He should get nothing. He missed 37 consecutive days of work. Gee, would you still have a job after that? I think not. People are getting fired for social media. He chose to engage in that, so be it. Find a new job dude.

lisa

Did he just miss 37 days of work? Or was he on leave? It doesn't say. The article said he should take some medical leave. If he just took off for 37 days without using his vacation/medical leave. Then yes he should be fired.

He missed 37 consecutive days of work because of stress from harassment his employer was legally responsible for preventing. If he proves the harassment, he should take his employer to the cleaners. If an employer doesn't want to get sued, they might consider enforcing their own work policies.

lisa-3322183, engaging in social media activity is no more grounds for being fired than is socializing at a cocktail party or a barbecue. It's what you DO and SAY that brings possible grounds for dismissal. If your vegetarian boss finds out via Facebook that you eat meat, and she calls you into her office to lecture you on the immorality of meat eating and eventually fires you, you'll just "find a new job, dudess"? I doubt it.

"Gee, would you still have a job after that? "

When a supervisor tells me about "going to hell" at a company meeting and sends email saying the same, then NO, the supervisor should not still have a job after that.

I agree, he should have been fired if he "missed" 37 consecutive days. If he was on sick leave and/or vacation, no.

However, I would have decked the boss anyway if he/she had called me into his/her office and started spouting that hypocritical religious dogma crap into my face.

If he/she chooses to believe in that campfire storyline from our uncivilized past, that's his/her choice. Don't try to force feed that pap to me on the job. The boss should keep that religious bugaboo stuff at home.

This month Maryland became the first state to ban the practice of asking for a job candidate or worker's social networking password;

Why not ask for their banking information so a prospective employer can track where you go after work.

I have said this once and I will say it again. This country is done. We'll never pay back our debt and that is the plan anyway. Time for the new world order brought to you by George Soros and friends.

I can't publicly comment on this. All the ladies I work with at the fashion shows think I'm gay, if they found out I'm not, they would stop walking around in front of me naked. It's a sacrifice I can live with.

lmao - good one Darth

Most males who work at a Library are gay. I am one of the few hetersexuals who works at a library. So him saying that he got fired because he is gay, I find it very hard to believe because of the library culture.

I believe the story says the guy was on medical orders to take leave. Would that not fall under FMLA as well?

@Jazz and others,

The guy was a management analyst at the Library of Congress, not a librarian. He is a Federal employee and as such, has a fair amount of protection against religiopus harrassment.

@sharonhughes4me, Ignorance at its finest.

@Lisa-3322183, *smacks forehead*

@Jazz-3117301, Where's the data on that which you base your stereotype off of...

Well, thanks for your run down there Trent. We all have the right to our opinions whether you agree with them or not.

You really should come down from your soap box, I think you are getting a bloody nose. :)

The indisputable fact of this case is that the employee missed thirty-seven days without leave; everything else amounts to nothing more than here-say and conjecture.

This is just another example of the biggest problem with affording class status to anyone; a pervasive sense of entitlement. If the powers that be were ever stupid enough to afford class status based on something do you might as well kiss the Constitution good-bye.

Hey, who do I sue for having my comment collapsed???? Seriously, I need 37 days off to recover from this stress.

Got your blood boiling with an emote aye?

I really hate these comment boards... it truly brings out the idiotic comments...

Such as: "Oh the poor boy was stressed and couldn't hack it. Gotta love this sue happy state of mind many people buy into. He does not deserve to be compensated because he got fired. Buck up little camper and go find a new job." ~ This person has NO CLUE what's going on in the world today...

And the one about Mars... Jesus... If people could get fired for their comments on a topic such as this.... OMG the unemployment rate would be astronomical... But hey, there would be plenty of openings for those who were unjustly fired...

If he was on a medical leave- he should not have been fired. If he didn't bother to follow the guidelines his workplace has (usually it requires paperwork) for getting a medical leave and simply didn't show up for work... then he should be fired.

People need to remember that Facebook and other social medias are easily accessible to anyone interested in finding out things about you. Unless you make effort to keep the information private... assume everyone can see it. Bosses, potential clients, cops, church members, in-laws, stalkers, people you rub the wrong way can get information from these things. Each person has a right to access anything you put down under "PUBLIC". It's up to you to ensure the settings.

JeremyH1982: you said:

I really hate these comment boards... it truly brings out the idiotic comments...

Do you know the meaning of the word irony ?

@America Today-Anthony

They already do. Background check now include credit checks. Employers can opt not to hire you (or fire you) if you have a late payment.

Whether his termination is justified or not depends on whether he presented his employer with paperwork from his doctor requesting the time off. If he did, then the employer is in the wrong as he is covered by FMLA, however, if he didn't present his employer with paperwork and just took the time off, then the firing is justified.

Either way, if what he says is true, that his boss sent him discriminatory e-mails, I hope he either forwarded them to a personal e-mail account or printed them.

lisa-3322183

Careful your own soapbox is looking pretty lofty up there, care to take your own advice and step down. I'll provide the ladder for you,

There is more to this story...line employees that work for the Fed. Gov. don't get fired over 1 incident...His supervisor doesn't have that power.

Krestov - you're going to need a crane :)

@lisa-3322183 I may not agree with you Lisa but I like your sense of humor!

gimmeabreakoradrink-1132383

That is the problem with the more activist fractions of both sides they tend to be the most vocal leaving the middle ground people to live with the consequences.

Also small note on "lifestyle choice". A lifestyle choice is choosing to live in Seattle or NY for the lifestyle, a persons sexuality is an biologically ingrained immutable part of a human being.

Now we know why those employers wanted your facebook account login! Religion has no place in any workplace. If it is mandantory for all to attend. We get closer and closer to the cliff with each passing day as Republicans who genuflest at the alter of religion sell us farther and farther down the the path that leads to the cliff of total domination by religious nut cases. The same thing that helped start this country. Fleeing Europe from religious prosecution. We have already established the new American Nobility. (the 1%) next it will be religious dictators in all aspects of our lives if we are stupid enough to keep voting the way we have been.

He missed 37 days of work. This is an open and shut case... Fire him and any judge who overturns this is a moron.

Yeah, it's really not clear from the article whether or not the 37 days he missed were medical leave, as his therapist recommended. If not, I'm afraid he doesn't have much of a leg to stand on, which is unfortunate given the circumstances.

I think it's really creepy that Employers think they have the right to sneak around an employees Face Book page and then use any info. they abtain to fire that employee..... This kind of behavior by any employer is despicable

dirtydog200

I guess if everyone who were different, to your good self, and hid themselves away it would make you happy.

Well the world is a place of variety and difference and people don't have to hide themselves away. Your job is to live your life and life by your own moral compass that is your right. It is also the right for others to live by theirs.

If Lisa actually has a job - she is posting from work on the companies dime... chew on that one.

Lisa; you don't seem to respect our laws - ever hear of Family Leave? No government/public job just fires you, and there is always a way to keep your job if you really want it. I failed a drug test (for pot, I used it for pain, now 20 years later pot is one of the best pain options out there - rednecks are so 30 seconds ago) and by admitting it up front (didn't try to hide or cover up my actions) and doing everything they asked of me, that being drug counseling (the councilor tried to set me up by asking why I didn't just find a job that allowed me to get away with smoking - had I shown any support of her words, she said I would have reached some number of questionable answers and would have been fired on her advice) I was able to keep my job.

When you rule with your prejudices and ignore law, you are worse than that you detest. Maybe anger and a hair trigger are not good options... not that any of you ever stepped on your own private parts by thinking with emotions over logic.

This boss went far and beyond his legal limits to fire this guy, if the fired guy tried to comply with the laws and regulations of our country - then Mr. Judgemental Religious dude is in deep dodo.

As a lesbian - if the only thing this guy did regarding the harrassment was to take 37 consecutive days off - without getting approval for medical leave, then yes...he should be fired.

PERIOD.

It's entirely possible this article is misleading for a reason, because it never should have been suggested he got fired for liking something on facebook - THAT isnt why he got fired, it was the time off he took.

And the article intentionally failed to explain whether or not he was approved for that time off, or if he just decided that was how HE was going to deal with the harrassment.

I am hoping for the sake of this guy that he had approval to take medical leave, but something tells me he didnt.

Just because someone treats you poorly doesnt mean to you evade all your own responsibilities and ability to do the right thing.

Guess what kiddies? ANY company that doesn't have a employee handbook that clearly states what the rules are surronding the work place, don't have a leg to stand on in any court of law! This individual will win his case!

NY company that doesn't have a employee handbook that clearly states what the rules are surronding the work place, don't have a leg to stand on in any court of law!

@LIVE TO RIDE - unfortunately, while an employee must adhere to the employee handbook and can be fired for not doing so the employer does not have to do so and can fire an employee and/or act in other ways (i.e. retaliate against an employee except in the case of EEOC complaints) with impunity unless the office in which the company operates and the employee works are in a right to work state. That's not applicable in this case as the employer is the federal government and this is an EEOC/civil rights issue.

I know Peter. he is a good guy. maybe his liberal leanings had a bit to do with it as well.

Hey Tyler - you know, its ok for someone to hold an opinion that gays should be banned from the planet - it is JUST as valid an opinion than gays should be allowed into all aspects of life - I happen to believe that gays are just as loving and caring as anyone else - but if someone disagrees with that you should not ban someone because they disagree with YOUR personal political persuasion - or are you saying that MSNBC and Newsvine's corporate position is pro-gay? You see how that gets YOU in trouble now?

As for the comments here - the following observations from 27 years of practicing labor law:

1. It is unlikely to the point of incredulous that a federal government employee is being discriminated against for being gay . . . .

2. every single case I have EVER done has resulted in the employee claiming s/he was the best employee in the department and the employer claiming they were the worst - it is pretty clear in almost 100% of the cases if there is a pretext for discrimination or if the employee's performance has dropped.

3. The Feds have a pretty decent appeals process - and a claims process. If the gay man here could have proved even in the slightest that there was hint of discrimination his claim would not have been dismissed and right to sue letter issued to him on his request.

4. Our gay employee here is going to have to prove that his boss knew 'almost immediately' that he posted to the two dads page and that his boss can find his profile on facebook and actually read it . . . .thats a pretty high burden of proof -

Before you all run off half-cocked against me, I have two very good friends who are a 2 dad household and I see that they are some of the best parents I know. . . . and I support their right to adopt 100% . . .

This sounds like a guy who was beginning to slack off at work, was reprimanded for the issues and then went crying to his therapist that working at that place is too stressful, my boss picks on me because i think he may have found out i'm gay, etc... Therapist tells him to take time off, 37 days later and he is puzzled as to why he was fired. For FMLA, the doctor must certify, in writing, that the patient is completely unable/disabled from performing their duties as it applies to their job. Over the course of 37 days dhy didn't the therapist come up with some coping skills for the employee to use in his daily interactions?. Did the therapist and the employee really believe that the time off would be indefinate? This is what we get when we allow junk science to overrule common sense. The pussification of America is in full swing. It's time to man up, even if you are gay and take personal responsibility and stop blaming lifestyle choices, race or any other pitiful excuse to justify ones rotten life. I believe Hank Hill called these folks, "Twig boys", apt reference. We have a country full of nancies, gay and straight and it's sickening. No wonder the previous generation just shakes their heads.

I agree, nothing personal should be posted on Facebook that can come back to haunt you, but in this instance, this man didn't post anything personal. He didn't mention his sexual orientation, or post nude photos of himself, or speak of sex, or speak ill of his employer, or threaten to blow up Congress for that matter. He simply stated that he liked a particular page in Facebook, the contents of which apparently offended his "religious" boss.

Really? Really? That is what we should be forced to think and learn.......that in the United States of America people should be scared that expressing a non-work related personal opinion on their personal site can get them fired from their job?

How about employers learning that they should ONLY make terminate, discipline or raise/promotion decisions based ON WORKPLACE PERFORMANCE!!!!

In the United States of America, people are free to have a personal opinion and we should defend every persons right to have one outside the workplace without the fear of retribution from their employers. ALL organizations that discriminate, punish or terminate based on their personal opinions of an employees private life should be fines and or have their business permits revoked.

I know it is against FB terms, but I keep two accounts. One for posting, and my real one, which I still barely use.

For over 20 years, every security expert said, "don't use your real name when posting", and then along comes Facebook, which requires you to use your real name. That was not a problem until all these site started to use their social plugin for commenting. Now we have a big problem, and I suggest a fake account.

even without FB, there are other ways his boss could have found out he was gay without the employee bringing it up directly so the FB reference is actually a distractor in this case. the crux of the issue and real evidence is those emails the boss sent that were not only of an inappropriately religious nature but can serve as substantiation that the sudden change in performance appraisals is related to the boss' bigotry and that the boss actively and overtly created a hostile work environment (which would be a mitigating and reasonably causal factor in any actual performance decrease)

@KevinC

If Facebook requires a real name, how do you have a fake account without your real name . . . as in Facebook requires a real name. What you have said makes no sense.

Roger-785733, they require it by their "terms of service". That does not mean they put a mechanism in place to actually check that the terms are being followed.

If they catch a fake account, they delete it.

I hope that clarifies it.

I don't give a rats azz who you are or where you work if there is a dink for a boss he/she will find a way to get rid of you if they wish

just try to keep records of all meetings and then don't matter where it goes you have a leg to stand on [use a pocket recorder if you possible can]

[I am a former litigator for a major union]

I can understand not using a real name for these things. Believe it or not, Pvblivs Ignotivs Secretus is not my real name. But, to the matter at hand, if the 37 missed days were, in fact, due to such harassment (which had nothing to do with the job) then he should be reinstated and the supervisor, having acted very inappropriately, should be dismissed.

This month Maryland became the first state to ban the practice of asking for a job candidate or worker's social networking password; and Illinois is considering similar legislation,...

Why is this not already a federal law? Employers (along with everyone else) should only have access to public records. They should not be able to do the equivalent of putting a video-recorder in your bedroom. It's not their business.

I agree with you...only exception to the rule will be if your job requires to you have a top secret clearance or higher but some serious waivers and other legal paperwork will be signed on what you can and can not be terminated on...need to protect free speech whether you area with what is being said or not..or better yet just change your privacy settings to friends and family only

Amen to that Anti Trust Proponent!

dear Ivan: there is something that you need to understand about free speach. Youj can say what you want, but there is nothing in the constitution that protects one from his/her own stupidity. If you worked for me, you have the right to say that I am a flaming d..bag. and I would have the right to fire you for that. Did you win by excercising your constitutional "right"? Seems to me you lose

That is exactly why NO ONE should ever post anything personal on these social networks that can lead back to them.

Sorry, but that's BS. Harassment based on sexual orientation is illegal, regardless of how the sexual orientation was revealed. There are other reasons not to post personal information on FB or other social sites, but fear of losing your job should not be one of them. What's the next step? Will your employers want to install surveillance cameras in your home to make sure your behavior meets with their approval 24/7? GPS ankle bracelets when you go on vacation? Are you familiar with the concept of "Big Brother?"

I hope this guy kept those e-mails from his ex-boss.

flbikerchick - agree w/your comment 100%. Sexual harrassment in workplace is inexcusable under any circumstances.

Employers have gained to much control over our personal lives in the last 10 years.

That is exactly why NO ONE should ever post anything personal on these social networks that can lead back to them.

and nobody should every say or do anything in public, or be with anyone else who says or does anything in public because someone you work with may see or hear about it and the boss may find out and the boss may not like that you're not his clone and. ..

He was checking on his employee and discovered the "like" page and put 2 and 2 together. The fired guy should have the bosses job and the boss should be gone. This religious PC crap makes me sick. If the guy isn't flaunting his sexuality at work then its not work's business.

Actually, he has every right to "flaunt" his sexuality at work, if by "flaunt", you mean "reveal". Straight people do this in the work place all the time. They talk about their spouses or partners, wear wedding rings, have photos of their kids on the wall, etc. Via these things, their sexuality is made quite clear. On the other hand, if by "flaunt" you mean wearing sexually suggestive clothing or talking about sex explicitly, then yes, I agree, but this applies to all employees.

Adam the PC way is to fire the boss and automatically assume the boss is in the wrong. Perhaps we should show some restraint and let the facts come out before we rush to judgement. The article says hes going to use religious reasons for his suit because it gets more money and has a better chance of winning, sounds like his motives also might be in question.

From the article: He said laws protecting workers against sexual orientation discrimination are limited and provide few, if any, remedies for compensating workers in cases like TerVeer's.

@square dude

TerVeer said he started to receive emails from Mech that contained ‘religiously motivated harassment and discrimination.’ Mech then called him into a meeting for the purposes of ‘educating him on hell and that it awaited him for being a homosexual.’

that email documentation would show the boss is wrong and out of line (and in violation of law). If you've been forced to take time off (especially time off w/o pay) and/or fired which will not only cause financial hardship for the duration of time w/o income and you may find it difficult to find another, etc. it makes sense to look for financial restitution. Since there is documentation that the religious reasons were at the root of the boss's actions (this wasn't just the boss constant making "fag" jokes and went well beyond regular hostile work environment issues), it has to be the crux of the case and it's a legitimate reason to want additional punitive action taken - the boss wasn't just violating EEOC, he was violating the employee's first amendment rights and I'll be honest with you, I think it's perfectly reasonable to use the argument that will provide a bigger payout when your civil rights have been violated by your employer and you've suffered emotional and financial hardship as a result of it.

So, if I worked for this guy, and he discovered I was Jewish, he would harass and fire me, too. These type of 'Christians' make me sick. That stuff does not belong at work.

fully agree with you square....seems there may be another motive and claiming harassment due to sexual orientation is the way to quick and easy money. from my experience some, NOT ALL, but some of the gay community sashay around the workplace purposely and intently trying to get the extra "attention" and ruffle feathers just looking for a golden opportunity like this. sadly more common than you would expect. "oh, he looked at me weird because i am gay so now i'm going to sue!"

i see this in the same light as the women who wear mini skirts so short that you can see pretty much everything and blouses cut so low you can see their navel but then scream sexual harassment if the wrong person notices....of course if the right person notices they get a promotion...

i think we need to hear both sides of this story before judgement is passed because i smell an opportunist in this story!

The article needs to clarify: did the employee not show up for 37 days, or was he on medical leave? If he was on medical leave, then he has yet another suit to file, because it is a requirement under FMLA that employers keep an employee's job intact and open for him (or one of equal status and pay) upon his return from leave if said employee has been on the job for more than 6 months. The religious harassment was a clear violation of the employee's first amendment rights, and the emails will prove it. The supervisor needs to be fired immediately, and should be included in the suit as well, he might also seek some counselling to learn to control his prejudicial and hateful rantings at those that disagree with his religious beliefs, or seek employment within his church.

Actually, protections for people under federal law for their sexaul orientation are VERY limited. Remember, technically at least, DOMA is still a valid federal law which every federal agency must follow. And there is not a part of title IX related to sexual orientation.

There are, however, some very strong protections based on religion. The supervisor messed up by going into Tea Party religious dogma. This guys lawyer was very smart in utilizing that aspect.

As to the days off, we don't know if this guy has worked long enough for FMLA to apply or if he requested time off under FMLA. However, IMO, once the supervisor had sufficient proof (in his mind) that the employee was gay, he just looked for an excuse to fire him.

Like any employer, the supervisor could easily have found sufficient alternate reasons to terminate the employee. The problem is, the supervisor indicated his true reasons, which were that the employee was gay and, by extension, not the right type of christian in this supervisor's warped mind.

Open mouth, insert lawsuit.

I hate it when people lie and say they're Christian when they're really just looking for an excuse to be an a-hole. If you're Christian you're supposed to try to act Christ-like. Jesus was big on helping others, not harassing them

Thank you both for this post agree w/you 100%

Personally, I am respective of everyone's religious beliefs, but I am tired of those Christians who spew damnation and more on gays/lesbians in this country and whine/cry when they say their religious rights are being denied. If they followed their own doctrine, they would realize jesus didn't ask someone if they were gay when saving their souls etc.

William & Its About Time,

I couldn't agree more. This is riduculous. We are supposed to accept and respect each other. I may not like or approve or practice various lifestyles, but, it is someone elses decision. I don't want anyone judging my lifestyle choices or how I spend my money etc (as long as it is harmful to none). There is no place for this kind of talk. I happen to believe we all answer for our behavior on this earth (Karma) and in the next (The Last Judgement), however, if you don't think the same, I will still respect you, try to understand your belief system and maybe even try to do it over a meal. Life is short. Relax. I hope this guy is okay, gets his job back and supervisor is retrained. Maybe someone will learn something from all of this.

that's what it's always been about Bob, expressing one's biases

Religion has no place in the workplace. A manager, or anyone with the power to hire and fire, shouldn't be able to impose their religious views on someone else. A person who doesn't work for a month isn't staying home because he wants to; it's because he has to in order to keep his mental sanity. Being bombarded with religious garbage at a time when he's trying to make a living would be enough for anyone to give up. This is called "we won't fire you because we know you will sue us, so we'll just make your life miserable until you quit." It is Horse Manure and it's happening more often than many people think.

Everyone has a right to work without religion in the workplace, unless you're working in a faith based operation. The Library of Congress is not a faith based operation. This man's lawsuit will be successful and he will have ended up a lottery winner because some religious heterosexual vigilante decided he didn't want a gay person in his midst.

I have never sued an employer for either orientation bias or religious bias, but I certainly could have. In every company I have ever worked for there was always at least one person who felt it was necessary to bring their religious ideals into the mix, and it was sickening. And it never failed, when religion was allowed to flourish at management meetings, anti-gay rhetoric soon followed and then suddenly I was always the outsider. Nevermind that I was the highest producing employee in my work unit, it didn't matter because I was queer. And after the day that I came out, no one would even speak to me. Suddenly, pamphlets talking about being "reborn" turned up on my desk when I'd get to work in the mornings, and phone calls from co-workers asking if I'd like to go to church with them to ask God for forgiveness. Forgiveness for what???

Looking back, I should have sued but instead went out on my own and became a serious player in my line of work. And again, I am the top producer in my own company and no one who works for me needs to fear being fired or harrassed over a religious undercurrent. My revenge for all of the stress and unnecessary bull that happened every day in the offices I worked in was to go out and be successful on my own. MY God, the God that I believe in, wanted me to.

And the ones who harrassed me? They still work a 9 to 5 for a paycheck. And me? I now own a yacht. Screw them.

Good on you Robert! They were probably more resentful of your superior work ethic, and the hypocrites went after your personal life, which was none of their business. I'm glad you're living large.

Brings to mind one of favorite expressions: "Living well is the best revenge!"

If this "guy" was at work and accessing his website on FB, then he should have been let go. If he'd been at home, maybe a different story. However, if you don't want something made public, don't do anything on FB or the other public accessible websites. End of story.

The boss should have to attend sensivitity training for sexual harrassment. Have his position downgraded, along with his salary. Both are equally responsible for this situation and outcome.

If the employee didn't apply for family leave or a leave of absence, shame on him. Just because the doctor suggested it, unless he files for it with HR dept. doesn't mean he can take 37 days with out consequences.

Patraicia, you are ridiculous, a person should be fired for accessing their facebook page. They you should be fired for sending a personal email or taking a personal phone call at work. Or better yet any talk that is not work related should get you fired.

Not to put to fine a point on this...but is FB access now a constitutionally protected right? Glad I do not and will never have a FB account. Social media is causing much more harm than good.

The point of electronic social networks is socializing, communicating, and in this instance, this employee didn't "gut" himself on line. Suppose you favored giving citizenship to illegal aliens, and your right wing boss heard you say this and harassed you over it? Or suppose your atheist boss read a story in the paper about your involvement in your church, and did the same? None of us live in a vacuum. If we never post on electronic media at all, we still have thoughts and opinions that employers may become privy too, and we can suffer for them; not because our opinions are harmful, disrespectful or illegal, but because we HAVE them, and someone else doesn't LIKE them.

The point is that TerVeer held a private view and it was dscovered by his boss at work. That private view appears to have had no bearing on his performance nor did it come up in discussion at all. This came from someone snooping or invading TerVeers privacy that did not affect the workplace in any other way.

TerVeer will have to answer for his own actions in terms of missing work and if it was authorized or reported timely.

Regardless of the injustice done to TerVeer, you are always responsible for your own actions. You have to take the right steps to protect yourself even if things are not fair. TerVeer obviously had options for help ,but we don't know if he took them.

Todd-he did not hold a "private" view. If he did, and knows that posting on a social site is basically posting to the world, he would have kept it private and not posted. But he, like almost all teenagers and a large number of adults, think that they are entering a vaccum with only their "friends" allowed to enter.

@headhunter22 -

But he, like almost all teenagers and a large number of adults, think that they are entering a vaccum with only their "friends" allowed to enter.

actually his "mistake" was assuming that his boss would be an adult and behave professionally. he shouldn't have had to worry that his boss finding out he was gay would impact his employment or cause him to be subjected to religious diatribes from his boss

He pressed "like" on a page supporting LGBT rights and the boss took it upon himself to make the assumption that he was gay. It never says he was flaunting his sexuality...if he was, the boss would have figured it out long before the guy did something so innocuous as supporting a cause he believed in.

The boss took it upon himself to guide this person's personal life. Some of you sound like it says the guy was posting photos of himself in a velvet gown. No. He pressed "like". And even if he was posting photos of himself in a velvet gown, it's nobody's goddamn business but his own. Not that that should matter...if the guy wants to run around the streets of Washington, D.C. dressed like purple Jesus it shouldn't matter, he's not at work.

The problem with this society isn't social media, it's that people take it upon themselves to force another to accept their own skewed, little truths.

That's why I would never friend a work associate, even if you're fiends. George Costanza had it right when he kept his work life and private life separate.

Easy for him to do. George Costanza didn't really have a work life OR a private life.

This is just a case of somebody not doing their job, then finding a reason why somebody else is responsible for their problem. There are channels available to deal with these issues outside of just not showing up for work. This guy is just looking for a free ride.

That's why he had years of good performance reviews until his boss started telling him he was going to hell.... Free ride indeed....

Already been tried, Bob-3241043, none of the communist regimes in history would put up with that. You'd fit right in, lock step with the Nazis with that attitude, Bob.

Thanks Bob for the comment and post. I agree 100%. Religion does not belong in our workplace, our government, public schools, or basically anything that receives my tax dollars.

Villan157 - Then you are going against the first amendment of the United States Constitution. That is not a Nazi or Communist document the last time I checked now was it? Problem we have here, is Fascist Republicans know their base is the Christian right.. and they have to server those campaign donators well.

He only e of the pressed the like buitton on a story. It is his private life and none of his employers business what he does on time away. It wasn't a crime to press the like button and what is his employer doing anyway chasing him around on Facebook?

Till the social freak appears as one of your family, your child, grandchild, great grandchild ... then maybe you'll care. What one sows, so shall they reap.

Until when should sharing your opinion outside of the work environment (in whatever environment - social media, print media, or other outlets) be grounds for termination? Yes, it does happen, but it shouldn't. And people like you who think that termination is just some natural consequence of sharing your thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes in a public forum outside of the work environment are part of the problem.

I think a lot of this intrusion into personal spaces by employers is reflective of our economy - supervisors and employers know that employees are easily replaced, so some will fire their employees for just as much as holding beliefs and attitudes they're not comfortable with.

So, let me guess, Rick. You tried FB and no one would "friend" you, would they?

Praise God for people like you! Truer words could not be said! You represent CHRISTIANITY in it's purest. So many so-called Christians, condemn, discriminate, and crucify in the name of Jesus. Look at the Vatican's campaign against Gays. Look at their declining membership. The younger generation are much more educated about Gays being BORN Gay, created by God that way, and will not tolerate all the hate by narrow minded older people... what one sows, so shall they reap.

Christians should love- no doubt about that. They shouldn't hate people (regardless of their race,gender,sexual orientation)- no doubt about that. The Vatican and many religions are full of hate and have killed many innocent people "in the name of Christ" - no doubt about that.

Homosexuality is condemned in the bible. - No doubt about that.

TRUE Christians do not practice homosexuality, nor do they hate or discriminate those who does.

BG, there are a lot of other things mentioned in the Bible that are sins, and some are mentioned a lot more than homosexuality. A big one - greed - is entrenched in the capitalist structure in the US, but you don't hear most Christians, especially conservative Christians, talking about that!

Besides, even if homosexuality is a sin (and I think that the context of statements condemning homosexual conduct in the Bible can be debated by Christians even if you believe, as I do, that the Bible is the word of God), the Bible also says that "for all have sinnned and fall short of the glory of God." So even if homosexuality is a sin, it is completely incorrect statement that you cannot be gay and a "true Christian." Let's be for real...the church is full of sinners of all stripes.

BG, you can truly say that homosexuality is a 'practice'? Really?

Trust me when I say not only does he have wrongful termination rights, he also doesn't need to use any type of leave. He's entitled to continuation of pay. Mangement refused to let me work until they had something from my psychiatrist saying my bi-polar disorder was under control. I didn't have bi-polar disorder. I also didn't have a psychiatrist.When it was settled, I was given continuation of pay. That means I not only didn't have to use any leave, I also continued accrueing leave while I was off.

Based on what facts are in this story, I'm still trying to figure out what kind of crack this man's boss was smoking. Honestly, in this day and age, and working for the Federal Gov....well, if the boss is too dumb to figure out even the basic rights of the employees, then he's simply too DUMBazz to even hold that job.

What kind of rock does the man live under? One's personal views on homosexuality are just that...personal views. They have NO bearing on the person's ability to do his job. If there is something else to the story..as in, the man simply failed to report for work without even calling anyone, then yeah, that's a HUGE problem.

Bull, big, tough jock guy. You know nothing of the work conditions that this person endured, the stress that he was under, his interaction with his boss or fellow employees, or other problems that he may have been dealing with. I once had a bad experience with a boss, filed a union grievance, and things dragged on for WEEKS. My grievance was honored, but I had to WORK with this jerk boss while things got sorted out, there was MUCH stress and pressure, and I damn well DID use whatever time off I could.

If this guy had sick or personal time due him, he had every RIGHT to use it in this situation, and as he had been deemed a good employee, he likely did. Since you're not a "panty waist", you'd do what? Punch your unbending, unreasonable boss in the face? Commit suicide like a real man? Or quit a job that you had a right to even though your boss was at fault?

Harassment is always the fault of the person doing the harassing.

37 days off because of a stressful work situation over something unrelated to work, done by management is nothing. He doesn't even need to use leave. The supervisor is liable for creating a stressful work environment. The supervisor is subject to termination of employment. He can also be sued because of his actions. Personally, I would have requested to see my union rep, the second that this happened, after which I would have gone to the doctor to get help for the strees created by the supervisor.

Awwww....poor "us". Better to let discrimination occur in government institutions than burden the taxpayer.

Bravo, Nik!!