The Ron Brown Religion & Persecution Thread

[Hercules]

This is an off-topic post about At-Will/Right To Work. Don't read it if you're not interested in the subject.

 

Nebraska is a 'right to work' state

 

Nebraska is an At-Will employment state. There are no states that are "Right To Work" states. I'm not sure how this phrase entered the modern lexicon, but it is pervasive, and it says exactly the opposite of what our law does.

 

We work (in Nebraska, and 47 of the other 49 states) at the will of our employer. They can hire/fire, promote/demote us at their will. They set our hours, they set our wages, and they can change any of them at their will. They can fire us at any time, for no reason at all. The position we hold is theirs, not ours, and they can do with it what they want within the confines of a few laws.

 

There are some protections for workers after their termination, but we cannot say to our (now former) employer that we want our job back, and get it back. It's their job, not ours.

 

 

I thought "right to work" laws referred to the laws that make it possible for people to enter certain lines of employment without being a member of a union. One of those conservative thinktank phrases that despite the sound of it actually makes things tougher for employees by weakening unions.

[knapplc]

Complaints or not, this is the thing that I've had the biggest issue with for as long as I've been aware of Brown's hyper religiosity. Really, who's going to complain when they're understandably afraid that doing so would jeopardize their standing on the team. All of this bad press is going to negatively impact the university, and Brown doesn't care at all about that because he's got a man crush for Zombie Josh of Nazareth. If I was an 18 year old being recruited by NU, Brown would definitely be a deal breaker whether he would be my position coach or not.

 

This is a very interesting post. On one hand you decry Coach Brown's bigotry against gays. Yet in the same breath you express hatred toward Christians.

 

Why would the two be different to you?

I think you're overstating things when you say that I expressed hatred towards Christians. I don't hate Christians. I admittedly have a certain disdain for religion - all religion not just Christianity - that involves belief in supernatural fables and superstition over the natural world we can see, feel, smell, taste and hear. Regardless of my feelings about religion, I fully support everyone's right to believe as they wish and to practice their religion as they see fit, so long as that practice doesn't infringe on the rights of others. I do, however, have an extreme intolerance for those who use their religious beliefs to justify bigotry and oppression. There you'll find the difference. Brown is actively advocating for the discrimination against and marginalization of a group of people. I am not. As for my use of a nickname for a mythological figure, a little healthy sacrilege doesn't rise hatred.

 

If we're going to worry that he might offend a closeted gay player (or player with gay friends or family members) with his anti-gay rhetoric, why wouldn't we be concerned that he'd offend those who don't share his views on religion, but would be too intimidated by fear of reprisals to speak up?

 

I think it was the "Zombie Josh of Nazareth" and similar phrases that piqued my curiosity. "Hatred" is probably overstated and I apologize for not being more eloquent.

 

RE: Your second paragraph... I agree. I used to think it wasn't a big deal, that Coach Brown kept it cool. Ameer Abdullah, a player of Muslim beliefs, seemed to reinforce that. But I talked to a former player a while back and specifically, pointedly asked him about Coach Brown's religious ways. Even back in the Osborne Era, when Coach Brown made fewer headlines with his religious beliefs, it was (apparently) quietly understood among players that it was better to express acceptance of Coach Brown's faith than not to. I found that very disappointing to hear. And I felt naive for having believed differently of him.

[bhamHusker]

Sorry about the ninja edit there - I hit submit a little prematurely, and then tried to beat any replies instead of carrying on in a second thread haha. Glad you caught it.

[Mavric]

It's not OK to use Nebraska as a bully-pulpit to harass people. It's not OK to focus on ONE THING your religion kinda outlaws while ignoring the myriad other things it outlaws that are all around you - some of which YOU DO, Coach Brown.

 

It is not OK to tear down the goodwill you engendered by leading the prayer at Penn State by waging an anti-gay crusade. A totally unnecessary crusade, by the way. One that has no point, no benefit, no merit.

 

It's time to disassociate yourself from Nebraska athletics, Coach. Before you do any more damage than you've already done.

 

I think you're overstating a few points.

 

I'm not aware of Brown harassing anyone. He spoke out at a public meeting. Brown admitted and I agree that it was a mistake to state his address as he did. But where is he harassing anyone?

 

To say that his religion "kinda outlaws" is a pretty cheap way to try to belittle something you disagree with.

 

Saying he "ignores" basically everything else is also not the slightest bit accurate. This is just the issue that there about which there was a public meeting.

 

You're fine to state your case but you usually do a much better job of presenting it accurately.

[Mavric]

How did I know? Well, the promotions came during a company-wide push to promote more females. And there was a HUGE uproar over these two girls getting promoted due to their lack of qualifications. At the time it was a pretty big scandal in our little corner of the world. Neither of these girls was even remotely deserving of the promotion as compared to the others in our group--either skill-wise or in terms of seniority. (It wouldn't have been such a big deal if they had three or four more years experience, and maybe led a couple of projects along the way.) Let's talk in football terms. Imagine if Andy Janovich was named the starting RB in our first game this fall (he's a walk-on from Gretna). Andy is a fine football player. Who knows, maybe he'll start some day. But right now he is not remotely qualified to be starting over Burkhead, Ameer Abdullah, Aaron Green, Braylon Heard, and a couple others. If this happened there would be a HUGE uproar.

 

I guess it's possible that management saw some nugget of managerial expertise in these two girls that was lacking in their more experienced, and apparently more highly qualified male counterparts. Then again, perhaps Andy Janovich *should* be our starting tailback come September.

 

Who said the company was having a push to promote more females? That's a clear violation of Title VII if they announced such a thing, and you would think lawsuits would have abounded after such an announcement. The EEOC would have stepped in with some very exciting paperwork for your employer, post haste.

Sorry this is off topic but it's an honest question: If what you're saying is correct, than how do you square affirmative action programs with Title VII? That would seem to be the same thing.

[TonyStalloni]

I think what's interesting to me is that after he prayed at Penn State last year everyone was singing his praises. He was expressing his beliefs then and he was actually representing UNL then-he was at work. So why is this different?

 

Offhand I'd say it's different because he wasn't advocating the hatred of a group of people while at Penn State. I sung his praises for his role in that Penn State game, and I'm the one who started this thread. I have no agenda against Coach Brown or against religion. I have an agenda against discrimination, which I would think Coach Brown, a Christian, would also have. But sadly, that is not the case.

 

I have followed the career and spiritual work of Ron Brown for 20 years and I challenge you to show one instance he ever "advocated hatred toward any group of people and especially gays". Maybe he is another citizen who is weary of every disillusioned group claiming civil rights for every agenda under the sun. As a black man I'm sure he understands the difference between something genetically determined like race and gender. Show me where gayness is genetically predisposed?

 

I don't see RB as a man who would ever turn his back on someone and not help if he saw the need. He wouldn't call out an individual gay student or worker as Barbara Baier claimed. If a player came to him and in private claimed to be a gay person I am certain RB wouldn't make that info public. They could agree to disagree and leave the meeting as friends with two different opinions which is something a lot of posters on here should do without letting their emotions and politically correct inclinations rule their thought process.

[JJ Husker]

I'm going to have to disagree with you. It does need to be listed as a protected status in Nebraska. Nebraska is a 'right to work' state (should be labeled 'right to fire' but anyway) and a gay employee could be outright fired if a superior had an issue with it. They could then also use the answer 'would not rehire' when that person is applying for a new job.

 

And at this point Brown is becoming a distraction. Him and his viewpoint are taking center stage, this story is on the front page of ESPN. Its an embarrassment, and could cause recruits for sports, as well as students for other fields to write Nebraska off their list of schools. Pearlman had to made a statement to the media after he appeared in front of the Omaha City Council (which was ridiculous anyway as he is not a resident of the City of Omaha)

Well I'm going to have to disagree with your interpretation of 'At Will' employment. Colorado is also an ;At Will' employment state and I happen to be an employer. There is no way in hell I, or any employer for that matter, could fire someone simply for being gay. If I or a supervisor has an "issue" with it has not one thing to do with it. You can find and/or create legitimate reasons to terminate anyones employment but their sexual preference is not one of them. I am curious- what on earth led you to make this statement "a gay employee could be outright fired if a superior had an issue with it."?

[ladyhawke]

I think what's interesting to me is that after he prayed at Penn State last year everyone was singing his praises. He was expressing his beliefs then and he was actually representing UNL then-he was at work. So why is this different?

 

Offhand I'd say it's different because he wasn't advocating the hatred of a group of people while at Penn State. I sung his praises for his role in that Penn State game, and I'm the one who started this thread. I have no agenda against Coach Brown or against religion. I have an agenda against discrimination, which I would think Coach Brown, a Christian, would also have. But sadly, that is not the case.

Well, I know that Coach Brown doesn't hate people. He does hate homosexuality as a lifestyle.

On the discrimination count: is this actually happening in Omaha? Is there any research that supports this law? I'm just asking from a research point of view. Was this law necessary? Where does one draw the line? (e.g. If another special interest group felt they were being discriminated against, would they be able to have this law ammended?) Does this law go both ways? (e.g. If I as a straight individual went to work in a business that was composed only of homosexual individuals, they could not fire me based on my sexual orientation-Right?)

Interesting discussion. Thank you for discussing with me in a non-threatening, intelligent way. I appreciate a good discussion. What I don't like is when people are somewhat 'ignorant' in their discussing (name calling-illogical comparisons). It defeats the purpose of a good discussion. That's why I never watch those 'talks' on tv or rarely listen to them on the radio. I don't like it when people aren't allowed to finish their thoughts. Thanks again

[Mavric]

If you're only way of forgiveness is by re-orientating your sexual preference from "not right (homosexual)" to "right (heterosexual)", then that is an unacceptable option in my opinion.

 

I guarantee you and would put any amount of money behind it that Ron Brown would not utter that statement. He would say the only way of forgiveness is to place your faith in Christ and receive the Holy Spirit.

 

And there are many homosexual Christians that would say they already do have their faith in Christ...so what's he complaining about? The problem with labeling homosexuality a sin and saying it's just as equal to any other sin....is that unfortunately homosexuality seems to be the only sin where you are constantly committing it 24/7, no matter what. Other sins seem to be mostly be momentary lapses in moral/ethical judgments...and then the person asks forgiveness and moves on. Homosexuals are basically sinning just sitting there not doing anything...just being who they are.

But I guess that gets into the is homosexuality an choice or not.

Saying you believe in something doesn't make it true.

 

I personally DON'T believe there is a difference between any two different sins - homosexuality included. The people who are calling out Coach Brown for also being a sinner are totally missing the point. I would place a bet along with Landlord that Coach Brown would say the same thing - the difference is what you think about your own sin. I'm sure if you asked him, he'd say he does sin but he works not to. That's the difference with homosexuality from a Christian perspective (speaking in general terms) - if you're openly going against a teaching, it doesn't show much devotion or seeking of forgiveness and, thus, pretty tough to reconcile the two.

[JJ Husker]

IMO, there are way too many over-the-top takes on this issue and on Ron Brown's actual stated position. Some of you need to sort through what he has actually done and said and compare it to the press that is really the culprit in blowing this deal out of proportion. We are talking about only one or two instances where he identified himself as a Nebraska football coach or University employee. He has backed that off. It might be time to let it go.

[bhamHusker]

I may not fully agree with Ron Brown's position on homosexuality or his choice to apparently speak so frequently on the subject but, I have nothing but respect for him and for his right to express his opinion on the issue. My only hope is that he remains extremely clear about these being his opinions and that he is not representing the University in any way, shape, or form. I feel this specific deal is simply exacerbated by current political correctness and because it is hot button issue. Where I do agree with him is that I don't feel the GLBT community needs any additional protections or allowances. But, I feel that way about all groups of people no matter how some may choose to catagorize them. We have civil rights and labor laws that are designed to protect all of us regardless if we are white, black, brown, male, female, gay, straight, Christian, atheist, etc. If a person feels homosexuality is a sin, no law in the world is going to change that. It doesn't even matter if he is right or wrong or if you think he is misinterpreting the Bible. He has the right to express his opinion and others have that same right to agree or disagree with him. However, he does not have the right to use his position as a University employee or coach to deliver a controversial message. If he feels it is that important of an issue and he understands the fine line he is treading, I have nothing but respect for him sticking to his convictions. The world would be a much better place if all people had that level of integrity.

 

A quote from the article that I liked-

Walls, now pastor at Shades Mountain Independent Church in Birmingham, Ala., said the Brown he knows is not hateful.

''When you speak the truth to people who don't see it that way, they often come away thinking you condemned them or judged them rather than addressing their sin from God's perspective, which is an act of love,'' Walls said. Brown helps ''illuminate the perversion and confusion of our culture.''

Brown said he isn't ''picking on'' homosexuals. He said a gay agenda has cropped up in American culture and that he is merely responding to it.

I just caught this. Shades Mountain Independent Church is literally 3 blocks from where I live, and it's also where I went to church and to high school after my family moved down here. Good to see that the place continues to justify my sense of shame at having ever been associated with it.

[Mavric]

I would love to have a conversation with Coach Brown about Romans 14. There are far too many Christians who overlook this passage. It's not as popular as the bite-sized morsel about the log in your own eye, but it's far more intricate in its meaning to the modern Christian, and directly relates to what Coach Brown is doing.

Are you talking about any specific passage or the entire chapter in general. The whole is really not talking about anything that has to do with this discussion. It's mainly talking about issues where this is doubt about what is accepted and what isn't - what can or can't be eaten, if some days are better than others, etc. This issue of this topic does not fall into that category.

[Lil' Red]

I personally DON'T believe there is a difference between any two different sins - homosexuality included.

 

So are you saying that committing homicide and working on the Sabbath are equally immoral?

[zoogs]

If every Christian religion approached it like this, there wouldn't be any problems.

 

Well, except where you view one man living a wonderful, godly life in wedlock with a woman and another man marrying another man as sinning in every loving moment they share.

 

You don't have to accept it, of course, just pointing out a problem with your portrayal of that approach as an end-all, be-all approach for Christians.

 

I suppose what I am saying is a Christian religion that teaches the act of homosexuality is not a sin and not to be viewed in the same light as adultery or drunkenness, then there wouldn't be a problem here.

[strigori]

I'm going to have to disagree with you. It does need to be listed as a protected status in Nebraska. Nebraska is a 'right to work' state (should be labeled 'right to fire' but anyway) and a gay employee could be outright fired if a superior had an issue with it. They could then also use the answer 'would not rehire' when that person is applying for a new job.

 

And at this point Brown is becoming a distraction. Him and his viewpoint are taking center stage, this story is on the front page of ESPN. Its an embarrassment, and could cause recruits for sports, as well as students for other fields to write Nebraska off their list of schools. Pearlman had to made a statement to the media after he appeared in front of the Omaha City Council (which was ridiculous anyway as he is not a resident of the City of Omaha)

Well I'm going to have to disagree with your interpretation of 'At Will' employment. Colorado is also an ;At Will' employment state and I happen to be an employer. There is no way in hell I, or any employer for that matter, could fire someone simply for being gay. If I or a supervisor has an "issue" with it has not one thing to do with it. You can find and/or create legitimate reasons to terminate anyones employment but their sexual preference is not one of them. I am curious- what on earth led you to make this statement "a gay employee could be outright fired if a superior had an issue with it."?

You can legally fire anyone for any reason other than one of the protected classes. Most companies don't, and will either use a paper trail or make a workplace so unpleasant the person will quit. But legally a person can be fired for being gay. Hell, think 'don't ask don't tell' for precedent. You could replace gay with any number of other adjectives and it would still be legal. The 'at will' thing protects employers from almost every reason of firing a worker. There is a reason why gender, religion and race are protected classes.