Firefighters suing for being forced to attend gay pride parade.

[ryan256]

LINK

Four firefighters are suing the city of San Diego for being forced by their superiors to attend the annual "Gay Pride" parade where they endured a barrage of sexual taunts and lewd gestures.

San Diego's fire chief, Tracy Jarman, is an open lesbian who called the July 21 parade a "fun event" in which "all employees are encouraged to participate."

But the firefighters said, unlike previous years, they were ordered into uniform to participate in the parade in their fire truck, despite repeated their protests.

The firefighters' legal counsel, the Thomas More Law Center, said the men were "left with the Hobson's choice of either violating their conscience or being disciplined for disobeying a direct order."

The firefighters, described as devoted husbands and fathers, said they were subject to the most vulgar kinds of sexual harassment.

San Diego Fire Chief Tracy Jarman is an open lesbian

"You could not even look at the crowd without getting some type of sexual gesture," one said, adding, "If any crew member were to hang up pictures at the station of what we saw, we would be disciplined."

Over the course of three hours, they heard statements such as, "show me your hose," "you can put out my fire," "you're making me hot," "give me mouth-to-mouth," "you look hungry, why don't you have a twinkie (from a man wearing a "Girth and Mirth" t-shirt)," and "blow my hose."

When they refused to respond to the crowd, some in the crowd turned hostile and started shouting, "F--- you firemen" and others began "flipping them off."

San Diego area attorney, Charles LiMandri, the West Coast director of the Thomas More Law Center, insists the city should have known from past experience "the kind of offensive activities that go on at this event."

"This was a clear case of sexual harassment in violation of state and federal law as well as the City's own code of conduct," he said.

LiMandri said the firefighters also were targets of sexual gestures, including exposure of genitals, blowing kisses, grabbing of the crotch, rubbing of nipples, tongue gestures and men hugging and kissing one another passionately ? many wearing make-up and dressed like women.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center argued the constitutional right to free speech also protects the right not to speak.

"These men should not have to explain to their families, friends and church congregations that their presence at a celebration of lewdness and obscenity in support of the homosexual agenda was because they were forced there by way of a direct order," he said. "This is a clear violation of their constitutional rights, and the city must be held accountable. It should never happen again to any city employee."

Jarman, the city fire chief, insisted when she was appointed that her homosexuality had never been an issue at the department.

But Thompson maintained the firefighters' ordeal was "another example of how radical homosexual activists in positions of authority force their agenda on unwilling citizens."

"Although the local media avoided mentioning the debauchery and the obscenity that pervaded the parade, the general public should know what went on and how these firefighters were forced to participate against their will," he said.

As WND reported, prior to the parade, the San Diego City Council unanimously adopted a resolution introduced by Mayor Jerry Sanders to designate July as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Pride Month."

This sickens me. I hope these firefighters get a substantial award from this suit. The fire chief had NO right to force her agenda on these men and order them to attend.
Had the firefighters simply shown up and been offended, too bad. Just leave. But they didn't have that choice.

 

[fskimospy]

Hrmm, I'm not sure what I think about it. The fire chiefs can force firefighters to participate in many other kinds of parades, such as memorial day, 4th of July, etc... and I haven't heard any complaints about such a thing. Does the topic of the parade determine if it can be made compulsory or not? (serious question) I will say regardless though that people shouldn't be forced into situations where they are sexually harassed and if the firefighters genuinely had that sort of problem some action should be taken.

I would like to denote the difference between the firefighters having themselves accosted, and the fact that they are also complaining that they had to see two men kiss. Being personally harassed is one thing, being in a situation where you are crying that you saw people being gay... I have no sympathy for.

That all being said, I don't know what the hell those guys are talking about. I live in San Diego, and the pride parade is one of the most fun days of the year. Parades almost by definition suck really badly, but that one is super fun. I'm straight, and I've been to it every year for at least 5 years and I've never had any sort of problem with anyone in the slightest. It's just a good reason to get drunk at noon. The gay community in San Diego is awesome.

 

[K1052]

1) Participation should have been encouraged but remained voluntary provided they were not required to be there for official duties. Quite a few cops and some fire dpt staff were assigned to the parade here as part of their job to provide security and emergency services if needed.

2) Nothing that happens at a gay pride parade is any more hardcore than what comes of of a typical Mardi Gras celebration (with a lot less sexual assaults to boot). Mostly its a bunch of people drinking.

While I don't agree with the fire chief's call the firemen are blowing this way out of proportion.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: K1052
1) Participation should have been encouraged but remained voluntary provided they were not required to be there for official duties. Quite a few cops and some fire dpt staff were assigned to the parade here as part of their job to provide security and emergency services if needed.

2) Nothing that happens at a gay pride parade is any more hardcore than what comes of of a typical Mardi Gras celebration (with a lot less sexual assaults to boot). Mostly its a bunch of people drinking.

While I don't agree with the fire chief's call the firemen are blowing this way out of proportion.

Hey does that mean you live in San Diego? If so, where at?

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Hrmm, I'm not sure what I think about it. The fire chiefs can force firefighters to participate in many other kinds of parades, such as memorial day, 4th of July, etc... and I haven't heard any complaints about such a thing. Does the topic of the parade determine if it can be made compulsory or not? (serious question) I will say regardless though that people shouldn't be forced into situations where they are sexually harassed and if the firefighters genuinely had that sort of problem some action should be taken.

I would like to denote the difference between the firefighters having themselves accosted, and the fact that they are also complaining that they had to see two men kiss. Being personally harassed is one thing, being in a situation where you are crying that you saw people being gay... I have no sympathy for.

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

 

[StageLeft]

In the grand scheme, it's not a big deal what happened to them. They weren't touched or anything and knew it wasn't personal.

Still, I'd hate to think my tax money is ever going to anybody agenda like that. Memorial day parades are quite different from gay ones.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: K1052
1) Participation should have been encouraged but remained voluntary provided they were not required to be there for official duties. Quite a few cops and some fire dpt staff were assigned to the parade here as part of their job to provide security and emergency services if needed.

2) Nothing that happens at a gay pride parade is any more hardcore than what comes of of a typical Mardi Gras celebration (with a lot less sexual assaults to boot). Mostly its a bunch of people drinking.

While I don't agree with the fire chief's call the firemen are blowing this way out of proportion.

Hey does that mean you live in San Diego? If so, where at?

Actually I live in Chicago. They had the parade here a about a month ago and it was a lot of fun. I live about half a block off part of the route.

Being able to wander the sidewalks with a full margarita in one hand and a beer in the other in front of umpteen cops (who don't even blink at the people with cases of beer) is pretty neat.

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: ryan256
LINK


This sickens me. I hope these firefighters get a substantial award from this suit. The fire chief had NO right to force her agenda on these men and order them to attend.
Had the firefighters simply shown up and been offended, too bad. Just leave. But they didn't have that choice.

Ryan, please define "agenda"? To me that means you think she is trying to promote a homosexual lifestyle to the firefighters, which in my opinion is not the case... Tolerance or feeling a sense of community unity may have been her misguided intentions by forcing some of them to attend, but I don't think it has anything to do with forcing an "agenda" upon them.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

Or how about those Naval Aviator conventions from a few years back, which were dens of sexual harassment against female aviators...the public certainly sided on behald of those who faced harassment.

I understand that the gay rights movement shifted to rather flamboyant tactics as a means of raising public awareness and demonstrate solidarity...for those of you who have witnessed a Gay Pride parade, they are rather interesting events, although I cannot imagine another group in America being able to get away with the sometimes inappropriate behaviors that happen during them...either on the floats themselves, or within the crowds they tend to draw. You won't see Irish men covered in glitter and wearing green g-strings engaging in stripper pole dance routines during the St. Patrick's Day Parade.

That being said, homophobia may be the motivating factor of the firemens' complaints, but I don't agree with the chief's decision to make attendance mandatory...and I do think they have a valid complaint given the lude nature of the taunts they received.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

That's arguably a different case, as maintaining public order at a legal public rally (assuming the KKK got permits, etc.) is clearly among a police officer's official duties. However, it's not at all clear that appearing in a parade is among a firefighter's official duties such that they can be compelled to attend. A more similar example would be firefighters being compelled to respond to a fire at a gay bar (which hopefully none of them would take issue with).

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

Or how about those Naval Aviator conventions from a few years back, which were dens of sexual harassment against female aviators...the public certainly sided on behald of those who faced harassment.

I understand that the gay rights movement shifted to rather flamboyant tactics as a means of raising public awareness and demonstrate solidarity...for those of you who have witnessed a Gay Pride parade, they are rather interesting events, although I cannot imagine another group in America being able to get away with the sometimes inappropriate behaviors that happen during them...either on the floats themselves, or within the crowds they tend to draw. You won't see Irish men covered in glitter and wearing green g-strings engaging in stripper pole dance routines during the St. Patrick's Day Parade.

That being said, homophobia may be the motivating factor of the firemens' complaints, but I don't agree with the chief's decision to make attendance mandatory...and I do think they have a valid complaint given the lude nature of the taunts they received.

EDIT: Above post beat me to it.

Do I really need to point out the difference between black policemen in their official job capacity providing security at a KKK rally and firemen attending a parade on a float?

A fireman who refused to put out the fire of a gay man's house would be rightly dismissed, but this is outside their job description. I doubt anyone would have been fired for refusing to attend however.

And to the OP, who says this "sickens him." I think you need to better ration your righteous anger, and save your offense for the truly heinous. In the scheme of things, this should only "sicken" O'Reilly [Offering 2-1 odds this is his lead story tonite]. Normal people can agree the firemen should not have been forced to attend the parade without becoming morally indignant to the point of illness.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

Or how about those Naval Aviator conventions from a few years back, which were dens of sexual harassment against female aviators...the public certainly sided on behald of those who faced harassment.

As police it is part of their job, period. If they don't want to follow their totally legal orders and fulfill their obligations they should look for work elsewhere.

The Naval Aviator business was taking place among people who all work for the same boss during the performance of duties. It was unacceptable on many levels.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

Or how about those Naval Aviator conventions from a few years back, which were dens of sexual harassment against female aviators...the public certainly sided on behald of those who faced harassment.

I understand that the gay rights movement shifted to rather flamboyant tactics as a means of raising public awareness and demonstrate solidarity...for those of you who have witnessed a Gay Pride parade, they are rather interesting events, although I cannot imagine another group in America being able to get away with the sometimes inappropriate behaviors that happen during them...either on the floats themselves, or within the crowds they tend to draw. You won't see Irish men covered in glitter and wearing green g-strings engaging in stripper pole dance routines during the St. Patrick's Day Parade.

That being said, homophobia may be the motivating factor of the firemens' complaints, but I don't agree with the chief's decision to make attendance mandatory...and I do think they have a valid complaint given the lude nature of the taunts they received.

Do you think the firemen would've had a problem with attending a parade predominantly composed of heterosexual single women who may act in the same manner as the gays in this parade?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

Or how about those Naval Aviator conventions from a few years back, which were dens of sexual harassment against female aviators...the public certainly sided on behald of those who faced harassment.

I understand that the gay rights movement shifted to rather flamboyant tactics as a means of raising public awareness and demonstrate solidarity...for those of you who have witnessed a Gay Pride parade, they are rather interesting events, although I cannot imagine another group in America being able to get away with the sometimes inappropriate behaviors that happen during them...either on the floats themselves, or within the crowds they tend to draw. You won't see Irish men covered in glitter and wearing green g-strings engaging in stripper pole dance routines during the St. Patrick's Day Parade.

That being said, homophobia may be the motivating factor of the firemens' complaints, but I don't agree with the chief's decision to make attendance mandatory...and I do think they have a valid complaint given the lude nature of the taunts they received.

I don't think that the pendulum has swung much at all? I think everyone here has pretty much agreed that if the firefighters were subject to sexual harrassment that they could not escape from that it is wrong, and action should be taken. I wouldn't equate what happened there to tailhook however.

Like I've said, I've been to this parade many times and I have not witnessed anything but a really good time. If something bad happened though, by all means... ensure it doesn't happen again.

 

[Bumrush99]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

Or how about those Naval Aviator conventions from a few years back, which were dens of sexual harassment against female aviators...the public certainly sided on behald of those who faced harassment.

I understand that the gay rights movement shifted to rather flamboyant tactics as a means of raising public awareness and demonstrate solidarity...for those of you who have witnessed a Gay Pride parade, they are rather interesting events, although I cannot imagine another group in America being able to get away with the sometimes inappropriate behaviors that happen during them...either on the floats themselves, or within the crowds they tend to draw. You won't see Irish men covered in glitter and wearing green g-strings engaging in stripper pole dance routines during the St. Patrick's Day Parade.

That being said, homophobia may be the motivating factor of the firemens' complaints, but I don't agree with the chief's decision to make attendance mandatory...and I do think they have a valid complaint given the lude nature of the taunts they received.

Good points. I think we do have a bias towards the gay rights issue simply because a pretty significant part of this country still believes that it is acceptable for private individuals and state/local/federal government to limit their civil rights.. Nothing gets people going like a Gay Marriage amendment or basic concepts like protecting them against discrimination in the workplace or when they are shopping for homes, or even if they are willing to give up their lives and fight for this country. Coupled with the fact that many of us here live in big cities and are exposed to the gay lifestyle and see nothing wrong with it, I think these types of posts do cause people to have strong reactions since state sponsored and socially accepted discrimination should be wrong in all instances.

 

[umbrella39]

LOL. Nice WND link, I think what the link is trying to tell everyone is:

San Diego Fire Chief Tracy Jarman is an open lesbian (so good they had to say it twice)

And how in God?s name can this be considered sexual harassment? Did Jarman harass them? The people in the crowd certainly don't fall under the criteria for a harassment case. These homophobes need to grow thicker skin.

That said, they should not have been forced to attend unless as with many parades, these guys were part of a mandated fire/police presence, which would make it part of their job, it does not sound like every firefighter in the county had to attend so I am led to believe firemen need to be there and I guess it just sucks to be them (in their opinion) that they were picked. If that is the case, I don't think as a fireman who is paid to do a job you should be able to pick and chose what fires to put out or what parades to work.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

In a word, no. They might have a valid complaint against the people in the crowd doing the taunting, not the people who employ them to do the job they signed up for.

Should they have found all women firefighters to attend the parade instead? Would they have received less taunting from the gay crowd? Perhaps. I think if these firefighters can prove their boss conspired to put them out there as "man meat" for the crowd to taunt, they might have a case. But if it was mandated to have X number of police and X number of firefighters in attendance, these guys don't have a leg to stand on imo.

I just hope this guys can recover from their scars and get on with their lives. Hopefully non of these gestures stuck and have turned any of these straight men into gays.

Edit: I have seen the word "float" used by a few users posting in this thread. Where are you coming up with that? It clearly said they were driving their fire truck which further leads me to think this was part of a mandated police/fire presence.

 

[dahunan]

Can someone tell us what is the reason for the firefighters being at any of these events?

What is their purpose? It surely isn't to put out fires or arrest people...

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can someone tell us what is the reason for the firefighters being at any of these events?

What is their purpose? It surely isn't to put out fires or arrest people...

Well it sounds like there were legitimate flames at this parade......


I kid, I kid

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can someone tell us what is the reason for the firefighters being at any of these events?

What is their purpose? It surely isn't to put out fires or arrest people...

I am not sure why they would need to be at THIS parade, but I can hear the cries of people if two cars in the parade colided, caught on fire, and it took a fire truck 20 minutes to get from the station, through the traffic, through the crowd and put out the fire. That is probably why the lawyers for any city would suggest, even mandate their presence at these kinds of events.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can someone tell us what is the reason for the firefighters being at any of these events?

What is their purpose? It surely isn't to put out fires or arrest people...

To show numbers and support to a political agenda.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

In a word, no. They might have a valid complaint against the people in the crowd doing the taunting, not the people who employ them to do the job they signed up for.

Should they have found all women firefighters to attend the parade instead? Would they have received less taunting from the gay crowd? Perhaps. I think if these firefighters can prove their boss conspired to put them out there as "man meat" for the crowd to taunt, they might have a case. But if it was mandated to have X number of police and X number of firefighters in attendance, these guys don't have a leg to stand on imo.

I just hope this guys can recover from their scars and get on with their lives. Hopefully non of these gestures stuck and have turned any of these straight men into gays.

Edit: I have seen the word "float" used by a few users posting in this thread. Where are you coming up with that? It clearly said they were driving their fire truck which further leads me to think this was part of a mandated police/fire presence.

I'm pretty sure that they were in a firetruck as part of the parade iself, not as part of the police/fire force providing security.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can someone tell us what is the reason for the firefighters being at any of these events?

What is their purpose? It surely isn't to put out fires or arrest people...

To show numbers and support to a political agenda.

The group that was supposed to show up as Indians for the city-wide YMCA Sing-Along couldn't make it?

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can someone tell us what is the reason for the firefighters being at any of these events?

What is their purpose? It surely isn't to put out fires or arrest people...

To show numbers and support to a political agenda.

I am with you on the agenda..

Firefighters are a sign of pride and patriotrism.. They are at other parades and I guess if they go to those then they are forced to go to these too...

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: glutenberg

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Agree with pretty much everything you said. It should have been a compulsory event, however these firefighters needs to chill the hell out..

Interesting how the pendulum of political correctness swings depending on the demographic in question.

Here is another scenario...police are forced to provide security at a KKK rally, and some of the officers in uniform are African-American...these officers experience taunts, racial slurs and other forms of harassment from those participating in the rally...would these officers have a valid complaint of their job placing them in a hostile environment?

Or how about those Naval Aviator conventions from a few years back, which were dens of sexual harassment against female aviators...the public certainly sided on behald of those who faced harassment.

I understand that the gay rights movement shifted to rather flamboyant tactics as a means of raising public awareness and demonstrate solidarity...for those of you who have witnessed a Gay Pride parade, they are rather interesting events, although I cannot imagine another group in America being able to get away with the sometimes inappropriate behaviors that happen during them...either on the floats themselves, or within the crowds they tend to draw. You won't see Irish men covered in glitter and wearing green g-strings engaging in stripper pole dance routines during the St. Patrick's Day Parade.

That being said, homophobia may be the motivating factor of the firemens' complaints, but I don't agree with the chief's decision to make attendance mandatory...and I do think they have a valid complaint given the lude nature of the taunts they received.

Do you think the firemen would've had a problem with attending a parade predominantly composed of heterosexual single women who may act in the same manner as the gays in this parade?

How is that relevent?

People ascribe to certain morays and beliefs. It was obvious that these firemen do not condone public homosexual lewdness. The article never states they disagree with a homosexual lifestyle, just the lewd acts they had to endure. Why is it such a crime that the firefighters don't want to be involved in that? Are we to push aside all of our principles in the name of tolerance and diversity?