Oct 15, 2012
Print This Post
Conservatives and even some liberals across the nation are outraged after Gallaudet University suspended the school’s chief diversity officer after she signed a petition in her church to put a gay marriage referendum on the ballot in Maryland.
FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE TO JOIN.
Angela McCaskill, a 23-year veteran of the university, was placed on paid leave as the university investigates her support for traditional marriage.
“It recently came to my attention that Dr. McCaskill has participated in a legislative initiative that some feel is inappropriate for an individual serving as Chief Diversity Officer; however, other individuals feel differently,” wrote Gallaudet president T. Alan Hurwitz in an email sent to the campus community.
McCaskill’s attorney said they will hold a press conference on Tuesday — stressing that his client is not “anti-gay.”
McCaskill was one of 200,000 residents who signed a petition to put “Maryland’s Question 6” on the ballot. The measure is a referendum on same-sex “marriage.”
The Washington Blade published the names and addresses of every person who signed the petition. An anonymous faculty member spotted McCaskill’s name in the newspaper and immediately notified authorites.
Hurwitz said McCaskill, who earned the school’s first Ph.D as a deaf African-American woman, was immediately placed on leave. Her job remains in jeopardy.
McCaskill’s pastor denounced the university’s decision and called it “beyond the boundaries of civility.”
“Unfortunately, Dr. McCaskill and her family have been subjected to threats and intimidation as a result of the media coverage of the actions taken by President Hurwitz on behalf of Gallaudet University,” said Lee Washington, pastor of Reid Temple. “As her church family, we stand firmly by her side and welcome all persons of good faith, regardless of their ideological views to denounce these actions of cowardice and bullying.”
Washington also said what happened to McCaskill should serve as a warning to all Americans who support traditional marriage.
“It is a clarion call for Marylanders who value religious liberties and individual rights to vote against question six,” he wrote in a statement on the church’s website.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said the university’s president should be fired “for violating our most basic civil rights.”
“Gallaudet University’s action underscores that far more is at stake in redefining marriage than two people walking down the aisle,” Perkins said. “Indeed, the very livelihood of business owners and employees is at stake.”
More than 50,000 have signed a Family Research Council petition calling for the university to reinstate McCaskill.
“If marriage is redefined, we can fully expect to see more of these discriminatory actions taken against anyone who espouses marriage as it has always been defined,” Perkins said.
Even some supporters of same-sex marriage are calling on the university to reinstate McCaskill – including Gov. Martin O’Malley.
Marylanders for Marriage Equality campaign manager Josh Levin said she “should be reinstated immediately.”
Although the group supports gay marriage, Levin says “everyone is entitled to free speech.”
The Washington Post weighed in on the matter in an editorial titled, “Gallaudet’s Mistake.”
“Firing, or threatening to fire, a diversity officer for off-campus political activity strikes us as inconsistent with “open sharing of thoughts and ideas,” the newspaper wrote.
Related posts:
FOX News Talk
I don't want to lump all the Republicans in one group but are they not the ones that are pushing for right to work laws that let employers fire you for any reason? I do not see the Republicans get all riled up when someone gets fired for being gay. I guess the phrase "Let Him Who is Without Sin Cast the First Stone" only applies to some people? If the Republicans stopped for one minute they would see they are no better than the Democrats when it comes to violating the rights of individuals. The voter who votes Democrat or Republican is the most destructive force in the USA right now.
Perhaps you should do some research and know what you're talking about before writing. The "Right to Work" laws mean that an individual has a right to a job without joining a unionand/or being forced to pay dues that he or she may not want to join. You are speaking of "Employment at Will". Beyond that, I know of no conservatives who would support firing someone simply because they were gay EXCEPT when the employment is related to a faith-based organization that with a fundamental doctrine that homosexual behavior is a sin. You may not like it but that's the way it is.
While part of "Diversity" is accepting those you don't agree with, it doesn't mean you give up your "Freedom of Speech" in the process. What she does on her personal time, based on her faith, to exercise that right is not the university's business unless she is engaged in what could be considered "hate speech". I say this as someone that does support marriage equality.
If she is not a diversity officer, I would say she should be reinstate. However, she is a diversity officer and she was supposed to be tolerant of everyone and every beliefs, her action did not match her job requirement!
I wonder how those supporting the University's President would react to the reverse – a University President firing a diversity official for signing a pro-gay-marriage petition at her church!
I wonder how those supporting the University's President would react to the reverse – a University President firing a diversity official for signing a pro-gay-marriage petition at her church!
I would like to know how this university found out about who singned that church petition? Signing a petition is a private endeavor on one's own time. Did someone purposely reveal the petition signers? This looks like a vengeful setup to me.
I learned that the local newspaper is the culprit. It must be run by gay sympathizers.
The latest update states that the university is reconsidering. Ms. McCaskill is merely on leave pending university evaluation. Now, they want her back to work (due to bad publicity, maybe?).
lets see…schools chief diversity officer is against diversity…yea…should be fired.
No. "Diversity" does NOT mean that everyone agrees. "Diversity of thought" iand political persuasion s important.
No. "Diversity" does NOT mean that everyone agrees. "Diversity of thought" iand political persuasion s important.
The blatant, blaring, hypocrisy of marriage-redefinition-bigots is a astounding. They cry out for "tolerance!" and then turn around and try to destroy anyone who adheres to God's definition of marriage. Because of these type of intimidation tactics, I will never again associate with someone who supports the redefinition of marriage. http://heteroseparatist.blogspot.com/2009/07/the-heteroseparatists-internet-manifesto.html
Lets face it:"diversity" leads to perversion…
Free speech is only for liberals or Democrats, don't you know that? If you're not a liberal or a Democrat you'll suffer the consequences or be shouted down.
WoW – What “Big Bullies” work at this college is. Think the way I do or I will have you investigated and suspended. For what? engaging in a political process. And all the threats by the people who want acceptance are not only monsters themselves, but plain hypocrites. What an oppressive environment to work and live in.
WoW – What “Big Bullies” work at this college is. Think the way I do or I will have you investigated and suspended. For what? engaging in a political process. And all the threats by the people who want acceptance are not only monsters themselves, but plain hypocrites. What an oppressive environment to work and live in.
"Liberals do a great deal of talking about hearing other points of view, but it sometimes shocks them to learn that there are other points of view." William F Buckley.
she signed a petition to allow the voters to decide about marriage, what's wrong about letting the people of Maryland decide.
Let's ask a few key questions in this situation: Whose actions and attitude here are shown to be hateful, intolerant and discriminatory? Whose actions and attitude here are infringing personal liberties, and freedom of speech and of religion? In my faith, marriage is not a right, it is a Sacrament — that is, something holy, ordained by God. To regard it a right would be to demote it to a level much lower than what we hold it to be. We have no authority in my Church to solemnize any ritual as marriage that is not clearly and explicitly ordained by God. The Sacrament of marriage has always been integrally united with intergenerational family life. It is far more than a sexual contract. The only legitimate interest of the state in regulating marriage at all is in connection with its significance as an institution which nurtures and supports a new generation of citizens. Social scientists have established in study after study that children thrive best overall in an environment which provides both a loving mother and a loving father. It makes sense for the state to sponsor and support such for the overall common good. Traditional marriage as an institution in society has served the common good in diverse cultures around the world for thousands of years. Why should we change this now for the sake of a social experiment, the ultimate outcome of which no-one knows? The state does not regulate the relationships of friends of all kinds, sexual or not, including mutually regarded soul-mates, why should it regulate the relationships of sexually active persons of common gender? Certainly we can insure individual basic rights in other ways without changing the definition of marriage, which has served humanity well for ages.
I hope she sues them for zillions and wins! Freedom of speech is at stake.
And the liberals aways try to claim the conservatives are the ones trying to force their opinions on others. Here is the real truth open to the light of day. Hope my employer doesn't read this. If he is a liberal he may fire me out of political correctness.
The Sexual Deviants do not want Homosexual Marriage to be put on a state-wide vote by THE PEOPLE…..because….they (the Sexual Perverts) know they will………lose.
They want it to be made "legal" by the Legislature….because….they can more easily twist and manipulate enough of the politicians…the crooked politicians.
Too late old man.
Too late old man.
While I support gay marriage wholeheartedly and am an atheist, I do NOT agree with the decision by Gallaudet to administratively punish this employee for actions she took in her personal life in her church. Even if she is chief diversity officer of this school, unless she has allowed her personal beliefs to carryover into her job performance, I see no reason why her employer is butting in. This woman is allowed to believe in what she likes and support her church's initiatives without fearing reprisals from her employers. Universities continue to overstep their boundaries with their students' and employees' lives outside of work and this is enough.
//huh, usually you hear this happening the other way round
The fascists really are on the left.
Welcome to the New Tolerance.
Such intolerance seems like a scene from the defunct USSR. Doesn't belong in America.
The word "marriage" means that union between a man & a woman. If 2 homosexuals want to live together that is their business, I could care less but it is not a marriage. If you want to call that relationship a civil union, domestic partnership, or a civil solidarity pact then fine. Give the same tax benefits & hospital visitation rights etc. I believe that to be the right thing to do but the word marriage is defined as the union between a man & a woman. I believe that if the pro homosexual people would agree to calling their relationship a civil union or whatever then I believe that most Americans will go along with it. If they insist on calling it a "marriage" even though it is not then I don't that most folks will agree to it. Given that the current US Supreme court has a majority of justices who believe that the US Constitution means what the authors of it intended to mean rather than the preferences of some judge I think the DOMA repeal people are going to lose.
Please read
She should be fired. She has the curse of Cain!
She should be fired. She has the curse of Cain!
The 'anonymous faculty member' – should be named and shamed and the Washington Blade should be sued. This hateful witch hunting and bullying to stop people from sharing their views in a democratic society must be stopped.
You know what's really sad about the majority of the comments here: They all seem to be making sweeping, hateful generalizations about "liberal minds" and "the left." If anyone read the article, it specifically notes that many pro-gay marriage groups are against the University's decision. Beyond that, there's a lot of hypocrisy here when I read arguments about the outrage of "others attempting to control a person's individual life." After all, it has historically been conservatives who want to control what consenting adults do in bed, to whom they fall in love, to whom they marry, what plants they smoke, etc. Here's a questions… What would the reaction be if the headline was this: "University punishes staffer for signing petition opposing interracial marriage?" I think the University was absurd in their action, but frankly, I think the University was stupid for hiring a DIVERSITY officer who seems to reject diversity.
You may want to consider updating this story as it is somewhat misleading. She says she signed the petition because she wants it to go to a vote and she is pissed off that she is being used as a part of political advertising done by those opposing ref 6.
drugs with no prescription – order prescription drugs without prescription
buy celebrex cheap – celebrex buy online
get nolvadex clomid – nolvadex purchase in canada
accutane 40 mg a day – buy accutane without a rx
buy avodart online pharmacy – buy avodart
generic lexapro india – lexapro purchase australia
flomax order online – flomax online from canada
generic drug inderal – how to buy inderal
purchase lasix pills – buy furosemide lasix
buy antibiotics no prescription – buy antibiotics online
Employer and managerial control within an organization rests at many levels and has important implications for staff and productivity alike, with control forming the fundamental link between desired outcomes and actual processes. Employers must balance interests such as decreasing wage constraints with a maximization of labour productivity in order to achieve a profitable and productive employment relationship.’^
Find out about our very own blog as well
<http://www.caramoantourpackage.com/