Fired Editor Sues for His Religious F...

Fired Editor Sues for His Religious Freedom to Write About "Gaystapo"

There are 17 comments on the Gawker story from Jul 25, 2014, titled Fired Editor Sues for His Religious Freedom to Write About "Gaystapo". In it, Gawker reports that:

Back in May, the Newton Daily News of Iowa fired its editor-in-chief for comments he'd made on his personal blog.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Gawker.

Belle Sexton

Santa Cruz, CA

#1 Jul 25, 2014
Personal writings, however pubic, should be protected against such actions.
Dan

United States

#2 Jul 25, 2014
No one owes anybody a paid platform for what they want to say.

This suit is ridiculous.

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#3 Jul 25, 2014
Belle Sexton wrote:
Personal writings, however pubic, should be protected against such actions.
So it would be OK for a Gay activist to criticize the Catholic Church even if she was an employee of the church? Cool deal!
Dan

United States

#4 Jul 25, 2014
Belle Sexton wrote:
Personal writings, however pubic, should be protected against such actions.
Well, yeah, the guy can blog all day and all night, but the paper isn't required to give him a platform to do it.

Since: Jan 08

Rayong, Thailand

#5 Jul 25, 2014
I'm sure this jerk wasn't fired for his "beliefs." He was fired because he showed in no uncertain terms that he was incapable of being objective about gay rights. I'm sure the Newton Daily News doesn't want to the Fox "News" of print.
Gremlin

Louisville, KY

#6 Jul 25, 2014
Comparing gay people to Nazis is hardly a Christian thing to do. But what can you expect from hypocrite "christians" who feel victimized when they're not allowed to spew out thier self righteous bigotry?
passing by

Salina, KS

#7 Jul 25, 2014
Belle Sexton wrote:
Personal writings, however pubic, should be protected against such actions.
As editor-in-chief, Mr Eschliman was being paid for two services that are important to consider here, ensuring that the news was being presented in an as clear and unbiased manner as possible and to write the opinion of the Newton Daily News on the subjects of the day. His personal writings, which he chose to make available to others, are incredibly reflective of his questionable ability to perform the first service and an unfortunate example of the second.

As Robert Dale Eschliman, American, he has the right to his ugly choice of religious beliefs and to share them with others. No one is trying to take that away from him, the owners of the paper just want an editor-in-chief who can edit their own work a hell of a lot better than that and whose opinions aren't such an ugly reflection on the Newton Daily News, on whose behalf he was hired to opine.
Max B

Lombard, IL

#8 Jul 25, 2014
passing by wrote:
<quoted text>As editor-in-chief, Mr Eschliman was being paid for two services that are important to consider here, ensuring that the news was being presented in an as clear and unbiased manner as possible and to write the opinion of the Newton Daily News on the subjects of the day. His personal writings, which he chose to make available to others, are incredibly reflective of his questionable ability to perform the first service and an unfortunate example of the second.
As Robert Dale Eschliman, American, he has the right to his ugly choice of religious beliefs and to share them with others. No one is trying to take that away from him, the owners of the paper just want an editor-in-chief who can edit their own work a hell of a lot better than that and whose opinions aren't such an ugly reflection on the Newton Daily News, on whose behalf he was hired to opine.
AMEN!
Ted Haggard s Masseur

Philadelphia, PA

#9 Jul 25, 2014
There are lots of cases like this where journalists get in professional trouble for either voicing an opinion (personally) or for donating to political candidates or PACs.(Often more liberal journalists, too.)

While I don't buy into the whole notion that journalists are or can be "objective," under existing practices this former editor in chief doesn't have a case against his former paper, imo. But crying "christianist" can be a very effective tactic.

If he were an executive at some non news reporting corporation, like Walmart or Target or Ford, and wrote similar stuff on his personal blog on his own time then he'd probably be in the clear...sort of unfortunately.
Here Kitty Kitty

Alpharetta, GA

#10 Jul 25, 2014
A snarling homophobe saying horrible things about fabulous GAY people?
.
Feed him to the lions!
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZDKEyB3pbn0/UovSdQT... !!!!!!!!!!lion.jpg

“A long time ago”

Since: Nov 09

in a galaxy far, far away....

#11 Jul 25, 2014
Belle Sexton wrote:
Personal writings, however pubic, should be protected against such actions.
They ARE protected... against GOVERNMENT interference and repercussion.
Sir Andrew

Honolulu, HI

#12 Jul 25, 2014
First, how many times can one include the buzz phrase "sincerely held religious beliefs" in a single legal filing while still keeping a straight face; and

Second, exactly where in that holy book of theirs does Jesus ever say ANYTHING in reference to "Christians?" As I understand it, he never alluded to any intention that people were to worship him, idolize him or name their cult AFTER him.

This publisher was entirely within its rights to fire him for his public demonstration of his sincerely held prejudices. His blog cast severe doubt on his ability to present the news in a fair and balanced manner and, to protect the perception of the public in the paper's journalistic integrity, he had to go.

Perhaps he should join Faux News where the words "fair and balanced" have meanings entirely divorced from those found in Webster's.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#13 Jul 25, 2014
"I would like to have obtained a religious accommodation for my sincerely held religious belief to share my Biblical view with the few family members and friends who read my blog."

Yet he has no problem denying people who have deeply held religious views that SSM is GOOD the right to express that through legal marriage.

IOW he expects accommodations to his religious beliefs at the expense of everyone else's deeply held religious beliefs (even those of his employer).

Talk about entitlement issues!

Did SCOTUS just rule that businesses were people and had the same religious rights as this guy?

Why is Hobby Lobby allowed to dictate their religious beliefs onto employees but it's wrong for this paper to do the same?
Too Sensitive

New Fairfield, CT

#14 Jul 26, 2014
Dubya wrote:
I'm sure this jerk wasn't fired for his "beliefs." He was fired because he showed in no uncertain terms that he was incapable of being objective about gay rights. I'm sure the Newton Daily News doesn't want to the Fox "News" of print.
Bullshit. I've worked for several newspapers and worked up close and personal with several managing/chief editors. Most held extreme bias' of some sort, but that doesn't affect their ability to perform their jobs, which, in part, includes keeping bias and opinion out of theirs and their staffs articles, reporting and columns.

Freedom of Speech seems to apply when we want to trash the religious and their beliefs all to hell, but it doesn't apply if someone says anything bad about homosexuality in any way.

We all need to get the hell over ourselves and stop being so f**king sensitive. The First Amendment needs to apply to all or to apply to none. Period. No Special Exceptions.
Corbutt of the Joke

Philadelphia, PA

#15 Jul 27, 2014
Too Sensitive wrote:
<quoted text>
Bullshit. I've worked for several newspapers and worked up close and personal with several managing/chief editors. Most held extreme bias' of some sort, but that doesn't affect their ability to perform their jobs....The First Amendment needs to apply to all or to apply to none. Period. No Special Exceptions.
Oh good, name the editors, what their biases were, and _where they blogged about them publicly_ while working as journalists. Then we can get them fired, too.

If some editor of a newspaper blogged about "talibangelical mullahs" you're saying that editor wouldn't be fired?

You're a liar. There are no "special exceptions" here. You're merely upset that now homophobic bigots are being held to the same standards everyone else has been held to for a long time.

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#16 Jul 27, 2014
Too Sensitive wrote:
<quoted text>
Bullshit. I've worked for several newspapers and worked up close and personal with several managing/chief editors. Most held extreme bias' of some sort, but that doesn't affect their ability to perform their jobs, which, in part, includes keeping bias and opinion out of theirs and their staffs articles, reporting and columns.
Freedom of Speech seems to apply when we want to trash the religious and their beliefs all to hell, but it doesn't apply if someone says anything bad about homosexuality in any way.
We all need to get the hell over ourselves and stop being so f**king sensitive. The First Amendment needs to apply to all or to apply to none. Period. No Special Exceptions.
BIG difference. This employee CHOSE to publicly express his bias. He was removed from his position because he exposed his bias to the general population.

Tell us how you handled being publicly attacked by someone expressing such bias, then maybe you'd have a leg to stand on with regards to freedom of speech. You don't like it that he was fired for attacking private citizens? Tough shit.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#17 Jul 27, 2014
Leviticus 19:18 (NIV)

18 “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.

Guess that isn't part of his deeply held religious beliefs.

That's OK. I know this part is.

Matthew 5:11
"Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.

<giggles>

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Journalism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'Dreams do pay off': Black women cheer royal en... Tue UruEuWauWau 104
News Elder Christofferson applauds journalists as am... Tue tongangodz 2
News Contributing Op-Ed Writer: The Men Who Cost Cli... Dec 9 Cordwainer Trout 14
News Winnipeg cyclist pinned under SUV on the road t... Dec 6 PILASTER PEDDLES PPP 1
News What's at Stake in the Alabama Senate Election ... Dec 5 Mr goody two shoes 1
News Inside the Beltway: Monica mocks 'The Monica Le... Nov 30 Ex Senator Santpo... 3
News Woman approached Post with false tale about Moo... Nov 28 TrumpTaxRaisesTax4U 1
More from around the web