Judge Rules Partly in Favor, Partly Against Chief Fired Over Book Calling Homosexuality ‘Perversion’

ATLANTA — A federal judge has ruled that the policies that led to a Georgia fire chief’s firing are unconstitutional, but also found that the City of Atlanta was justified in regard to its decision to terminate his employment because of the public controversy his initial suspension caused.

Judge Leigh Martin May, appointed to the bench by then-President Barack Obama, ruled on Wednesday that the City of Atlanta did not discriminate against Chief Kelvin Cochran’s religious beliefs when it fired him following an investigation into a complaint about a book he wrote that mentioned homosexuality on one page.

She rather found that the investigation led to a public uproar from both sides of the issue, and the uproar led to Cochran’s firing because the matter was deemed disruptive to the City.

“The Court … finds that the actual disruption in this matter, and the context in which it arose, support the City’s firing decision. Plaintiff’s book was brought to the City’s attention in late 2014 when LGBT rights, and specifically gay marriage, were hotly debated in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s consideration of Obergefell v. Hodges,” May wrote.

“It is undisputed that Plaintiff accepted support of a social media campaign aimed at reversing his suspension, which led to Mayor Reed receiving thousands of emails, both for and against Plaintiff’s suspension,” she continued. “Mayor Reed also received phone calls to his home in which he was called a racial slur, the Antichrist, and a terrorist. Some calls even included death threats.”

Therefore, because of the public outrage surrounding his suspension, “Plaintiff’s speech caused such an actual and possible disruption that it does not warrant First Amendment protection in the workplace, based upon Supreme Court and Eleventh Circuit precedent,” May deduced.

“As a private citizen, [Plaintiff] is perfectly free to preach vigorously and robustly that homosexuality is a sin. But he did not enjoy that same unrestrained freedom while he occupied the important and prestigious office of a [fire chief],” she asserted, quoting from case law. “Plaintiff was also not entitled to exercise his free speech rights in the workplace when there is a ‘[r]easonable possibility of adverse harm.’”

  • Connect with Christian News

However, May found that Atlanta’s policies requiring prior approval before becoming involved in outside “employment,” including publishing a book, were problematic because they were both underinclusive and overinclusive.

“This policy would prevent an employee from writing and selling a book on golf or badminton on his own time and, without prior approval, would subject him to firing.” May wrote. “It is unclear to the court how such an outside employment would ever affect the City’s ability to function, and the City provides no evidence to justify it.”

“[T]he provision that requires Plaintiff to seek pre-approval from the board of ethics does not define any standards for the board to apply,” she also noted. “… This ultimately could result in inconsistent results and does not provide the board any standards to use in defining what a ‘conflict’ would be, assuming the purpose is the relevant standard.”

As previously reported, Chief Kelvin Cochran was fired in 2014 after being suspended for one month and placed under investigation as to whether he violated city policy or engaged in discrimination by publishing the book “Who Told You That You Were Naked?”

The book, available on Amazon, is centered on God’s question to Adam following his disobedience in the Garden of Eden, and parallels the matter with those who are now “clothed in Christ.” It was compiled as a result of a number of lesson plans that he had prepared over time for men’s Bible study groups.

While “Who Told You That You Were Naked” was published in 2013, it was reportedly not until November 2014 that Atlanta employees complained to Mayor Reed about its content.

“Uncleanness [is] whatever is opposite of purity; including sodomy, homosexuality, lesbianism, pederasty, bestiality, all other forms of sexual perversion,” Cochran wrote. “Naked men refuse to give in, so they pursue sexual fulfillment through multiple partners, with the opposite sex, the same sex and sex outside of marriage and many other vile, vulgar and inappropriate ways which defile their body-temple and dishonor God.”

But it wasn’t Cochran’s writings against sexual perversion that got him into hot water; it was the fact that he included homosexuality among those behaviors that are cited as being “vile,” “vulgar” and “inappropriate.” The text was included on just one page out of the entire 160-plus page book, which does not center on homosexuality.

Following the receipt of a complaint over the quote, Mayor Kasim Reed placed Cochran on a one-month suspension while an investigation went forward. Shortly after he returned to work, Reed decided to terminate the fire chief over the publication.

He alleged at a press conference shortly after the beginning of the new year that his decision had nothing to do with freedom or speech or religion, stating that Cochran was fired because he had not obtained approval from officials to publish the book. Reed also stated that he thought the chief could present legal liabilities for the city.

But Cochran said the he indeed did seek out the ethics officer prior to publishing the book, and not only was he granted permission to proceed, but he was also allowed to include in his biography that he served as the fire chief of Atlanta. He said that he gave a copy of the publication to Reed in January 2014—nearly a year before the controversy erupted—and was told by the mayor that he would read it.

Shortly after his firing, Cochran filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission, alleging a violation of Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act, and a month later, attorneys for Cochran filed a federal lawsuit against Reed and the City of Atlanta, asserting violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

On Wednesday, both Cochran’s attorneys and the City of Atlanta expressed satisfaction over the areas in which they succeeded.

“We are pleased that Judge Leigh Martin May ruled today that Mayor Reed acted lawfully and appropriately in terminating Mr. Cochran’s employment,” said City attorney Jeremy Berry. “This lawsuit was never about religious beliefs or the First Amendment. Rather, it is an employment matter involving an executive in charge of more than 1,100 firefighters and tasked to lead by example.”

“The government can’t force its employees to get its permission before engaging in free speech,” also remarked Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) Senior Counsel Kevin Theriot. “In addition, as the court found, the city can’t leave such decisions to the whims of government officials. This ruling benefits not only Chief Cochran, but also other employees who want to write books or speak about matters unrelated to work. Atlanta can no longer force them to get permission or deny them permission just because certain officials disagree with the views expressed.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Lydia Church

    It IS a sin of perversion, and I have the right to say that, whether it be in a book or a conversation or otherwise. To try to deter that is what a totalitarian dictatorship in favor of gays would do, who hate Christians and God’s standard of righteousness. To persecute Christians in this way is tyranny that is totally against God’s law and the Constitution. But it just goes to show what direction the tide is moving in, as I have warned many times prior, persecution against us is coming… and in many ways is already here. By the way, in the end we (the Christians) win. But you need to read God’s Word, the final chapter, to see that, later you will see it anyway but perhaps not from the right side of the bleachers.

  • cadcoke5

    It seems like this court order is justifying the firing of an employee because he failed to keep his Christian faith secret. And while publishing a book is certainly going to generate more public awareness, just talking with your neighbor about Jesus is in essence the same thing. It is only a matter of degree. If being a Christian who is a state employee, means you must suppress communication of that faith, it is essentially saying it is OK to fire someone because they are a Christian.

    • Blake Paine

      Just as an administrative leader who’s Christian faith flows from the Aryan Nation Church would have to keep his views about race to themselves, so would someone who is homophobic.

      The source of the prejudice is immaterial – if they is going to be representing a group of multiple races and sexual orientations they can’t be seen to be prejudice against those that they represent.

      Racist ‘Christians’ went through this in the 60’s, and homophobic ‘Christians’ are now.

      Oh well.

      • cadcoke5

        Note that there is no sign that Chief Cochran did things to suppress homosexuals in the department. He simply expressed what the bible has to say outside of his work time. There are actually several sexual sins that he spoke against in his book, including heterosexual fornication. So, he is “sin-o-phobic” not homophobic.

        The churches who promoted racism in the 60s were actually ignoring the very clear teaching in the bible, that says we are all fairly recent descendants from Adam and Eve. But, the idea of evolution had, by then, already started to permeate many churches, so “science” seemed to help their cause if they wanted to say black folks were inferior.

        Concerning the idea of promoting one view over the other in regards to racism, the reality is that our society does make moral decisions and enforces them. These all fall under the heading of “world view” and “religion”. There is no rule of physics that says any practice of sex is immoral, be it homosexuality, pedophilia, or standard Christian moral values. So, those in government, who want to promote homosexuality as OK, are in fact promoting a state religious view. It is a view that apparently demands that Christians keep their mouth shut on or off the job.

        • vreed lak72

          He didn’t express it outside of his work time. He disseminated the book while on the job. What he wrote was the deaths of homosexual should be celebrated. He is the fire chief and there are gay employees who work under his leadership. The city rightfully feels that expressing a view publicly towards some of the employees under his supervision who put their lives on the line lose faith in his leadership.

          PS: I’ts YOUR opinion that the churches that promoted racism were ignoring the bible. The largest protestant denomination in the country, the Southern Baptists, disagree with your view. Many Christians also don’t share your view.

          How would you feel if this was a Muslim fire chief who passed out a book to employees and the book contained a passage that the deaths of Christians should be celebrated?

          • cadcoke5

            have not seen any statements, even by authors that are OK with homosexuality, who quote his book where he is saying to celebrate the death of homosexuals. I would think that such a statement would be widely touted as the reason he should be fired. I don’t have his book, but am familiar with what the bible says.

            Must any employer refrain from any discussion that involves Christianity? I have experienced examples myself, of a school asserting the properness of the LGBT stuff. Why is a statement to the contrary grounds for dismissal from a job? Doesn’t tolerance allow for people to disagree, or does the modern redefinition of tolerance specifically mean that Christianity must not be tolerated.

            While doing research for my reply, I came across an article in the National Review. It does a good job of touting all the great things this man has accomplished. “How the Atlanta Fire Chief’s Christian Views Cost Him His Job”. Does a man successfully lead a city’s fire departments to raise its standards, but really be a man promoting hate against its employees?

          • vreed lak72

            Ugh, they didn’t take my reply – probably because I tried to link the decision. These are the words from the 1st page of the decision, which can be found on his lawyer’s website (the Alliance Defending Freedom). The case is Cochran v. City of Atlanta and you click on the District court summary judgment decision which is on the right side under “Legal Documents”.

            “This matter concerns whether the City could fire the Fire Chief of the Atlanta Fire and Rescue Department (“AFRD”) for publishing a book to be used as a religious guide for men that contains passages identifying those who engage in homosexual and extramarital sex as “naked”—or “wicked,” “un-Godly” sinners—whose deaths will be celebrated. See Cochran Dep., Dkt. No. [154] at 176:24-178:15”

            Suggestion for the future: Always read the case yourself – the media (both the left and right are often pursuing their own agenda and are not always the most accurate reporters. The National Review is clearly a conservative publication.)

  • ppp777

    Reprobate America .