"Dallas cop punished over Chick-fil-A sandwich incident"

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Aug 2, 2009
24,574
4,262
113
#2
You know what, it seems like if you want to have your way in this world all you have to do is be gay and use it to your advantage. You can't be insulted, fired, looked at the wrong way, maybe even not-hired, or be within earshot or eyeshot of anything that might be interpreted by you as offensive. Too be we can't lie about our sexual orientation.
 

Justcuz

Banned: 13 forum posts with blatant lies about CC
Jul 6, 2012
172
1
0
#4
You know what, it seems like if you want to have your way in this world all you have to do is be gay and use it to your advantage. You can't be insulted, fired, looked at the wrong way, maybe even not-hired, or be within earshot or eyeshot of anything that might be interpreted by you as offensive. Too be we can't lie about our sexual orientation.
actually there are some down sides to being gay too, like having to sleep with men, ew :D
 
T

TheGrungeDiva

Guest
#5
Terrible journalism. The cop was NOT "punish" over a sandwich.

1) Police are frequently scheduled to work different shifts. It is not uncommon for someone to be switched from a day shift to a night shift for no reason than that the boss needs someone to work that shift and your number came up. The article doesn't even say definitively that the shift change was a punishment at all.

2) IF it was a "punishment," it is clear that the infraction was the "words" that were "spoken with two lesbian officers." What the officer may or may not have said is what the issue, not the sandwich. I can easily see two possible scenarios, either of which is possible:

Perhaps the officer came in, sat down, ready to enjoy his delicious chicken sandwich, and two lesbian officers started yelling at him "You homophobe! How dare you eat something from Chick-Fil-A!" Why he was eating in the briefing room instead of the lunch room I don't know -- maybe at this particular station, the briefing room is also the lunch room. But that is certainly a possible scenario, and the one the journalist is trying to paint this into.

Equally possible, however:
During the morning's briefing, a time when officers are not supposed to be eating, but paying attention, this particular officer brought in his Chick-Fil-A bag and made a big deal about how proud he was to eat a sandwich made by good, Christian, values that know all gays are going to hell. Perhaps he was aware that two of his fellow officers were lesbians, and even made some derogatory comments to them. I'm not saying that this is how it happened, but it could have been, and the article says nothing that contradicts such a scenario.

More likely, it was somewhere in between the two extreme stories above. The only question is, is the reporter just really bad, or is he or she purposely leaving out important facts of the story to twist it, spin it to a certain point of view? Honestly, I don't know. Sometimes, I see so much incompetence I can't tell when it's genuine and when it's just an excuse for rude behavior.
 
Aug 2, 2009
24,574
4,262
113
#6
A quote from the article:

"The officers alleged in a complaint that Johnson embarrassed them, and the department moved him to a midnight shift. "

That sounds close enough to being a punishment to me. I'm not saying there is no chance that the shift change had nothing to do with the verbal exchange that took place between the officers, but I think that sentence leaves little room for doubt that it was a direct result of the complaint against the officer.
 
V

violakat

Guest
#7
Terrible journalism. The cop was NOT "punish" over a sandwich.

1) Police are frequently scheduled to work different shifts. It is not uncommon for someone to be switched from a day shift to a night shift for no reason than that the boss needs someone to work that shift and your number came up. The article doesn't even say definitively that the shift change was a punishment at all.

2) IF it was a "punishment," it is clear that the infraction was the "words" that were "spoken with two lesbian officers." What the officer may or may not have said is what the issue, not the sandwich. I can easily see two possible scenarios, either of which is possible:

Perhaps the officer came in, sat down, ready to enjoy his delicious chicken sandwich, and two lesbian officers started yelling at him "You homophobe! How dare you eat something from Chick-Fil-A!" Why he was eating in the briefing room instead of the lunch room I don't know -- maybe at this particular station, the briefing room is also the lunch room. But that is certainly a possible scenario, and the one the journalist is trying to paint this into.

Equally possible, however:
During the morning's briefing, a time when officers are not supposed to be eating, but paying attention, this particular officer brought in his Chick-Fil-A bag and made a big deal about how proud he was to eat a sandwich made by good, Christian, values that know all gays are going to hell. Perhaps he was aware that two of his fellow officers were lesbians, and even made some derogatory comments to them. I'm not saying that this is how it happened, but it could have been, and the article says nothing that contradicts such a scenario.

More likely, it was somewhere in between the two extreme stories above. The only question is, is the reporter just really bad, or is he or she purposely leaving out important facts of the story to twist it, spin it to a certain point of view? Honestly, I don't know. Sometimes, I see so much incompetence I can't tell when it's genuine and when it's just an excuse for rude behavior.
While I agree we don't know the whole story, and probably never will, the man interviewed in the video attached with the story, who is doing the internal investigation claimed that the officer did not get a full hearing but instead was quiet possible punished over bringing a sandwich. He specifically states that is the way it is looking. But he is also looking into the matter over the alleged comments the male officer made.

And by the way GrungeDiva, Scenario B did occur to me while I was reading the article.
 
T

TheGrungeDiva

Guest
#8
A quote from the article:

"The officers alleged in a complaint that Johnson embarrassed them, and the department moved him to a midnight shift. "

That sounds close enough to being a punishment to me. I'm not saying there is no chance that the shift change had nothing to do with the verbal exchange that took place between the officers, but I think that sentence leaves little room for doubt that it was a direct result of the complaint against the officer.
That all depends on the journalist. If this is simply a case of incompetence, I agree with you.

If this is a case of the writer trying to create a controversy where there was none, I could see how that sentence could be 100% true, and yet the shift-change not being a punishment. Heck, Johnson could have REQUESTED the shift change!

There's a famous example of this kind of journalism from back when the Soviet Union was the Soviet Union. In its newspaper _Pravda_ (Russian for "Truth"), it was reported:

"In a great long-distance race, the Soviet runner came in 2nd, and the American runner had to settle for 2nd-to-last."

Of course, what they left out was that there were only two runners in the race.

Like I said: is it simple incompetence or purposeful spinning? I don't know.
 
T

TheGrungeDiva

Guest
#9
was quiet possible punished over bringing a sandwich.
And there's another possibility: would he have gotten in just as much trouble if it was a home-mad peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwich? Is the crime "eating in the briefing room?"

And by the way GrungeDiva, Scenario B did occur to me while I was reading the article.
Of course it did. That's because you're smart :)