eFree wrote:Maybe you could clarify some things for me
1) is joining an organization an ACT or a belief?
Joining is an act, but it's not an act that has a significant external effect. Whether someone joins the KKK, or a church, or an atheist group has no direct effect on the performance of their job. It's a free expression of their beliefs. It's a private matter that isn't necessarily relevant to job performance.
They may take additional actions which DO affect job performance, and then you'd be justified.
eFree wrote: ----- a) is it sane to say I have no right to 'judge' that action. After all, you cannot legislate my thoughts.
As an individual, you have that right. As an employer, you are legally prevented from asking the question because it is unfairly prejudicial. Being a member of organization X, does not necessarily mean you're going to take any action Y. Additionally, taking action Y doesn't necessarily affect your employer.
My employer has no right to information about my personal life, beliefs or activities - until such time as those activities represent a clear conflict of interest or detriment to the performance of my job.
I had a job interview today. I know that one of the three founders of this company is a Christian. Does he have the right to ask about my religious beliefs? Does he have the right to ask if I'm overtly anti-religion and anti-Christianity? If he discovers that I'm the president of the ACA and host of our TV show - a local show that may be viewed by his friends, relatives and business associates - does he have the right to use that as grounds to refuse to hire me?
The law protects my freedom and, to some extent, my privacy. He can fire me for cause. He can fire me spending company time on personal tasks or creating a disruption in the workplace, but he can't - legally - fire me for holding views in opposition to his, no matter how vocal I am when I'm away from work.
eFree wrote: ----- b) is it 'wrong' to judge the ACT of joining KKK as 'poor judgment' that may impact on one's job (if so please tell me why -- and it is illegal we should all realize is irrelevant-- I will 'think' regardless of the laws)
Yes, it's wrong to conclude that this act of 'poor judgment' necessarily impacts one's ability to perform their job. If you feel differently, you have the burden of proof
. You have to demonstrate that mere membership in an organization sufficiently damages your business to justify not hiring, or firing the individual.
We've already established that individuals have freedom of thought and expression. You're not allowed to ask a prospective employee whether or not they're a member of the KKK, because taking action (refusing to hire or choosing to fire someone) based is unjust. It is an unjustified discrimination and the temptation to act prejudicially, based on the results of such a question, represents an unfair risk to the employee's livelihood.
If, however, the individual's job performance IS effected by actions taken, you have the right to terminate their employment.
eFree wrote: 2) Is 'lynching' an ACT or a belief?
The shockingly ignorant implication here is that being a member of the KKK means you lynch people. I almost didn't bother to comment on this, but I guess I will. You're making gross generalizations and pretending that you can sufficiently assess the character of an individual based on one factor - and that your assessment of the character is necessarily relevant to their ability to perform the job.
Being in the KKK doesn't mean you necessarily advocate or commit murder - and vice versa. (Additionally, having committed murder does place you at a higher risk - which is why employers have a right to ask about criminal records - but we also have laws that protect felons from unfair discrimination, as well.)
eFree wrote:2.5) Is KKK a group of people with common 'beliefs' ONLY or a group that share a common PLAN OF ACTION to uphold their warped principles?
It doesn't matter. They have the right to their beliefs and to take action in accordance with those beliefs - until they infringe on the rights of someone else. You're allowed to believe that blacks should be exterminated, you're allowed to say that you believe this...until you actually take steps to do so, your rights are protected.
eFree wrote:You are all making me rethink my relatively pacifist views of 2nd amendment. maybe I need a weapon. I don't want to leave my 'rights' in your hands anymore. You won't come to my defense- but would defend the 'poor racist' who just wants to feed his white family.
Yes. I protect religious freedom - for everyone - because that's the only way to guarantee my own. I protect freedom of thought - for everyone - for the same reason.
You haven't demonstrated that being a member of the KKK is sufficient grounds to prevent you from hiring someone - you've simply shown that you disagree with their views and that you don't believe they could do a good job.
That sort of simple bigotry is something I'll oppose on all fronts.
3) Who made you judge of 'Moral High ground' That is my job:
One Last big thought -- you said:
If, as a member of the KKK, this individual takes actions that negatively affect their job performance and/or your bottom line - then you have a case. Not before...which is why you are not legally allowed to ask the question - which was the whole point.
He already did this, he joined KKK-- furthermore, some may view this like having someone put a gun to their head-- just the name KKK now carries a social sense of 'threat'. Do I have to wait for someone to shoot, before I know the guy with the gun to my head does not have my 'rights' in mind?
Please demonstrate that being a member of the KKK necessarily affects job performance.
Also, please stop exaggerating. Being a member of the KKK is nothing at all like having a gun to your head.
You simply asserted, without justification, that simply joining the KKK negatively impacts their job performance. You may as well have asserted that being a Christian, or an atheist, or white separatist, or a NAMBLA member, or a communist, or a socialist, or a dominionist should be sufficient grounds for disqualification.
We've established that you believe this is the case - I'm asking for justification.