Muslim man who thinks gays are criminals rejected by NYPD

VMS

Victim of high standards and low personal skills.
Apr 26, 2006
10,309
2,650
586
#1
Link

Man Who Thinks Gays Are 'Criminals' Is Rejected By Police Academy, Sues NYPD For Discrimination

A man identified in court papers only as "Fahran Doe" is suing the NYPD, The New York Daily News reports, after he was rejected from entering the Police Academy for responding "Yes" on an application to the question "Should homosexuals be locked up?" In a follow up interview with a police psychiatrist, Doe affirmed his view, saying he thought gays were "criminals."

Doe, who's worked as an auxiliary cop in Brooklyn, is a Pakistani Muslim, and the lawsuit claims the NYPD discriminated against him for his religious views.

"The First Amendment is very clear," argued Doe's lawyer, Jerold Levine, in "saying that you can’t discriminate against someone because they have a view you do not like.”

While the NYPD could punish Doe for acting out on his views, Levine argued, they can't not hire him on the basis of his thoughts.

The NYPD argues, however, that Doe's "bias" could have “significant disruptive consequences” in dealing with the LGBT community, both inside and outside the force.

Meanwhile, debate over Doe's case took an Islamophobic turn on the NYPD free speech-comment board "NYPD Rant."

"Infiltration is our biggest weakness," one commenter wrote. "Gotta wonder if this was a blatant attempt by the rag heads to infiltrate our ranks. Surprisingly, common sense prevailed over political correctness in this case."

Another commenter agreed with the NYPD's decision on less inflammatory grounds.

"The "standard" in this case has nothing to do with anyone's religious views," the commenter wrote. "It has to do with this moron's inability to distinguish his "view" from the law. You can't hire someone to a law enforcement position who thinks that "homosexuals should be locked up." Next you thing you know he'll be calling the boss to the scene of a "collar" and telling the boss that the charge is "being a homosexual." "
Ok. But since when has message board opinion been something to add to a news article? Not as commentary by the public at the bottom of the page, but in the article itself?

Oh, and this Paki is probably just missing his sheep, living in NYC.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,824
18,546
513
Kingdom of Charis
#2
If your religious views are at odds with the laws of the country you live in, don't be a cop.
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,247
12,977
438
Atlanta, GA
#3
"Should homosexuals be locked up?"
I was kind of surprised by how bluntly and informally that question was worded. It's weird. As a joke, they should've asked "Do homosexuals deserve to die?" and given bonus points to anyone who answered "Yes they deserve to die and I hope they burn in Hell!"
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,824
18,546
513
Kingdom of Charis
#4
I was kind of surprised by how bluntly and informally that question was worded. It's weird. As a joke, they should've asked "Do homosexuals deserve to die?" and given bonus points to anyone who answered "Yes they deserve to die and I hope they burn in Hell!"
I bet it was something like: "Agree or Disagree with the following statement: 'Homosexuals should be locked up!'" Those questions are sometimes intentionally worded informally.


Here's what this guy doesn't understand, and why he is likely to fail: If he sees a gay couple making out, and they get attacked by some people, will he rush to defend them with the same urgency that he would if it was a properly modest Muslim couple who were attacked? If you tell a police interviewer that you think gays are criminals, it wouldn't be unreasonable for him to assume the answer to the above question would be "no."
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,247
12,977
438
Atlanta, GA
#6
I bet it was one of those Agree or Disagree with the following statement: "Homosexuals should be locked up!" Those questions are sometimes intentionally worded informally.
I'm not put off by it or anything. I just wasn't expecting it.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,824
18,546
513
Kingdom of Charis
#7
I'm not put off by it or anything. I just wasn't expecting it.
Yeah. Appears as though it worked like a charm, though. This is exactly the type of person a question like that is designed to weed out. Someone who is so religious that he doesn't understand the difference between his own beliefs and the system of law that he is meant to enforce as a member of the police.
 
Dec 8, 2004
49,456
21,278
693
Maine
#8
Perhaps he should join the Mutaween.

The Mutaween in Saudi Arabia are tasked with enforcing Sharia as defined by the government, specifically by the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (CPVPV). The Mutaween of the CPVPV consists of "more than 3,500 officers in addition to thousands of volunteers...often accompanied by a police escort." They have the power to arrest unrelated males and females caught socializing, anyone engaged in homosexual behavior or prostitution; to enforce Islamic dress-codes, and store closures during the prayer time. They enforce Muslim dietary laws, prohibit the consumption or sale of alcoholic beverages and pork, and seize banned consumer products and media regarded as anti-Islamic (such as CDs/DVDs of various Western musical groups, television shows and film which has material contrary to Sharia law or Islam itself).

Additionally, they actively prevent the practice or proselytizing of other religions within Saudi Arabia, where they are banned.[4][5]

Among the things the Mutaween have been criticized or ridiculed for include, use of flogging to punish violators,[6][7] banning Valentines Day gifts,[8][9] arresting priests for saying Mass,[10] and being staffed by "ex-convicts whose only job qualification was that they had memorized the Qur'an in order to reduce their sentences."[11]

Perhaps the most serious and widely criticized incident attributed to them occurred on March 11, 2002, when they prevented schoolgirls from escaping a burning school in Mecca, because the girls were not wearing headscarves and abayas (black robes), and not accompanied by a male guardian. Fifteen girls died and 50 were injured as a result. Widespread public criticism followed, both internationally and within Saudi Arabia.[12]

In June 2007 the Saudi Mutaween announced "the creation of a 'department of rules and regulations' to ensure the activities of commission members comply with the law, after coming under heavy pressure for the death of two people in its custody in less than two weeks".[13]
 

CousinDave

Registered User
Dec 11, 2007
25,297
198
393
Ohio
#9
This is obvious discrimination against Muslims
 

ShooterMcGavin

Go back to your shanties.
May 25, 2005
18,029
1,380
643
#11
This is obvious discrimination against Muslims
He'll probably claim that he wasn't hired because of his "beliefs" and sue the NYPD

EDIT: Wow, just clicked the link. That's exactly what happened.
 

mascan42

Registered User
Aug 26, 2002
19,040
5,840
848
Ronkonkoma, Long Island
#12
"The First Amendment is very clear," argued Doe's lawyer, Jerold Levine, in "saying that you can’t discriminate against someone because they have a view you do not like.”
They can if your view is in direct opposition to the job you're applying for, idiot. And BTW, the First Amendment says nothing of the sort.
 

KRSOne

Registered User
Dec 8, 2011
13,127
3,031
258
Sunnydale
#13
If your religious views are at odds with the laws of the country you live in, don't be a cop.
What about non religious? Like if you refuse to arrest someone for committing a victimless crime?
 

ShooterMcGavin

Go back to your shanties.
May 25, 2005
18,029
1,380
643
#15
What about non religious? Like if you refuse to arrest someone for committing a victimless crime?
You really think you have the mentality of a hero don't you faggot?
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,623
5,081
568
Wyoming
#16
But since when has message board opinion been something to add to a news article?
When the "news" outlet is Huffington.

It comes down to one thing. This guy doesn't know the law. Being gay is legal. He's not qualified for the job.