Thursday, December 4, 2008

Holy Toledo! You're Fired!

The interesting case of Crystal Dixon, a University of Toledo HR manager who publicly expressed her views on gay rights and was subsequently fired for it.

Guess which side she took.

She is now suing the school.

Read it all.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

She took the side of ignorance that being gay is a choice. It is quite likely, despite her claims of impartiality, that she injected (or would inject) her bigotry and total ignorance into hiring practices. Certainly, her statement would lead one to question her judgment in these matters.

Her self-reported "track-record for the past 25 years" should probably be examined as well.

If she were a Muslim going on about Christians being sinners or American immorality, and embracing Islam as the "cure", you'd be the first one in line asking for her resignation.

December 4, 2008 at 10:24 AM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

Doubt she'll win the case.

I was fired from my writing job at the Pasadena Weekly due to my views on gay marriage and illegal immigration. They also weren't too happy I was going to a Sarah Palin rally and that I was hanging out with the Pasadena Republican Club.

A lawyer told me that political preferences aren't a protected group.

Besides, a lot of lawyers are too wussy to go after a newspaper. Especially an Alternative Weekly that's going steady with Mark Geragos.

Lots of people out in Wackyland are losing their jobs due to supporting Prop 8.

December 4, 2008 at 10:25 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aaron, did you write about your anti-gay views in the paper?

I "googled" you and found this:

and your youtube:

and your own wikipedia page: which you appear to have written yourself in the third person (way to much detail for a total nobody).

Spencer, it seems like the weird level here just got cranked up past 11.

I predict Aaron, R, and Scott will form a right-wing tag-team called "Ignorance is Bliss".

December 4, 2008 at 12:07 PM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

Wait...being gay isn't a choice?

Show me scientfic evidence that shows people are born gay.

Haven't seen it yet. And if I ever do see significant evidence by the scientific community, I'll be the first to change my tune. I'm not stubborn in that sense.

Not saying it's not OK to be gay or that I hate gays.

Just sayin''s nonsense to compare someone who is gay to, say, racism. And you know who believes that more than anyone? The people who have actually been victims of racism that voted Yes on Prop 8 in California. Ya know, the same people who also voted for Obama.

" is quite likely, despite her claims of impartiality, that she injected (or would inject) her bigotry and total ignorance into hiring practices."

Wow. That sounds like something right out of "1984". The fact that she MIGHT inject her "bigotry" shows that the company has an awful lot of clairvoyance.

Thoughtcrime doubleplusgood.

December 4, 2008 at 1:02 PM 
Anonymous r said...

Ho-hum. More Liberals abusing their holdings in Higher Education to enforce their Lib-prescibed speech code and silence all opposing views.

It is quite likely that Liberals in Higher Edu actively inject this pro-gay bigotry into their hiring practices as well.

We need to investigate this track record of Liberal intolerance which openly violates free speech at schools that accept public tax dollars with an eye toward correcting this injustice and prosecuting the offenders.

The opposition to Prop 8 has been great for how it has drawn out onto the light the ugly angry gay and pro-gay advocates and exposed their hate-filled intolerance and disrespect for democracy for all to see. It ain't all just about freedom to love, folks.

You know we’re living in Crazy Backwards Liberal World when Gay is the new normal and any who dare voice opposition to that are persecuted. Liberals always push to far.

December 4, 2008 at 1:03 PM 
Blogger Pro Christ Pro Gun said...

Wow! You get fired from a state university because you express your viewpoint that homosexuality is a choice, and that god has an order, that being men and women.

Hum, makes you wonder how that is being ignorant. Meanwhile, the pro homosexual movement is doing its level best to force people to agree that the most unnatural of acts is "normal".

I guess to people like Anon if you counsel someone who is homosexual that they can leave that lifestyle, that makes you a bigot, or a hater?

C. Scott Shields, Esquire

December 4, 2008 at 1:25 PM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

No, I didn't write about my "anti-gay" views, which I don't have, in the paper. I did fluff and human interest stories.

I wrote about them on my personal blog which was not associated with the newspaper and - up until I criticized a sister paper for sucking - nobody at the newspaper had a problem with. And was fired the day after I was let go from my accounting gig at the newspaper for "budgetary reasons".

1. I'm not responsible for the Wikipedia article. Most of that stuff in there about a "nobody" (which I'm not entirely disagreeing with) can be easily found elsewhere on the Internet.

2. Yay, you found Virginia Hoge's blog. The craziest of the California crazies. She wants the Internet censored, you know. Plus, in her mind, I'm still a 23 year old Goth kid who wants rent control. Because apparently she hasn't hit refresh on her browser in 4 years.

3. My YouTube is awesome. Thank you. :-)

- AP

December 4, 2008 at 3:19 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No. It makes you an ignorant dolt that doesn't understand biological and neurological science.

Not only is the "Bible" not science, it directly conflicts with known science and reality. Earth isn't 6000 years old and Noah's Ark is a cute animal story for children (and the childlike).

Aaron, read this (as a start) and educate yourself:

"Homosexual Behavior Largely Shaped By Genetics And Random Environmental Factors

Homosexual behaviour is largely shaped by genetics and random environmental factors, according to findings from the world's largest study of twins.
Writing in the scientific journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, researchers from Queen Mary's School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, and Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm report that genetics and environmental factors (which are specific to an individual, and may include biological processes such as different hormone exposure in the womb), are important determinants of homosexual behaviour"

Also look at:


Don't revel in the ignorance of R and Scott.

December 4, 2008 at 3:52 PM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Gil - WOW! Thanks for bringing this to my attention. So if I go gay, I'm gettin a $10,000 raise!

December 4, 2008 at 4:08 PM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Proc - I just looked at some of your Youtube videos. If homosexuality is a choice, when are you going to make your decission?
......The "Proc" ROFL

December 4, 2008 at 5:17 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I wrote about them on my personal blog which was not associated with the newspaper and - up until I criticized a sister paper for sucking - nobody at the newspaper had a problem with."

Sounds more like you got canned for being journalistically unprofessional regarding a sister publication, like you broke some code of honor or conduct.

As for the "she MIGHT" comment, if you re-read what I wrote, I also suggested that it was likely she had already injected her bias into her work. If you have someone that likes to play with matches and is fascinated by fire, you don't hire him to guard the fireworks warehouse.

Aaron, if you didn't write that Wiki article, you've got a stalker. Beware.

December 5, 2008 at 1:01 AM 
Blogger Pro Christ Pro Gun said...

Anon said, "No. It makes you an ignorant dolt that doesn't understand biological and neurological science".

Most homosexual agenda pushers are atheists (or disregard the Bible), they think that the ACLU is the greatest organization ever, and they believe in evolution, not creationism (rabidly).

If we focus on evolution, Darwin believed in "natural selection" (survival of the fittest). Since we know that a genetic (pure) homosexual DOES NOT reproduce (or for Bible believers like me- Pro Create), there is no way for them to spread their genes to future generations. Anon will say that there are rogue homosexual men that will impregnate a woman and likewise rogue homosexual women to promulgate the continuation of their homosexuality. But if you believe in evolution, the homosexual gene is weaker than the heterosexual gene, and it will have to die off by definition.

That said, homosexuality, as hypothecated by Darwin, would have to die off since there is no way for homosexual couples to continue seeding the rest of the population with "the gay gene", since homosexual couples NEVER conceive children together.

Bottom (no pun intended) line is that homosexuality is a choice, and mostly because they are recruited. They are not born that way. Although some homosexuals believe they were born that way, it is a lifestyle choice that they can leave, unlike being black (unless you are Michael Jackson).

Another excellent source that suggests that God made a man and a women for a reason, is the Bible, or your local maternity ward where I assure you each and every child was conceived as a result of a man's sperm fertilizing a woman's egg, most often as a result of intercourse. There is no other way (naturally or biologically) for this to happen. I hope this clears up the issue for Anon.

One last thing ANON, refrain from launching an attack at me using the terms bigot, hater, etc.... Instead, give me some scientific evidence proving that homosexual couples can make their "own" children with their partner, through the natural act of sexual intercourse (which is the only natural way produce offspring).

C. Scott Shields, Esquire

PS- any rational thinking human being knows that sex between a man and a woman is natural, and that 2 men or 2 women engaging in simulated sex acts is unnatural and perverted.

December 5, 2008 at 6:13 AM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

Absolutely amazing how Liberals will attack someone.

I am not a "Bible" kind of guy...don't even go to church...

Now I'm being called "anti-gay" when I can 100% confirm that I do not, in any way, shape, or form hate gay people, advocate discrimination against gays, or otherwise think of them as a "lower species".

I'm just sayin' - if the day ever comes where it's GENERALLY ACCEPTED by scientists who aren't on the take from groups who WANT them to say being gay is genetic - I'll change my tune.

Until then, it's your right as an American to be gay, I'm fine with that...but I'm not going to sit here and compare gays having the same civil rights problems as minority races.

I was "journalistically unprofessional" when they hired me, considering they did so for shock value. It was funny when I'd bite other hands, but when I bit the hand of a sister that fed me, it led to my downfall from the paper. But I was told - to my face, mind you - by my former editor - that I was being let go from my writing side of the gig due to my "comments against gays and Mexicans".

Guess he forgot about comments about white people, black people, Emo kids, NASCAR rednecks, and Mormons.

So, at least in California, it's ok to "discriminate" or make fun of one group but not another.

So much for being "progressive".

Re my YouTube: Yeah. The Proc. Ya know, Like "The Rock". You must be from the Left Coast or a Liberal, since you have no sense of humor.

- AP

December 5, 2008 at 8:13 AM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Scott - If sexual preference is a choice, at what age did you make a conscious decission to be attracted to women (assuming thats your preference)?

December 5, 2008 at 11:06 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you read and understood the articles I linked for Aaron, you would have learned that very fertile women can produce male children with female traits and brain chemistry (ie liking men). It's been established in other studies that women having a lot of male children in a row start to produce hormones associated with females for the latter pregnancies. It's a biological effect as their bodies attempt to "balance" the male/female ratio of their offspring. The result of this is that not only are gay men are constantly being produced by fertile straight women, but that the continued production shows the vibrant sexual health in our female population.

Gays are recruited? In what black and white 1950's propaganda film are you living in? No amount of "recruiting" is going to make you aroused by James Bond, instead of the James Bond girl. Wise up.
"2 women engaging in simulated sex acts is unnatural and perverted."
If you advertise that you don't like seeing two women making out, the other guys are going to start questioning your masculine credentials. What do you do when a hot 2-girl make out scene is in a movie? Cover your eyes? Whine? Walk away?

Aaron, the only 100% confirmation would be if you were gay yourself. :-) It's quite clear that you are not so much anti-gay as ignorant of the fact that scientists already DO generally accept homosexuality as being biological.

December 5, 2008 at 11:10 AM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Scott / Aaron - If sexual preference is a choice, at what age did you make a conscious decission to be attracted to women (assuming thats your preference)?

December 5, 2008 at 11:11 AM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

Does anyone believe that homosexual people come in two variations?

1) Natural - Born wit hte preference.

2) Confused - confused, frequently shifts preferences, experimental.

Maybe I'm crazy for throwing it out there...

December 5, 2008 at 11:38 AM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Aaron said "Re my YouTube: Yeah. The Proc. Ya know, Like "The Rock". You must be from the Left Coast or a Liberal, since you have no sense of humor." Aaron, the Youtube videos aren't funny. Just weird! If thats what you call humor, you must be from Chester....Oh wait.. you are from Chester.

December 5, 2008 at 12:09 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't go making assumptions about Scott/Aaron's choices. :-)

There are bisexuals out there that fluctuate between their preferences. There are also gays that were raised as straight or conflicted by erroneous religious dogma or regressive societies that tries to redefine who they really are.

Don't let yourself fall into the trap that these people are representative of the gay population. Think of them more like the swing voters in an election that had trouble deciding between Obama and McCain or split their ticket. Their vote did not put them in one political category or another. They are fundamentally different from the hard core Dem/Rep that know who they are.

December 5, 2008 at 12:41 PM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Steve - Come on Steve! Stop being logical! OK. I think you are probably closer to the truth, although I believe real homosexuals have no choice in the matter. They simply feel a physical attraction to the same sex, and I dont care what C. Scott Shields says,Jesus aint gonna cure them! Personally, I prefer well endowed brunettes. Did I make a conscious decission to have that preference? Not that I can remember. Did the recruiter from the busty brunette brigade pull me in off the street and say "sign here"? Unfortunatly not. But as you were pointing out, I'm sure there are people who experiment, others who are sexualy confused, and others who are attracted to both sexes. I agree its not black and white. There are those that hate having that physical attraction to the same sex, and they try desperatly hard to overcome it. Sometimes by marry members of the opposite sex in an attempt to "straighten out". Unfortunatly this usually ends up destroying the relationship, and devestating the straight half of the relationship. Trust me on this one. I know.

December 5, 2008 at 1:02 PM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

anonymous-iano - that's my point. I happen to believe Homosexuality occurs naturally, yet I also believe there are people who can't identify themselves are tend to be bi as a result. This is why my theory may have weight. I don't believe those who are bi, confused, or experimental accurately represent actual homosexuals. And, not that I have not had such a conversation, but I have a feeling gay people may agree with me here.

I'm on the fence about including sexual preference within a discussion of civil rights, but not ready to signal opposition.

I remain in total opposition of transsexuals, and, God forbid they become a major issue in this country requiring ACLU/PC police backing, this country is definately heading to hell in a handbasket.

December 5, 2008 at 1:08 PM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

Bob, if the busty brunette brigade comes to my door, I will happily surrender.

December 5, 2008 at 6:14 PM 
Anonymous r said...

What about the sometimes/ parttime gays? Were they only partly born that way? They only got half of the gay gene and somehow it turns on and off? Lol...

December 5, 2008 at 6:47 PM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

Why did this one dude I went to high school with suddenly come out of the closet and his voice instantly changed to that of a stereotypical Jack-from-"Will and Grace" gay voice?

Why didn't he talk like that the whole time if it was something he was born like?

I didn't have to decide on whether or not I was attracted to chicks. They came to me. :-) *drumroll/cymbal*

- AP

December 6, 2008 at 8:24 AM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

Being a transsexual...wouldn't that be JUST THE SAME as when I was a teenager through my early 20's and decided to dress like an extra from "Blade Runner"?

So if I beat up the Columbine-lookin' kid for playing his god awful music too loud on the train, that's gonna be a hate crime too?

I'm just sayin'....

December 6, 2008 at 8:26 AM 
Anonymous Bob said...

OK Aaron - I got to be up front with you on this. I saw your GOTH video on Youtube. Not only does it look gay, it sounds gay. You didn't look like an extra from Blade Runner. You looked more like an extra from The Birdcage.

December 7, 2008 at 2:52 AM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

thanks for sharing bob. I was actually referring to mr anonymous-iano, but I appreciate your openness and respect you for taking the time to post the background here.

I don't have a story anywhere as dramatic - I grew up in the age of the 80s into the early 90s where insults generally included the gay variety and where the church would ingrain in our minds that being gay was wrong (a sin). I think it took college for me to wake up - and thankfully so. I have come to respect the lifestyle as non-offensive and downright normal in human beings. (OK, I disagree with the flaymboyant types who parade in next to nothing, but I digress) I know and get along with gay people, and seeing what I have in them, fully believe that the preference is a natural occurence. When it comes to marriage, I love to take the philosophy my uncle recommended a few years back "Let them be as miserable as the rest of us!".

How many right wingers take my philosophy? Combine that with my feelings on the green movement and I would be labeled as a 'traitor'.

December 8, 2008 at 8:36 AM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

What's your point, Bob? A lot of people go through phases in their life. I don't really understand your hostility to a way I used to look.

I also used to think rent control was a swell idea and that socialized health care was the answer.

We all grow up, ya know.

If anything, you sound like you're supporting my argument about people choosing to be different things.

December 9, 2008 at 10:41 PM 
Anonymous Bob said...

Aaron - No hostility. I just call em like I see em. You think you looked like an Xtra from Blade Runner? I disagree. You think being gay is a choice? I disagree. You think the Rachel Maddow joke was funny? That, we agree on!

December 10, 2008 at 9:04 AM 
Blogger Yaro Gabriel said...

polo outlet
houston texans jerseys
ed hardy clothing
jordan shoes
kobe bryant shoes
y3 shoes
nike store uk
air force 1
canada goose jackets
undefeated clothing

July 9, 2018 at 9:36 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home