North Carolina state employee forced to retire for refusing to honor Jesse Helms.
North Carolina state employee forced to retire for refusing to honor Jesse Helms.
L.F. Eason, a 29-year veteran of the North Carolina Department of Agriculture, “instructed his staff at a small Raleigh lab not to fly the U.S. or North Carolina flags at half-staff Monday” to honor the late senator Jesse Helms, “as called for in a directive to all state agencies by Gov. Mike Easley.” In a string of e-mail messages with his superiors, Eason was told he could either lower the flags or retire effective immediately. Here is Eason’s reasoning for his decision to retire:
This is in no way a political decision. I simply do not feel it is appropriate to honor a person whose epitaph of government service was to have voted against or blocked every civil rights issue that came before the US Congress. His doctrine of negativity, hate, and prejudice cost North Carolina and our Nation much that we may never regain.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
L.F. Eason, I salute you!
PSSST, wanna run for office?
July 9th, 2008 at 2:25 pmdamn right! now lets get rid of DOLE….
July 9th, 2008 at 2:25 pmEason is an amazing person and a noble citizen. Period. standing for ones beliefs is what this nation is about!
July 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pmMr Eason! You are awesome. Thanks.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:33 pmBravo, Mr. Eason! Thank you for taking a principled stand against racism, hatred and bigotry!!
July 9th, 2008 at 2:34 pmAn honorable position to hold, but if the governor ordered flags to be lowered he should have done it. Keep in mind, this could just as easily be a state employee refusing the governor’s decree to lower flags for Rosa Parks based on their own particular convictions.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:36 pmTo paraphrase the good Gov. Easley, “By God, North Carolina stands for negativity, hate, and prejudice. You do as I say or you dishonor our great state!”
July 9th, 2008 at 2:37 pmThe flags in North Carolina should have been lowered until Jessie Helms died, not after.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:38 pmDvlsAdvocat Says:
So, to be racist is OK, but to fight it is not?
Guess we know which side of that coin you come up on!
July 9th, 2008 at 2:38 pmDon’t want to make the mistake of painting with a broad brush, but states like NC keep their progressives under a rock, don’t they?
At least L.F. Eason wasn’t going to play a role in allowing NC to be viewed as regressive.
It only takes one sun to shine.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:40 pmNice to know that someone in government still has some morals. I was beginning to become rather cynical.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:42 pmupside99 Says:
——————————————————————————–
DvlsAdvocat Says:
So, to be racist is OK, but to fight it is not?
No, he/she is just saying there is no difference between a freedom fighter, and one who fights freedom.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:42 pmDvlsAdvocat Says:
An honorable position to hold, but if the governor ordered flags to be lowered he should have done it.
Not if his conscience doesn’t allow it. I thought really moral people, like Christians, always believed it was essential to “witness” their beliefs, so this isn’t anything different than that.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:44 pmGuess we know which side of that coin you come up on!
You would be completely wrong on that point. The flags didn’t belong to Mr. Eason, they are the property of the state and under the authority of the governor they should have been (and hours later were) lowered.
I admire Mr. Eason’s convictions, but to play Devil’s Advocate, what if a state employee refuses to lower the flags for Jimmy Carter or Barney Frank because he couldn’t stand the positions they took in office and after?
It was a lawful decree to honor a former state senator. Helms disgusts me personally, but the same people who elected him elected the governor.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:46 pmNot if his conscience doesn’t allow it. I thought really moral people, like Christians, always believed it was essential to “witness” their beliefs, so this isn’t anything different than that.
I don’t know about you, but I’d prefer to not have anyone “witness” their personal beliefs to me through any action they take as government employees. I’d prefer they simply execute the duties they are assigned, by the law, and work in their personal time against whatever social ills they see in the world around them.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:51 pmBravo to Mr. Eason for being willing to sacrifice his job to point out that the “sainted” Jesse Helms was a hard core racist from start to finish. The fact that the state of North Carolina was willing to lose a valued employee rather than face up to that inconvenient truth says all you really need to know about that pathetic cracker box.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:54 pmAh, yes, DvlsAdvocat – they should be Good Germans and just follow orders, right…?
Shut up, you ass. Just …shut …up.
July 9th, 2008 at 2:57 pmSenate! Take notice! This is what patriotism is all about.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:00 pmWow, do you think we could persuade him to run for Congress? We sure could use men of principle like him there.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:00 pmDvlsAdvocat Says:
An honorable position to hold, but if the governor ordered flags to be lowered he should have done it. Keep in mind, this could just as easily be a state employee refusing the governor’s decree to lower flags for Rosa Parks based on their own particular convictions.
Then they should have been given the same option. If their principle was bigotry, then they would have retired.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:01 pmwhat if a state employee refuses to lower the flags for Jimmy Carter or Barney Frank because he couldn’t stand the positions they took in office and after?
Couldn’t care less.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:02 pmMissHMolly, is this guy related to you>?
July 9th, 2008 at 3:02 pmYou bet. lowering a flag is the moral equivalent of gassing millions of Jews. Hyperbole much? People here are making the same using thought process that guides fundamentalist christians who want religion in schools. They love the idea of teaching THEIR religion, but abhor the idea of teaching someone else’s faith. Thats why I keep asking how you would react to a government official not following instructions to lower the flag for a liberal politician because he PERSONALLY objected to their policies? Would you applaud his convictions then? I wouldn’t, and I don’t applaud Mr. Eason’s actions, although his PERSONAL feeling are quite laudable.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:03 pmbarfly Says:
DvlsAdvocat Says:
An honorable position to hold, but if the governor ordered flags to be lowered he should have done it.
Not if his conscience doesn’t allow it. I thought really moral people, like Christians, always believed it was essential to “witness” their beliefs, so this isn’t anything different than that.
You’re right. It’s no different than a pharmacist who is an evangelical refusing to dispense birth control medication. The difference is the pharmacist is allowed to get away with it.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:03 pmDvlsAdvocat Says:
I don’t know about you, but I’d prefer to not have anyone “witness” their personal beliefs to me through any action they take as government employees. I’d prefer they simply execute the duties they are assigned, by the law, and work in their personal time against whatever social ills they see in the world around them.
So how would this person’s morality have affected you? He was willing to sacrifice his job for something he believed in. That’s much more than people of your ilk are willing to do. But that’s probably because you have no morals and no belief systems other than your worship of the almighty dollar.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:06 pmDvlsAdvocat Says:
I don’t know about you, but I’d prefer to not have anyone “witness” their personal beliefs to me through any action they take as government employees.
So I guess that means that you are against pharmacists being allowed to refuse to dispense birth control medications because of their religious beliefs.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:07 pmI admire Mr. Eason’s convictions, but to play Devil’s Advocate, what if a state employee refuses to lower the flags for Jimmy Carter or Barney Frank because he couldn’t stand the positions they took in office and after?
-DvlsAdvocat
If they felt so strongly about it, they can choose to retire too and hopefully are shunned by their community.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:12 pmSo how would this person’s morality have affected you? He was willing to sacrifice his job for something he believed in. That’s much more than people of your ilk are willing to do. But that’s probably because you have no morals and no belief systems other than your worship of the almighty dollar.
?????????????????? What on Earth are you talking about? You don’t know me in the slightest, and are making ridiculous assumptions about me based on this non-issue. The flag was still lowered. He made a foolish choice, even if his stance was honorable.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:12 pmThe comparison to the pharmacist who refuses to dispense birth control medication is dead on. I object to them imposing their personal beliefs into their professional responsibility to provide medication. The fact they are “allowed” to do just that doesn’t make it right.
The flag was still lowered. He made a foolish choice, even if his stance was honorable.
-DvlsAdvocat
The choice was honorable and the stance honorable.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:15 pmThere is no honor in bigotry, and there is no honor in honoring bigots.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:24 pmFlying government flags at half-staff should not be dependent upon the political opinions of the employees flying them. Or their supervisors. Presidents, governors, senators, congressmen and women, etc. all get flags at half-staff when they die (government flags, that is — private flags can be flown at the whim of the owner). Regardless of the job they did. Regardless of how many enemies they made. Regardless of whether they made the world a better place or a worse one. If we allow that decision to be made by the individual controlling any given flagpole based on his political views, then the half-staff flag becomes a political statement (which it should not be).
That said however, I can understand the convictions of L.F. Eason, and I agree with every word of his assessment of the late senator. If I was in a position to hire him, I would, if he needs a post-retirement job.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:24 pmmisshusseinmolly
Yes. This ^^^^^^^ is exactly what I’m talking about.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:25 pmMaking an honorable choice is NEVER foolish.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:28 pmEason was told he could either lower the flags or retire effective immediately.
Because that’s what we do here in the land of the free and home of the brave. We punish anyone who shows any bravery or respect to freedom.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
July 9th, 2008 at 3:29 pmIf we allow that decision to be made by the individual controlling any given flagpole based on his political views, then the half-staff flag becomes a political statement (which it should not be).
-misshusseinmolly
The alternative was honoring a racist and the guy couldn’t do that.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:34 pmRUCerious Says
July 9th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
MissHMolly, is this guy related to you?
___________________________________________________________
Nope — unfortunately, I don’t even know the man. But if the News & Observer had mentioned where in Raleigh this particular lab was, I would go there and post a sign cheering this guy.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:37 pmHey TP, want to start an online retirement fund for the guy?
July 9th, 2008 at 3:39 pmPardon me if someone has already said this, but he was not forced to retire. He chose to retire as TP later says, “Here is Eason’s reasoning for his decision to retire…”
Eason is 51. And unless he has another job waiting, in this economy, this is misguided passion.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:41 pmWow, a southern state gubbermint employee with the ‘nads to stand for his convictions.
As for the tripe from ‘misshusseinmolly’, the employee has as much choice as those issuing the order to follow it or not. L.F. Eason made the correct and honorable choice. Bless him!
Jesse Helms was a racist, bigoted, hate monger, and may he rot in hell.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:46 pmNat Says
July 9th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
The alternative was honoring a racist and the guy couldn’t do that.
_____________________________________________________________
Which I understand. He made a choice, accepted the consequences, and I respect that.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:48 pmBloggerRadio.com Says
July 9th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
Wow, a southern state gubbermint employee with the ‘nads to stand for his convictions.
As for the tripe from ‘misshusseinmolly’, the employee has as much choice as those issuing the order to follow it or not. L.F. Eason made the correct and honorable choice. Bless him!
Jesse Helms was a racist, bigoted, hate monger, and may he rot in hell.
______________________________________________________________
No argument from me on anything you said about Eason or Helms.
Eason did make an honorable choice, and he paid the price for it willingly. People often stand up for what they believe in when there’s a penalty involved, and that’s civil disobedience.
If you are suggesting that he should have been allowed to make his choice without penalty, that’s a different matter.
July 9th, 2008 at 3:56 pmnanlichi Says
July 9th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
To paraphrase the good Gov. Easley, “By God, North Carolina stands for negativity, hate, and prejudice. You do as I say or you dishonor our great state!”
_____________________________________________________________
No, Governor Easley is a Democrat and no fan of Jesse Helms or his politics. He ordered the flags at half-staff because it’s traditional to do so for someone who served as U.S. Senator.
If Easley had taken the position of, “Helms is dead, but he was a loathesome human being so keep the flags at full staff,” this would set a precedent that would effectively allow any future governor to decide whether or not to lower flags based on his personal whims.
Or if he had said, “just do what you want — fly at half-staff, fly at full-staff, or don’t fly at all,” this would politicize the process by allowing the controller of each individual government flag to make his own political statement.
I’m having enough problems with the politicization of our federal government — I don’t want to see that here in my state.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:12 pmHere is another local article about it.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:28 pmThe Devil:
July 9th, 2008 at 4:31 pm‘Jesse, I’d like you to meet Mr. Reagan & Mr. Falwell…
ATTENTION WINGNUTS
this is an actual example of REAL political incorrectness.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:32 pmI’m in complete agreement with misshusseinmolly. Where would Eason’s type of stand, based on personal views, happen next? Would the State Highway Department head chose not to pave roads that run in front of abortion clinics? Injecting your personal views into how you run your department is why we have the Dept. of Justice debacle we’re in now.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:34 pmONE ethical person in government and they get the boot….figures.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:34 pmJesse Helms is the Tom DeLay equivalent of the Senate. At least, Jesse will not run again! We are still at risk from this DeLay fellow until he overdoses on bug spray.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:50 pmUn freakin real. Not only was the man deprived of his livelihood because of a political statement, but, we have so-called Americans defending it.
And we’re still at war with Eurasia.
July 9th, 2008 at 4:59 pmpete Says:
…we have so-called Americans defending it.
Betcha there aren’t any African-Americans defending it.
July 9th, 2008 at 5:29 pmHe wasn’t deprived of anything, he resigned. Of course, he could easily HAVE been deprived of his job, and the state would have been in the right to do it. If i tell my boss I refuse to work on my current project because I object to the treatment of Kosovo by Serbia, I’d be kicked to the curb.
I guarantee you that this site would be in near total opposition if the guy was a Right wing Christian who had refused to fly the flag for Ted Kennedy if he were to die from his brain cancer.
He should have written an editorial to the newspaper, on his own time, if he wanted to air his personal views on the racist Jesse Helms.
July 9th, 2008 at 5:30 pmDvlsAdvocat Says:
I guarantee you that this site would be in near total opposition if the guy was a Right wing Christian who had refused to fly the flag for Ted Kennedy if he were to die from his brain cancer.
This highlights the problem with always being a “devils advocate”. Your moral equivalence knows no bounds. Sometimes a devil does not deserve an advocate.
Ted Kennedy has always fought for the rights of minority Americans.
Jessie Helms always fought the rights of minority Americans.
There is no comparison.
July 9th, 2008 at 6:04 pmHe most certainly was deprived of his livelihood you silly dolt. And he didn’t refuse to do his job. He made a political statement. No different than wearing an “I Like Ike” button.
And your prognostications fail. I have defended the politically incorrect since before the term was coined and have never been a fan of Sen. Kennedy. If, when the time comes, someone decided to not dip their flag? I would support them as vehemently as Mr. Eason.
July 9th, 2008 at 6:07 pmAccording to flag protocol only the President (in this case the completely useless GW Botch) can call for the American flag to fly at half-mast.
So the Gov is out of line!!
AND NO FLAG IN THE WORLD SHOULD EVER DIP OR WAVER FOR THIS FASCIST, RACIST, JESSE (I HATE THE NEGROS) HELMS!!! PERIOD!
July 9th, 2008 at 6:42 pmNot to mention, dixie, that even a legitimate violation of flag protocol is not grounds for termination. I really can’t wait for the court cases on this one. I have the feeling that the rednecks won’t fare well if they go to trial.
July 9th, 2008 at 6:54 pm______
pete Says:
He most certainly was deprived of his livelihood you silly dolt. And he didn’t refuse to do his job. He made a political statement. No different than wearing an “I Like Ike” button.
And your prognostications fail. I have defended the politically incorrect since before the term was coined and have never been a fan of Sen. Kennedy. If, when the time comes, someone decided to not dip their flag? I would support them as vehemently as Mr. Eason.
July 9th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
______
He wasn’t fired, he chose to retire. He deprived himself of his livelihood. No one told him to agree with his job, just to do it.
“Though he’s only 51, Eason chose to retire…”
“Several people, including his wife, argued to Eason that the flags belonged to the state, as did the lab. But Eason said he felt a strong sense of ownership.”
He felt like it was his lab. It belongs to the state. The flag is not flown to honor people at his pleasure.
July 9th, 2008 at 7:16 pmSure UL. And Nixon resigned to spend time with his family.
My guess is that Mr. Eason has a fair understanding of his legal standing and will make the people who made the decision live to regret it. Even if there is clause in his contract about the flag I doubt such a clause would stand in court. I hope he enjoys his early retirement and gets his job back, if he wants, though I doubt he will lack for offers.
July 9th, 2008 at 7:32 pmUL just looooves being stoooopid!
Like Exlaxley and Mighty A$$holeAmighty and the other morons whom parade through here like little Cub Scouts in Mommy’s makeup and panty hose!
July 9th, 2008 at 7:40 pmdixie blood: According to flag protocol only the President (in this case the completely useless GW Botch) can call for the American flag to fly at half-mast.
So the Gov is out of line!!
If you are going to make an argument, at least make an attempt at gathering the facts. According to flag protocol: Only the President and state Governors can decide when and how long the flag should be flown at half-staff.
So the governor was not “out of line” to decree the flag to be flown at half-mast at all state offices….like the one Mr. Eason worked in. Its not “his” flag nor “his” office to decide which decrees from the governor he will and will not abide by, at least without the reality of possible consequences.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:05 pmGood on you, L.F. Eason, good on you.
July 9th, 2008 at 9:37 pmThe whole concept of freedom is wasted on these silly tits. I don’t suppose it occurs to our Constitutional scholars that the employers could have sought to redress the issue with a, one day, unpaid suspension?
July 9th, 2008 at 10:12 pmMr. Eason’s freedom is not even relevant to this episode. He had the freedom to speak about his concerns to the media, write a letter to the governor or newspaper, freely meet with like-minded individuals, or petition the government to change the policy, ON HIS OWN TIME. His freedom of speech doesn’t extend to the management of the offices under his purview.
July 9th, 2008 at 11:07 pmI think a lot of people do the wrong thing for the right reason. This gentleman thought he was doing the right thing, but not to comply with what he felt was a legal directive, was the wrong thing to do. For those who disagree, not a problem, that is why we have dialogue; to get different viewpoints out on the table for discussion. He chose an emotional response, which is inappropriate for a government employee.
July 9th, 2008 at 11:12 pmEvery government agency has avenues for addressing your grievances. I hope for his family and any who are depending on his salary and benefits, that he had other options available. Pride and principle can sometimes be blurred. He could have chosen to put himself on leave that day, and address the situation through normal channels. An all or nothing position results far too often in the “nothing”.
The last line in the position description for practically any government job will state, “…and all other tasks deemed necessary by those appointed over this employee”. I’ve never read one which says, “… and all tasks which the employee is in political agreement with!”
Have a nice day.
people can get fired for not lowering a flag?! devil’s advocate, even if you think that refusing to lower the flag for a bigot is equivelant to refusing to do so for civil rights champions, dont you think the punishment is a bit harsh? i’m still pissed that people can loose their job for smoking weed. people should get fired based on their inability to perform their job functions, not by their political views.
Also, Mr.Eason is my hero!
July 9th, 2008 at 11:26 pmneopro Says: people can get fired for not lowering a flag?! devil’s advocate, even if you think that refusing to lower the flag for a bigot is equivelant to refusing to do so for civil rights champions, dont you think the punishment is a bit harsh?
But he wasn’t fired. The article said he was offered the option of lowering the flag as directed or resigning his position. This may be construed as the equivalent of being fired, but he could have saved his job by lowering the flag which he had to know would be lowered within minutes of his resignation. (and it was)
July 9th, 2008 at 11:41 pm______
dixie blood Says:
UL just looooves being stoooopid!
Like Exlaxley and Mighty A$$holeAmighty and the other morons whom parade through here like little Cub Scouts in Mommy’s makeup and panty hose!
July 9th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
______
Evening dix! Having a good day? ;)
July 9th, 2008 at 11:41 pmAn employer, private or public, can not require an employee to display grief or respect for anyone any more than they may require one to vote for a preferred candidate. The ownership of the flag and premises has nothing to do with it. Politics has little to with it.
It was demanded that he participate in a public display of affection for someone. Giving him no other option but to lose his employment was illegal on many levels. And if one wants to play the hypothetical game, how about if OBL were killed and Chinpy demanded that flags fly at half mast to show respect for a fallen enemy? Castro? How about one of his numerous Saudi lovers?
But back to real world events… even the local Reich Radio fool, who happens to be a lawyer by training, is behind this guy. And comments I’ve heard and read elsewhere lead me to believe no court in the land would enforce this forced retirement. And that has nothing to do with any feelings about Helms’s politics. It’s a founding principle of our national identity.
Hump the flag all you want, I can’t find anything that would justify ending the career of someone over it’s flying. His boss could order his subordinates to comply (and they could respectfully decline), or they could have, as I pointed out earlier, “suspended” him for the day and probably end up repaying him plus possible punitive damages.
Instead they decided to make his career contingent on following an arbitrary order. That’s almost always a clear cut case of wrongful dismissal. Legions of civil lawyers have gotten rich making very simple arguments against arbitrary orders.
When you top that with the Constitutional aspects? I can guarantee that there are armies of ACLU lawyers preparing cases as we speak and waiting for the nod. The consensus among lawyers I’ve seen and heard comment on this case is that Mr. Eason could probably win rights to his ex-boss’s job, savings, and firstborn son. And I would bet a good deal that at least one of his ex-boss’s bosses has explained at great volume how stupid this was.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:04 am______
neopro Says:
people can get fired for not lowering a flag?! devil’s advocate, even if you think that refusing to lower the flag for a bigot is equivelant to refusing to do so for civil rights champions, dont you think the punishment is a bit harsh? i’m still pissed that people can loose their job for smoking weed. people should get fired based on their inability to perform their job functions, not by their political views.
Also, Mr.Eason is my hero!
July 9th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
July 10th, 2008 at 12:05 am______
He wasn’t fired. He was lucky he was allowed to retire rather than be fired since he chose not to do his job. The U.S. flag on a state building isn’t the personal political statement of the individual in charge of raising it.
______
pete Says:
It was demanded that he participate in a public display of affection for someone.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:04 am
______
No it wasn’t. He wasn’t the person who put up the flag every day. It would have been someone that he supervised who did it.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:10 amHiding one’s ignorance behind semantics lends nothing to an argument. If Mr Eason’s ex-boss has competent legal council, Mr Eason will have his job back by noon tomorrow. If not? The lawsuit will begin.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:21 am______
pete Says:
Hiding one’s ignorance behind semantics lends nothing to an argument.
July 10th, 2008 at 12:21 am
______
So you’ll stop? ;)
July 10th, 2008 at 1:02 amI applaud him too…..what a patriot!!!
I just drove through Smithfield, the home of the KKK of NC and much to my amazement saw a confederate flag along the highway flying at half-mast! What a sick country we live in.
July 10th, 2008 at 9:35 amMr. Eason:
I applaud you and admire you. Standing for principle is the direction in which we need to go and you are a leader.
I wish you happiness and good fortune,
Michael Redford
July 10th, 2008 at 10:11 amI may be guessing here but did not the people of this fair state elect Helms to office all those years. The time to challenge him is not in death, but when he was alive and could defend himself. And I would also hazard a guess that there are a few federal projects that took place in NC at the behest of Mr. Helms. And these would have been for the betterment of the state. I can not comment on Mr. Helms record, because I don’t know it. It was not the govenor that was honoring Helms it was the state. The govenors actions were not political but Mr. Eason’s were. I would imagine that by now Mr. Eason has his job back and all parties have apologized to each other, as they should.
July 20th, 2008 at 8:56 am