A Michigan man recently employed as a contractor for the Ford Motor Company has filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, saying he was fired because of his religious beliefs. The firing came after Thomas Banks received a newsletter from Ford which discussed the company’s LGBT-inclusive policies as well as GLOBE, a support group for LGBT employees of the car maker. Banks’s response to the newsletter, which he left as a comment in the feedback section, got him fired for violating Ford’s anti-harassment policies.
You almost have to admire someone who has the chutzpah to defend his willingness to express his disapproval of another’s lifestyle at his workplace…and expect that it will be recognized as exercising his “religious freedom.” Banks was a contractor for an employer whose anti-harassment policy prohibits the speech engaged in by Banks…so now he’s going to the EEOC crying discrimination?
Classy, eh??
So what did Banks write? And is it something that could lead to creating a hostile work environment, which is what an anti-harassment policy is designed to forestall?
“For this Ford Motor should be thoroughly ashamed. Endorsing and promoting sodomy is of benefit to no one. This topic is disruptive to the workplace and is an assault on Christians and morality, as well as antithetical to our design and our survival. Immoral sexual conduct should not be a topic for an automotive manufacturer to endorse or promote. And yes-this is historic-but not in a good way. Never in the history of mankind has a culture survived that promotes sodomy. Heterosexual behavior creates life- homosexual behavior leads to death.”
I don’t know the specific wording of Ford’s anti-harassment policy, but I can’t imagine that paragraph isn’t in violation of virtually every part of it. Banks is certainly free to his “religious beliefs” (as if hatred and bigotry really count as “religious beliefs”), but speech that expresses disapproval of those whose sexuality happens to be different is generally not considered protected speech by most employers.
Sorry, but you don’t get to claim homophobia and intolerance as “religious values.” If those are your “values,” you have no religion.
Banks’ mistake (and arrogance) was in assuming that he could claim the cover of “religious freedom” while engaging in speech that very likely could have created a hostile workplace environment. He has every right to his beliefs, but there is no right to claim the protection of “religious freedom” when you’re disparaging your co-workers and your employer. That’s not “religious freedom,” because hatred and homophobia aren’t Christian values. Jesus Christ taught inclusion and tolerance, and He never preached homophobia or hatred of gays; that’s a construct conjured up out of whole cloth by homophobes disgusting by types of sexuality other than their own. Thomas Banks is a Christian in the same way I’m Batman.
For my part, I hope the EEOC will dissolve in laughter when it reads Banks’ complaint. He deserves nothing less.
