BOP;3057762
Perhaps because the Sgt. worked with the officer day in and day out and knew the officer's beliefs better than you or me?
Or maybe it was the decedants agenda?
Do you have any information which suggested the decedant didn't? I didn't read anything in the article which suggested the eulogy was protested by the family?
How do you know this wasn't the wishes of the family, or decedant?
The Sgt. is suing the agency. I would suggest that facts related to his claim would be available through that lawsuit. I think you need to keep up sir! This thread is more about being able to have your own beliefs without bias and the right of free speech.
Try to keep up, sir. Why would he even do that at a, as part of a EULOGY?
Perhaps because the Sgt. worked with the officer day in and day out and knew the officer's beliefs better than you or me?
By so doing, the deliverer of the EULOGY was making it all about him and his belief system in front of what was basically a captive audience. He shifted the focus away from the deceased and the friends and family of the deceased, to his own agenda.
Or maybe it was the decedants agenda?
Unless (again) you or anyone else is somehow suggesting that sometime prior to his death, the decedent specifically said to his buddy, the Sgt "you know, if I happen to die before you, I want to have you deliver the eulogy, and by the way, please mention that I hated homosexuality and that people who engage in homosexual acts are going to burn in hell."
Do you have any information which suggested the decedant didn't? I didn't read anything in the article which suggested the eulogy was protested by the family?
Or however that played out. Use your imagination. Because unless that was specifically a request by the dearly departed, via a will, or by his family, it had no place at a funeral/memorial service. Why anyone would think that that venue is a proper time and place to rail against the sin-du-jour is simply beyond belief.
How do you know this wasn't the wishes of the family, or decedant?
Note that we haven't even talked about the sgt's allegedly being discriminated against for promotions and so on. There's no proof of any such thing mentioned in the article. I can only guess that if he was in fact passed up for promotions, assignments, and so on, it's probably on the basis that somebody felt that he might be a little mentally (specifically emotionally) unstable. Who does the kind of thing that he did at a funeral?
The Sgt. is suing the agency. I would suggest that facts related to his claim would be available through that lawsuit. I think you need to keep up sir! This thread is more about being able to have your own beliefs without bias and the right of free speech.