Way OT – Employer/Employee Conflict

[testsubject]

So what's your point? that some of our Pres. are going to hell?It's to late for them Stephen is trying to save you

LOL.

It just gets my dander up when it is often stated that the country was founded on Christian principles when it was not.

 

[testsubject]

Bob you answered while I was typing, you should no better though.

John Adams
Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Second President of the United States

What's the matter Ron? Having trouble with quotes?

 

[testsubject]

And for the record, I agree with some of the scriptures that Stephen quoted because they are secular in nature, not divine.

I agree with Ron on this; Stephen should have his say but he also has to be willing to be scrutinized just like everyone else.

 

[rsdoran]

Yes I am having problems with quotes. I think Phil has stepped in, regardless of what I post it goes back to the bad post whether I use quotes or not.

To answer your statement about the religion look at these statements made by many signers of the Declaration of Independence and others with impact upon the founding of the US.
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=21


John Adams
Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Second President of the United States

It is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.

(Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, 1854), Vol. IX, p. 401, to Zabdiel Adams on June 21, 1776.)

 

[russrmartin]

Well, I am probably a little late here, but here is my two cents. I also live with a woman and have for the past 3 years, though neither of us has children. We have both worked full time, gone to school part time, and probably been part time mates also, due to hectic schedules. We have made the best of the relationship as possible, I believe. Now things are settling down, she is finished with school, and I am seriously considering marriage. If I were in your shoes (and in many ways I am), I would do the following:

1. It sounds like you do not wish to sue, so determine whether or not you even wish to work in that environment. Regardless of this decision, you need to report this to the next in line or higher. I definitely agree with the statement that legal or illegal, meddling in someone else's private life in the workplace is never a desireable trait, in a coworker or a boss.

2. Get married if you know in your heart that it is what you want. It seems to me that there are a lot of "preachers in the house". Last I checked, living together out of wedlock is not one of the 10 commandments, and even if it is frowned upon, they teach us that "God is all knowing and all forgiving, so I wouldn't fret." So, I say to you that if you decide to get married and live happily ever after, you played your cards right. If you don't get married, again, you saved the church and a lot of people a lot of wasted time for what inevitably would have ended up as a divorce. Finally, good luck no matter what roads you pursue in both the employment and personal side of this discussion.

 

[Stephen Luft]

Ron,

I tried first to send you a PM, but was unable to do so.

Thank you for your comments.

I am not certain as to the reference you are addressing.

Abram and Sarai were married when first mentioned in Genesis 11:29 No details were given.

You might be referring to the process Abraham went through in finding a wife for Isaac...found in Genesis 24:15-67

This was more of an arranged marriage...in that Abraham didn't want his son's wife to come from the Caananites, where they dwelt, but rather from the land that he came from.

I am not certain what you are referring to, because 24:67 confirms my original statement: "And Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent and took Rebekah, and she became his wife; and he loved her: and Isaac was comforted after his mother's death."

Ron, you were incorrect in one statement you made. Sleeping with some one is only adultery if it is someone else's spouse. It is fornication if that person is not married.

Tom,

You give me far too much credit.

My intent was to respond to our annonymous friend, for he requested input. I had no intention of sugar coating anything I wrote. With every choice made there is a result...whether that result is a consequense or a blessing, depends on that choice.

Many people just give their opinion without any foundation. You have my view and the foundation for which it is based.

Many of the responses vilified the boss for what he did, without knowing anything about him. Our friend, in his second post mentioned two other employees who were in the same situation, and treated in the same manner by the boss. If anything the boss is consistent and fair in how he treats all of his employees. They overcame, so can he. Our friend even said that one of them is now VP. To me this means that the boss doesn't condemn you for past transgressions but awards based on the merit of the work done.

There are some flaws in your statement, but it is your opinion and you are entitled to it. This is not the place to continue it, for it is not related to the original post.

Bob,

I think I just got an increase in my scrutiny quota...lol.

On that note.

God Bless,

 

[Tom Jenkins]

Since I was quoted, Ron, I feel I should reply.

I have no objection to Stephen Luft expressing his opinion, nor did I say he should not do so. He has every right to his opinion, and he has every right to express it. Nothing I wrote is in contradiction of that.

I very strongly object to the use of religious belief, political dogma, economic gain, or any other ideology being used as the basis for coercion of another person. That is what "AC" was doing.

And let's make it clear that I did not read Mr. Luft as promoting coercion on the basis of faith, and I certianly don't think he intended to do so. However, the logical basis for coercion is similar to many of the points Mr. Luft made, and reference to the authority of Scripture has been the basis of untold evil and misery throughout the world and throughout time.

My heartfelt "AMEN" was intended to convey a sentiment of gratitude that in our nation, albeit imperfectly practiced at times, the justification of Scripture has no legal sanction and cannot be the basis of public policy. That applies equally to Christian Scripture, the Koran, the writings of Confucius, and so on and so on and so on and ..........

P.S. geniusintraining: you are absolutely right - it was sarcasm.

 

[geniusintraining]

Well, I am probably a little late here,

LATE?

Russ, he's married and has two kids now (same job, his boss came around), we are on freedom of speech now.

 

[anon_guy]

Things that involve work stay at work, your personal life is nobodies business whether they be coworkers or friends. This includes your boss, unless your personal life affects your performance at work.

As for looking for a job, I note that your location line says Texas, Things are picking up around Lubbock. I am a one man show and am buried for one guy, but not enough for two people. Others around here are looking for bodies to fill seats and hoping that they work out as programmers/engineers.

Good Luck with whatever decision you make, marriage and job wise.

JPM

I was going to send you a PM, but it seems that I can't. I am curious what is available up in Lubbock. If you have time please email me at [email protected]. Thanks.

 

[rsdoran]

I will make one more statement and leave it at that.

If you have ever been in a courtroom and had to testify what procedure must be done first?

It is a process called being "sworn in" where you swear on the Bible to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That shows that the US government was founded on belief in God and religion based upon Abrahamic concepts.

Religious beliefs are here regardless of how they are used, each individual must assess any situation to decide if there beliefs conform to the situation in question or not.

IN general Tom I agree with what you said, religion is used to impose control upon others and promotes violence for that purpose in many situations.

With all that I have stated it is still anon_guy's and his fiance's decision. 15 years ago I would have done what I think CroCop said i.e. told him it was none of his business regardless of the outcome, if there was a second conversation someone would probably have left the building bloody.

That said I would have been wrong even if I or others think the boss is wrong. A bosses opinions have to be respected for several reasons regardless of whether you agree or not. What needs to be done is determine the best method to obtain an agreement on the issue, whether it follows a religious, legal, moral, or just plain consensus by both parties is up to the people involved.

As I stated I am not religious but religion has been around for 1000's of years and many people are spiritual beings. If we are to maintain a "free society" the freedom of religion and religious speech must be accepted. If you look at some of the responses to this thread it was not and was in fact totally rude and inappropriate in my opinion. Then again opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one and they all stink.

 

[testsubject]

If you have ever been in a courtroom and had to testify what procedure must be done first?

It is a process called being "sworn in" where you swear on the Bible to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That shows that the US government was founded on belief in God and religion based upon Abrahamic concepts.

This is not the only way to be sworn in. This was taken from the N Dakota Courtroom oaths website but I cannot imagine it being any different elsewhere.

http://www.ndcourts.com/court/rules/ndroc/rule6.10.htm

(b) Affirmation. A person must be allowed to make an affirmation instead of taking an oath, by substituting the word "affirm" for the word "swear" and substituting the phrase "under the pains and penalties of perjury" for the phrase "so help you God."

 

[brucechase]

My turn

Can I chime in here ( I'm a little bored after 14 hours of trying to get a machine up and running before the weekend)? My father always told me that we were a direct descendant of Samuel Chase, a signer of the Declaration of Independance so I feel like I should really say something even though I have absolutely NOTHING OF IMPORTANCE to say. Don't know if it's true or not (The descendant thing, not the importance thing) I like to believe that I am and really don't want to be disappointed if I'm not. (My family is from the Balitmore MD area - is that a southern state or a yankee state?)

My suggestion is to have some more open dialog with the boss. It sounds like to me he MIGHT look at himself as a mentor or father-figure to you and might be just trying to help. If you like the job, then try to work it out and stay.

I've been away for a while and haven't been keeping up so ---- when can I start buying gasoline from Shell or Exxon or 7-11 again? Is the boycott over? Did it work? Something must have happened, I get better gas mileage now.

 

[TimothyMoulder]

On the subject of the founding fathers, there are times when it is mighty hard to dispute the hand of a higher power working in history, whatever you choose to call that power. The Revolutionary War (the War of Insurrection to our non-US contingent) was such a time.

I'm not talking about Washington having several horses shot out from under him, and over a dozen bullet holes in his uniforms repaired, yet the man was never shot once. I am referring to after combat, when the newly-formed US Government offered Washington the chance to claim absolute power. They offered him nothing less than dictatorship over the country.

And he walked away from it. He refused. As near as I can gather, NOBODY before or since has refused to accept this devil's offer. But Washington became the true father of our nation - by declining.

The example I gave earlier about the congregationalists vs the baptists was real. Under pressure from the other emmisaries, Jefferson was giving hard thought to removing the separation of church and state clause from the constitution. Then he got a letter from the Baptist church in Georgia pleading with him - to leave it in!

It's funny, because it works so well. Jefferson, in a moment of what could only be divine inspiration (else we'd all by diests) realized that the only way to keep one faith from trying to supersede all others was to level the playing field - by expressly forbidding any church to rule.

Of course, people have their faiths, and vote accordingly. This is what those who claim the separation clause is "godless" overlook. Faith is integral to the process - what they really want is their own banner flying on the flag.

Any time anyone uses faith as an excuse to coerce another, call it what it is - terrorism. Disagree? Ask an Iraqi Shiite.

What Anon's boss is doing may not be illegal - but it should be. Just because he's a Christian, one of "us", cannot provide an excuse. We have these laws, and submit to them, because we ALREADY KNOW we don't play nice together where faith comes into play.

TM

 

[rsdoran]

You did it AGAIN

Jefferson was giving hard thought to removing the separation of church and state clause from the constitution. Then he got a letter from the Baptist church in Georgia pleading with him - to leave it in!

There is no clause in the constitution that "separates church from state".

You should actually read once in a while.

BTW a deist still believes in GOD even if they do not believe in God's participation in the action of HUMANS.

de·ism ([font=verdana, sans-serif] P [/font]) Pronunciation Key (d

z

m, d

-)
n.
The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation.http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=deist

 

[CroCop]

There is no clause in the constitution that "separates church from state".

You should actually read once in a while.

This is true.
Equally true is that the invisible wall does good for all of our Nation, and we need not hand one specific religion state sponsorship.