, said:

I agree that there's more to the story, like the whole other side, but I don't know whether we get more.

We might not...but the courts will, if the court does not get both sides there is no case....The man is sunk

To sum it all up without doing into full detail... If you wish to build a case that is one sided based on the little evidence you have read from an on line new article... All you needs to say is - Based on the man's statements  he could have this settled out of court easy....  <-- But we know that won't happen...nothing will get viewed one sided..................Well apart from in this thread  lol.. So many have viewed it one sided

[Beckys_Mom]

eight bits, on 23 November 2011 - 10:48 AM, said:

I truly marvel at the absurdity of an atheist pontificating about how a Christian should interpret the Bible.

So according to you if a person is atheist, they cannot possibly know how to interpret a bible verse ?  Really eaight bits... I find that statement very droll and unfair to think atheists cannot do it

Many turned Christians were atheists who knew how to read a bible and interpret it... It is called using their intelligence...  You do not need a special label attached to be  able to to that

[eight bits]

BM

Quote

So according to you if a person is atheist, they cannot possibly know how to interpret a bible verse ? Really eaight bits... I find that statement very droll and unfair to think atheists cannot do it

What does any of that have to do with what I wrote?

Everyone is welcome to interpret the Bible, and its instructions for behavior, for themselves. Mr Hyatt has been instructed in this thread by atheists how he, a Christian, ought to have interpreted the New Testament, and ought to have conformed his behavior to the atheists' teachings about the New Testament.

Those are very two very different things, Geri. To only one of them have I voiced an objection. And the objection that I voiced was not incapacity, but absurdity. Speaking of things that are very different.

Quote

We might not...but the courts will, if the court does not get both sides there is no case...

Precisely. That's what settlement is for, that there be no case.

Edited by eight bits, 23 November 2011 - 04:35 PM.

[Beckys_Mom]

eight bits, on 23 November 2011 - 04:28 PM, said:

BM


What does any of that have to do with what I wrote?

I truly marvel at the absurdity of an atheist pontificating about how a Christian should interpret the Bible.    <-- Your own words.. which I do not in any way see how you came to this conclusion.. As I did not see an artheist do such a thing.. I did however see Kratos give an accurate interpretation of a bible verse..  


To add .. many christians have had trouble interpreting the bible accurately ...  It's anyone's game

[eight bits]

Quote

Your own words

Yes, they are, as are these:

Mr Hyatt has been instructed in this thread by atheists how he, a Christian, ought to have interpreted the New Testament, and ought to have conformed his behavior to the atheists' teachings about the New Testament.

You questioned whether I objected about an atheists' ability to read the Bible,

Quote

So according to you if a person is atheist, they cannot possibly know how to interpret a bible verse ?

The answer is no. I objected to something else. In case that wasn't clear from my last post, it is now.

Rather than derail the thread further, if you believe that I have misrepresented or unfairly maligned you or some other poster than summon a moderator and we'll resolve it with him or her offline.

Edited by eight bits, 23 November 2011 - 04:56 PM.

[Beckys_Mom]

eight bits, on 23 November 2011 - 04:52 PM, said:

Yes, they are, as are these:

Mr Hyatt has been instructed in this thread by atheists how he, a Christian, ought to have interpreted the New Testament, and ought to have conformed his behavior to the atheists' teachings about the New Testament.

You questioned whether I objected about an atheists' ability to read the Bible,

I never said ability to read the bible, I said - interpret the bible... to gain the understanding from reading a verse.........ability to read is one thing.. to gain the understanding and interpret is another.. still easy to do
I feel you are looking at it all wrong... It is not like IE - An electrician   trying to tell a vet how to preform surgery.. The bible and those that can follow is is not like some profession.......The bible is just a book that anyone can interpret... it is not complex or rocket science...

And I disagree  with you on how you feel atheists in this thread have tried to tell Mr Hyatt anything of the sort... I saw people voicing opinions and how they see it...   Mr Hyatt is not told a thing  by anyone here

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 23 November 2011 - 05:11 PM.

[Leonardo]

Mr Hyatt is entitled to interpret the bible as his faith dictates him to. What others here interpret various passages to be is completely irrelevant to that.

That is part and parcel of 'religious freedom'.

To all those arguing "Revelations says this..." or "Revelations says that...", your arguments are absolutely meaningless with respect the issue(s) surrounding Mr Hyatt's firing. The only argument that has any bearing is the argument "Mr Hyatt interpets Revelations as saying this..."

Edited by Leonardo, 23 November 2011 - 05:53 PM.

[Beckys_Mom]

Mr Right Wing, on 23 November 2011 - 12:52 PM, said:

The law isnt that straight forward

While its true your employer can expect you to execute any reasonable demands they cant violate your religious freedom. In this case we can speculate all we like (Beckys Mom) but we can only go off what facts we know.

The info we know of still is one sided...And regardless to what you wish to believe, there still is another side to the story...  I do not believe a person working anywhere can be fired over a sticky piece of paper due to a belief.. there has to be more to it..

[DieChecker]

Copasetic, on 23 November 2011 - 05:07 AM, said:

I suspect that the employer has a list of grievances against said employee. Or else I would not expect them to be hashing it out in court. Rather quickly settling, mitigating the story.

That is what I think too. He likely had more issues then just this one.

I see a lot of people did not read the article. This guy never wore the sticker, because he was gone for 3 days.

From the OP Link:

Quote

He said he was told that his beliefs were 'ridiculous' and that he should wear the sticker or serve a three-day suspension.

Hyatt says he told a manager that wearing it would force him 'to accept the mark of the beast and to be condemned to hell'. Hyatt took the three-day suspension, and was fired at a human resources meeting several days later. He then filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and his attorney Stephen Mixon said the agency granted him the right to sue the company in August.

So management gave him two choices and he chose the one where he did not have to wear the sticker. He took 3 days off. Then when he got back, they fired him. This smells like a definate issue where the manager stewed about it for 3 days, got himself good and mad and fired the guy out of shear stupidity. The Berry Plastics Corp is going to lose this one.

They had the right to fire him, but the appearance is that they fired him for a semi-religious related infraction. Thus supercedeing the At-Will Law.

I wonder at the reasoning behind making everyone wear a sticker too. Most small companies I've worked for put up a poster in the lunch room.

This guy might have been an idiot, but the manager was too, and now Mr Fired Christian is going to clean up for it.

I do agree that wearing it would mean nothing. This is like accepting a book that has more then 666 pages, or not eating anything that has the number 666 on the wrapper. It is very naive.

The guy should have talked to his pasture/minister/priest before talking to management.

Edited by DieChecker, 23 November 2011 - 09:21 PM.

[DieChecker]

Beckys_Mom, on 23 November 2011 - 05:46 PM, said:

The info we know of still is one sided...And regardless to what you wish to believe, there still is another side to the story...  I do not believe a person working anywhere can be fired over a sticky piece of paper due to a belief.. there has to be more to it..

If this guy gets a good lawyer, that other stuff might ruled Inadmisable. And then the company is hosed.

[Beckys_Mom]

DieChecker, on 23 November 2011 - 09:23 PM, said:

If this guy gets a good lawyer, that other stuff might ruled Inadmisable. And then the company is hosed.

The other stuff?  You mean the other side of the story?  I'd say the company can afford better lawyers than this guy can

[Setton]

Beckys_Mom, on 23 November 2011 - 12:05 AM, said:

Setton I would NEVER discuss a private message on a board...Not ever...    I have cut the rest of your post  off because there is really only one point to make -  There has to be two sides of the story regardless and we do not know both sides...  I fail to see how anyone gets fired over a sticker...There has to be more to this.. I am not the only one that thinks so...

Glad to hear it. That's how it sounded to me, that's all.

I agree there will probably be more to it but there's no point second guessing what that is and saying the employee must be in the wrong because he got fired - that's effectively the argument you're putting forward. Companies make wrong decisions too.

Quote

Now  as for Christians.. any Christian I have ever met does believe in Jesus protecting them...  You are doubtful of that view.. so be it..I disagree with you completely on that...

The bolded part - you've met me so I'm afraid this is not true. But it looks like we disagree on the fundamental definition of a Christian so we'll just have to agree to differ.

Quote

Anyhoo.. I am tired and off to lay down.. being pregnant takes it out of me.. it is uncomfortable sitting her for a long time...  So I'm off

Didn't realise you were pregnant. Congratulations