--sexkitten-- wrote:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/14250244p-15067017c.html

Court says sharing religion not an employee's right

SAN FRANCISCO - A county social services department cannot be required
to accommodate the belief of an evangelical Christian employee that he
must share his faith with clients and others on the job, a federal
appeals court ruled Monday.

On balance, said the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the
constitutional duty of the Tehama County agency to avoid entangling
itself in religion outweighs the constitutional right of Daniel M. Berry
to promote his religious views.

The decision upheld one by U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton in
Sacramento.

It was a rebuff to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
which had authorized Berry to sue. The federal agency said Berry should
be allowed to discuss religion with "receptive" clients and display a
Spanish-language Bible and "Happy Birthday Jesus" sign in the cubicle
where he counsels them.

Writing for a unanimous three-judge appellate panel, Judge Consuelo
Callahan said, "The department's clients seek assistance from Mr. Berry
in his capacity as an agent of the state. Accordingly, they may be
motivated to seek ways of ingratiating themselves with Mr. Berry, or
conversely, they may seek reasons to explain a perceived failure to
assist them.

"It follows that any discussion by Mr. Berry of his religion runs a real
danger of entangling the department with religion. This danger is
heightened by Mr. Berry's admission that unless restricted, he will
share his faith with others and pray with them."

Berry's lawyer, Anthony J. Poidmore of Roseville, said he would study
the decision and consult his client in the next few days before
determining whether to appeal the case further.

Richard Whitmore, a San Francisco employment law specialist, said the
9th Circuit decision was "reasonably consistent" with other recent
federal court opinions concerning expression of personal views on the job.

He said Callahan seemed to go slightly further than other judges by
extending old legal principles to "somewhat more passive activity."

In two 2004 cases, for example, the 9th Circuit upheld the firing of
Christian employees who insisted on proselytizing against homosexuality
at work. One of the fired workers, a Hewlett-Packard employee,
repeatedly posted Biblical texts insulting homosexual colleagues. The
other, an employee of Cox Cable Co., advised a lesbian colleague that
she was sinning and violating "God's design."

Jesus Christ would be the best one to explain your ideas to.
Robert B. winn

--sexkitten-- wrote:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/14250244p-15067017c.html

Court says sharing religion not an employee's right

SAN FRANCISCO - A county social services department cannot be required
to accommodate the belief of an evangelical Christian employee that he
must share his faith with clients and others on the job, a federal
appeals court ruled Monday.

On balance, said the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the
constitutional duty of the Tehama County agency to avoid entangling
itself in religion outweighs the constitutional right of Daniel M. Berry
to promote his religious views.

The decision upheld one by U.S. District Judge Lawrence K. Karlton in
Sacramento.

It was a rebuff to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
which had authorized Berry to sue. The federal agency said Berry should
be allowed to discuss religion with "receptive" clients and display a
Spanish-language Bible and "Happy Birthday Jesus" sign in the cubicle
where he counsels them.

Writing for a unanimous three-judge appellate panel, Judge Consuelo
Callahan said, "The department's clients seek assistance from Mr. Berry
in his capacity as an agent of the state. Accordingly, they may be
motivated to seek ways of ingratiating themselves with Mr. Berry, or
conversely, they may seek reasons to explain a perceived failure to
assist them.

"It follows that any discussion by Mr. Berry of his religion runs a real
danger of entangling the department with religion. This danger is
heightened by Mr. Berry's admission that unless restricted, he will
share his faith with others and pray with them."

Berry's lawyer, Anthony J. Poidmore of Roseville, said he would study
the decision and consult his client in the next few days before
determining whether to appeal the case further.

Richard Whitmore, a San Francisco employment law specialist, said the
9th Circuit decision was "reasonably consistent" with other recent
federal court opinions concerning expression of personal views on the job.

He said Callahan seemed to go slightly further than other judges by
extending old legal principles to "somewhat more passive activity."

In two 2004 cases, for example, the 9th Circuit upheld the firing of
Christian employees who insisted on proselytizing against homosexuality
at work. One of the fired workers, a Hewlett-Packard employee,
repeatedly posted Biblical texts insulting homosexual colleagues. The
other, an employee of Cox Cable Co., advised a lesbian colleague that
she was sinning and violating "God's design."

Jesus Christ would be the best one to explain your ideas to.
Robert B. winn

Jesus Christ would be the best one to explain your ideas to.

Jesus Christ would be the best one to explain your ideas to.
Robert B. winn