University Administrator Fired for Her Faith

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=28065
5/27/2008

"ANN ARBOR (CNA) - An administrator at the University of Toledo who was fired for writing an editorial objecting to the comparison of homosexual rights to the civil rights struggles of African Americans and expressing her Christian views against homosexuality has accused the university of violating her First Amendment rights when it terminated her employment earlier this month."

While she did comment on her beliefs as a private citizen and not as a company employee, I think its funny how they call foul now that the shoe is on the other foot.

Is the university of Toledo a publicly funded (read; Government) organization?
If not, she can take her first amendment rights and shove it.

I'm ambivalent. Fairness in employment cuts both ways: sometimes it will mean hiring (or not firing) people you disagree with. The position of the University seems to be that her religious beliefs interfered with her ability to carry out her job -- that seems reasonable, but I hate to see people fired for what they do outside of work without a clear indication that it affects the work itself. However much I might loathe Dixon's views, this seems like a borderline case to me.

Quote from: Alyssa M. on May 27, 2008, 07:58:20 PM
Fairness in employment cuts both ways: sometimes it will mean hiring (or not firing) people you disagree with.

I agree with Alyssa. I think we must be careful to let people express their views. How we deal with people of differing views can come back to bite us, if we don't allow a dialog to occur.

Anne

I favor freedom of speech.  A person speaking as a private citizen should not be fired from their job simply for having those beliefs.  This is the kind of thing that happened in the McCarthy Era.  Unless the UoT can show that she acted in a prejudicial manner in the execution of her duties as an administrator, they should be held liable for the harm they have caused this woman.

when she is in that position, she HAS no personal view. it reflects on the university. and she has to consider that. Politicians dont get a private life, or a non official view. Shes the same.

she made her own bed, now she lies in it.
R >

Quote from: Rachael on May 27, 2008, 08:55:19 PM
when she is in that position, she HAS no personal view. it reflects on the university. and she has to consider that. Politicians dont get a private life, or a non official view. Shes the same.

she made her own bed, now she lies in it.
R >

And a large soft one it will be!  She'll get a nice settlement for the inconvenience.  This isn't the UK, you know.  People are entitled to personal views.  Clearly, she was not speaking as a university employee.

The email that I sent her:

------------------
Crystal,

I too have suffered discrimination and have fully experienced the pain and subsequent challenges. However the great hurdle in my life was far different.

I am asexual, an atheist, and transsexual.  While I disagree with almost every one of your goals listed on your website, I do fully support you in your right to free speech.  As far as I can tell, you have been wronged.

I wish you success in your legal proceedings.

Cindi Jones

no Claire, they are not....


when someone is in a position of media visibility, thier personal views must remain personal. Any public views they give reflect on thier position, intentional or not.
Politicians and officials in the US are accountable for what they think, This woman made clear she is homophobic, and as such, is unsuitable for such a position as the leader of an organization that is likely seeing itself as a font of Knowledge, not ignorance.
R >

Quote from: Rachael on May 28, 2008, 12:36:43 AM
no Claire, they are not....


when someone is in a position of media visibility, thier personal views must remain personal. Any public views they give reflect on thier position, intentional or not.
Politicians and officials in the US are accountable for what they think, This woman made clear she is homophobic, and as such, is unsuitable for such a position as the leader of an organization that is likely seeing itself as a font of Knowledge, not ignorance.
R >

She's not a public official.  She's a bureaucrat at most and was not speaking in an official capacity.  The law is clear on separation of church and state.  Our Founders remembered those little problems you had in the 17th century when they wrote it.

It does not say so, and being a Christian site I doubt they would, but is it not possible she was fired for her views against Homosexuals?
Working for a university, they may not want that sort of discrimination on the staff. The university never said it was about her religion but her views in general.

QuoteThomas A. Sobecki, Dixon's attorney, said she was fired from her job "because she exercised her right to free speech... She spoke about something certain people at the university disagreed with."

Universities always promote diversity, having her on their staff stifles that. In the article she brought faith into it, and she may have made it her reason for being fired, but she could have written the article without ever mentioning her faith.

Quote from: Claire de Lune on May 27, 2008, 10:59:57 PM

Quote from: Rachael on May 27, 2008, 08:55:19 PM
when she is in that position, she HAS no personal view. it reflects on the university. and she has to consider that. Politicians dont get a private life, or a non official view. Shes the same.

she made her own bed, now she lies in it.
R >

And a large soft one it will be!  She'll get a nice settlement for the inconvenience.  This isn't the UK, you know.  People are entitled to personal views.  Clearly, she was not speaking as a university employee.

And the last time I checked, the Bill of Rights only applies to the government and it's entities, and therefore does not apply to a private university. Any law that states that a person may not be discrimminated against by an employer based on their religion ought not to be confused with the first amendment. And many of her claims and views which would have made her a candidate to be fired were not religious in nature, she was not practicing her religion, she was peddling bigotry and misinformation, how could she be trusted as a fair and balanced professional when such information is known?

The University of Toledo is one of 13 state universities in Ohio.

I take that to mean its state and therefore government funded... Religious views are not aloud... well, not aloud to be forced upon anyone by the staff atleast...

The motto on there website. Improving the Human Condition...  I like that LoL...  they promote diversity and as such would not want someone detrimental to the beliefs of the university on the staff...  I can see there point at this moment, but would say it needs further research...  <I'm too tired to do that now and am going to bed LoL>

She has a right to speak as a private person as long as she did not sign the letter with her official title.  They are going to have to bail her out fat.  Dumb decision.

Quote from: tekla on May 28, 2008, 09:29:01 AM
She has a right to speak as a private person as long as she did not sign the letter with her official title.  They are going to have to bail her out fat.  Dumb decision.

I agree, people are fully entitled to their views but as a public official she has a responcibility to those not of her persuasion. What I do object to is how the religious or the medical profession seek to pathologize trans people. It's either a sin or a mental illness. From the site: "one should hate the sin but love the sinner". Like which is it, am I a sinner going to hell or suffering a mental illness, I wish they would make their minds up .. 

As long as she wrote it as a private person, to a public press (this might be different if it had been printed in the university paper, where it could have been seen as an official statement) then she is free to say that if she chooses.  Fact of the matter, I've always been been a bit leery of that comparison myself and I never use it. 

She is going to get a huge check, at the expense of the taxpayers of Ohio, and then get a nice job with some Christian School. 

As long as all she did was express her opinion, and took no action in her job to prevent it, she is within her rights, even if you don't agree with her. 

There is a deal going on here (California, but not SF) about the clerks giving out marriage stuff to gay couples, and the deal is... "you don't have to like it, but you do have to do it."

Quoteyou don't have to like it, but you do have to do it."

You always have the option to work elsewhere. Employers have a right to hire and remove anyone who they feel is the best for the business. That is what management is all about.

Here's an article from the Toledo Blade (apparently the local rag):

University of Toledo official fired over column

QuoteA letter to Ms. Dixon informing her of her termination, stated "The public position you have taken in the Toledo Free Press is in direct contradiction to university policies and procedures as well as the core values of the strategic plan which is mission critical."

It went on to say her position calls into question her ability to continue in her role as an administrator in charge of personnel actions and decisions and that "the result is a loss of confidence in you as an administrator."

link to the article
link to the letter (pdf file)

I strongly advocate a broad interpretation of the First Amendment. This letter makes a good case, but I'm not sure it's good enough, if she hasn't done anything to act against university policy. Perhaps the issue is that she was unable or unwilling to state clearly to officials that her views would not interfere with her work in the future.

Quote from: Cindi Jones on May 28, 2008, 12:05:32 AM
The email that I sent her:

------------------
Crystal,

I too have suffered discrimination and have fully experienced the pain and subsequent challenges. However the great hurdle in my life was far different.

I am asexual, an atheist, and transsexual.  While I disagree with almost every one of your goals listed on your website, I do fully support you in your right to free speech.  As far as I can tell, you have been wronged.

I wish you success in your legal proceedings.

Cindi Jones

I could not have said it better, Cindi.  If we wish to be taken seriously, we must support the right of free speech, especially when it does not agree with our own views.  I know it is a difficult thing to do, but it is what will gain the respect of others.  If there were any evidence that she practiced discrimination at her job, this would be an entirely different matter.  It would also be different were she speaking as an official spokesperson for her university.  But as it is, she seems to have done her job well.  That's life.  Not a day goes by that I don't have to deal with someone with different viewpoints than I hold.  Welcome to the real world.  I can disagree and still respect them, and I believe they know that.  I, for one, do not want any government-sponsored thought police checking candidates for views someone considers incorrect.  As tempting as that sometimes sounds, we are putting a dangerous mechanism in place which will almost certainly be used against us at some point.

Kristi