Brookstone Fires Employee For Belief In Traditional Marriage

[StColette]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 11:26 AM' timestamp='1257524781' post='1997123']
So?

We're only getting one side of the story, and from people with bias.

Jim
[/quote]

It is not bias to speak of one's person interactions with a particular person or information about their character. Bias means to lack the ability to be impartial or objective. If Peter were someone who was a jerk and had a history of harassing people, I'd admit that he's had issue with harassing people. If I didn't make it known that he had a habit of harassing people and spoke of him the way I did previously, then I'd be a liar. But that's not the case. Peter's character has always been one of kindness and truthfulness, not one of hate and harassment. In the court system there are such things as character witnesses, who testify to a person's morality and/or honesty. If that type of testimony can hold up in court as substantial evidence towards a person's character and work toward their innocence or toward winning their case, I don't see how you can call fellow friends and students of Peter's that they're being bias. Being biased means you lack the ability to be completely honest about a situation, ideology, or person. So are you saying those of us that have attested to Peter's honesty and good nature are being dishonest and are thus liars? I don't take kindly to being accused of being dishonest (which is what having a bias essentially means)

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Peter is also an extremely peaceful person and always strikes me as being shy about speaking up. I very highly doubt that he said anything out of turn.

I would hope that a person would have more respect for those who know the individual in question. We know him well enough to be character witnesses in court, so I don't think we should be disbelieved, but given the benefit of the doubt.

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 12:19 PM' timestamp='1257524386' post='1997116']
In a free market, a single negative experience is more than enough reason to boycott a retailer. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/happy.gif[/img]
It's my right as a consumer to boycott for any reason, or none at all if I just feel like it.
[/quote]


Sure, but if your boycott causes unjust harm to another, because you accepted bogus information
from an internet sight, you're still culpable to the evil the boycott caused.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the information is bogus, but I've only seen one side of the story.

Jim

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 12:47 PM' timestamp='1257533267' post='1997212']
Sure, but if your boycott causes unjust harm to another, because you accepted bogus information
from an internet sight, you're still culpable to the evil the boycott caused.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the information is bogus, but I've only seen one side of the story.

Jim
[/quote]
Whom am I harming in choosing to exercise my right as a consumer to support whatever organization pleases me?

[HisChild]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 11:50 AM' timestamp='1257533455' post='1997218']
Whom am I harming in choosing to exercise my right as a consumer to support whatever organization pleases me?
[/quote]


Exactly.

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 02:50 PM' timestamp='1257533455' post='1997218']
Whom am I harming in choosing to exercise my right as a consumer to support whatever organization pleases me?
[/quote]


A boycott hurts business. If it hurts the business it can also hurt the people who work there, who have nothing to do with this issue.

Jim

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 12:56 PM' timestamp='1257533786' post='1997224']
A boycott hurts business. If it hurts the business it can also hurt the people who work there, who have nothing to do with this issue.

Jim
[/quote]
That's how the market works. They can find another job. Especially considering that in a boycott, the competitors will have increased business and will therefore hire a greater proportion of workers.
Immoral businesses deserve to fail.

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 03:01 PM' timestamp='1257534068' post='1997227']
That's how the market works. They can find another job. Especially considering that in a boycott, the competitors will have increased business and will therefore hire a greater proportion of workers.
Immoral businesses deserve to fail.
[/quote]

I'm speaking from a Christian perspective, not a capitalists.

If you're actions cause harm to an innocent person, you are culpable.

Jim

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 01:56 PM' timestamp='1257533786' post='1997224']
A boycott hurts business. If it hurts the business it can also hurt the people who work there, who have nothing to do with this issue.

Jim
[/quote]
The same line of logic would stand against the right of workers to strike, but the Church upholds that, too.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 01:11 PM' timestamp='1257534706' post='1997234']
I'm speaking from a Christian perspective, not a capitalists.

If you're actions cause harm to an innocent person, you are culpable.

Jim
[/quote]
How is someone innocent by supporting an immoral organization with their labour?

[StColette]

The fact that they also contribute to Planned Parenthood (according to the Planned Parenthood website) doesn't help my feelings toward them.

[zunshynn]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 09:26 AM' timestamp='1257524781' post='1997123']
So?

We're only getting one side of the story, and from people with bias.


Jim
[/quote]

It is one thing to suggest that perhaps the source is biased. It is quite another to say "[b][i]It wouldn't surprise me if this fellow was getting into this woman's face[/i][/b], because of her sexual orientation." ... [emphasis mine] as if you have good reason to believe that this man would do that. You don't have good reason to believe that, in fact, because a number of people hear know him personally and have testified to his character that he would not do that, you have good reason to believe the opposite. You are maligning this man's character with out just cause.

Edited November 6, 2009 by zunshynn

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Raphael' date='06 November 2009 - 03:11 PM' timestamp='1257534709' post='1997235']
The same line of logic would stand against the right of workers to strike, but the Church upholds that, too.
[/quote]


The right of workers to strike, is for their benefit against unjust wages or conditions.

The Church also teaches that workers have an obligation to be fair in what they demand from their employer.

It wouldn't be fair for employees to go on strike against their employer, because they're not getting free trips to Disney World every year.


Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 03:18 PM' timestamp='1257535129' post='1997241']
How is someone innocent by supporting an immoral organization with their labour?
[/quote]


The point is whether you actually know that the organization is immoral or not.


In the current case, we only have one side of the story, so lacking all of the facts, we actually don't know.

Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='StColette' date='06 November 2009 - 03:21 PM' timestamp='1257535293' post='1997246']
The fact that they also contribute to Planned Parenthood (according to the Planned Parenthood website) doesn't help my feelings toward them.
[/quote]


Thats a seperate issue than the one presented in this thread.

If you want to go that route, starte another thread on the issue of boycotting businesses who support planned parenthood.


Jim

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='zunshynn' date='06 November 2009 - 03:25 PM' timestamp='1257535537' post='1997251']
It is one thing to suggest that perhaps the source is biased. It is quite another to say "[b][i]It wouldn't surprise me if this fellow was getting into this woman's face[/i][/b], because of her sexual orientation." ... [emphasis mine] as if you have good reason to believe that this man would do that. You don't have good reason to believe that, in fact, because a number of people hear know him personally and have testified to his character that he would not do that, you have good reason to believe the opposite. You are maligning this man's character with out just cause.
[/quote]


I stated it wouldn't surprise me if this was the case, not because I suspect it is, but rather, its a more common than not occurance, based on my experience, as I also stated.

Jim

Edited November 6, 2009 by JimR-OCDS

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 01:28 PM' timestamp='1257535709' post='1997254']
The point is whether you actually know that the organization is immoral or not.


In the current case, we only have one side of the story, so lacking all of the facts, we actually don't know.

Jim
[/quote]
Well then that's not what we were talking about, is it? We were talking about my right to boycott an organization, which I decisively have. In our previous discussion, the model assumes that the organization has been found to be immoral.

[StColette]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 02:30 PM' timestamp='1257535812' post='1997255']
Thats a seperate issue than the one presented in this thread.

If you want to go that route, starte another thread on the issue of boycotting businesses who support planned parenthood.


Jim
[/quote]

Nihil was speaking of boycotting as do many of the others in this thread. The fact that they support planned parenthood is merely another reason not to contribute to their company by buying from them on top of the fact that the fired someone for uphold belief in traditional marriage (though you seem to be questioning the motives of the person who was fired).

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 03:35 PM' timestamp='1257536111' post='1997261']
Well then that's not what we were talking about, is it? We were talking about my right to boycott an organization, which I decisively have. In our previous discussion, the model assumes that the organization has been found to be immoral.
[/quote]


I didn't know there was an assumption the organization was immoral. I stated totally from the
context of the story in this thread.

I don't know if the organization is immoral or not.

Jim

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 01:41 PM' timestamp='1257536479' post='1997269']
I didn't know there was an assumption the organization was immoral. I stated totally from the
context of the story in this thread.

I don't know if the organization is immoral or not.

Jim
[/quote]
Thanks for completely missing my point.