Yeah, well, in most states, including where I am, she wouldn't even have been able to get the name change. I guess that's something.
I don't think you can fire a California state employee even if he had killed and eaten her right there in the DMV office.
Now y'all see exactly what the fucking problem is down here in California. Damn state workers that are almost "guaranteed" they CANNOT be fired unless there they commit an extremely grievous faux pas. It seriously boggles the mind.
But in California she CAN get the name change. And DMV clerks should know it. Fire that goddamn public servant! What an asshole.
I thought the DMV sucked BEFORE...
Fnarf, that's what I'm saying. Doesn't matter what they do, who they did it to or why. This is some of the most inane shit you'll ever hear of when it comes to state government.
What the DMV worker did is seriously fucked up, but what freaks me out the most is that this woman was able to look up/remember Amber's address to send this horrible condemnation. Someone who can't keep their religious damnation to themselves shouldn't have access to information like that, IMO.
The DMV's clerk job is to process applications and licenses within the legal guidelines set up by the state. Freedom of religion means an individual is allowed to hold private belief and worship as he/she chooses. Freedom of religion does not mean that a state employee gets to make up his or her rules.

If this clerk finds the job so objectionable, the clerk should go to work--perhaps processing forms in a church or seminary.

If the clerk is incapable of doing the job without intentionally insulting the clients, the state should fire the fucker.
That's just harassment. And since the clerk used state resources (i.e., whatever documents at the DMV that had the lady's address on them) to commit harassment, he ABSOLUTELY should lose his job.
I'm surprised they are suing for only $25K.
I went to the MSNBC article and read the comments. Big mistake. :(
@8, @10 What that DMV employee did was commit a crime, stealing private information from a State database for personal use. There are laws against that, including ones designed to prevent identity theft. Federal ones, too. Fuck firing him. Put the motherfucker in jail.

Then, firing him gets much simpler.

Yeah, the pissant act of harassment is what should really get punished, but going after him for illegally taking statutorily protected data is a whole lot easier to convict on, and devoid of political complications.
At least pharmacists are self-employed.

Hopefully this civil servant will soon be unemployed... and not receiving unemployment!
FTMFA? Wait...
I agree, the DMV clerk committed an illegal act of harassment and invasion of privacy.
I would think that there is a published privacy policy for the California DMV. I'm sure that by using that private information to harass a person she is in violation of the policy. I expect a firing quickly, or the DMV is going to find itself in an even worse position
Fire him. And then rehire him, just for the fun of firing him again. Repeat as necessary.
#19 asshole spammer.

I know! Let me have 15 minutes alone with him!
I agree with 13 and 17. I'm certain the DMV employee made improper use of personal identity information. That's against the law. I expect she will be fired for it. I sometimes have access to private information in my job, and even if I wrote a very nice letter to a customer, I'd be fired for mis-use of the information and violating privacy laws.

Just sent an email and copied a whole mess of people, encouraging them to do the same. I doubt much will happen, but I'd like to at least hear that the DA/Police are looking into it in order to deter future incidents of this kind of bullshit.
Savage posting on trans shit?!, fuck it. Thanks for posting this and being an awesome ally to trans people Dan
Obviously. It makes me sick that this happened in my city! I don't care what some bitch thinks his religious freedoms allow. If you use your access to government records to send any kind of personal communication to someone who only gave you that information with the understanding that it was going to be used professionally...your ass should be fired!
Freedom of religion doesn't give you the right to tell other people how they can act. In protecting your own religious freedom to judge everyone around you, you fail to respect the religious freedom of everyone around you. In the eyes of the law, it's not so much freedom OF religion as it is freedom FROM religion. I love her, "I do not support the reason for [the sex change] it", I'm curious, at what point did this ignoramus ask, and listen, to her reasons for a sex change? My question assumes she didn't, but I am curious to know if she thinks she knows why. Ignorance is religion.
Question: Not to generalize, stigmatize, pigeon-hole, or otherwise make assumptions about life in San Francisco, but why on EARTH would someone who is this intolerant, close-minded, bigoted, and hateful choose to work with the public in one of the most gay and trans-friendly places on the planet?! Granted, I don't live in SF and have only visited there once, but is my understanding of SF culture incorrect? Go get a job at the Provo, UT DMV if you don't want to deal with transgender people you sick sonofabitch!*

*Note to Sloggers: I'm kidding - I know there may be transgender people in Provo, UT.
Freedom of religion has nothing to do with this. It's about professionalism. Personal notes sent in official documents? Opinions offered on standard administrative processes? Unacceptable in any circumstance, even factoring out the hatefulness driving it. That this DMV worker should be fired is a no-brainer under any standards.
Where in this dickwad's bible does it say that transgender women are going to imaginary hell? Those religious morons make this shit up and then claim religious freedom? Bullshit!
This has nothing to do with freedom of religion. This has to do with privacy laws, and confidentiality. In order to get a job with the DMV, where you have access to personal information, you would have to sign some sort of confidentiality document, and this is a clear contravention of that. Even if state employees have a very strong union, I doubt it protects them from being fired if they break the law. It's the personal use of confidential information that is the clear handle here - even if the douchbag used the info to sell Amway, or invite people to her birthday party.

how do you include links without a registered account?

we are in awe......
Prepare Yourselves, People:

In the Qunited States of Gaymerica
EVERYONE must believe as Dan does....
@2 Where do you live that trans people cannot change their names and have the drivers license changed to reflect it? I'm pretty sure every state allows it, though some require more red tape than others.
He's protesting WAY too much... he probably just wanted a date.
@34 yup. This guys beats off to tranny pron. Guaranteed.
Firing will be a good start - this is likely a criminal violation of privacy and civil rights protections under California law.
@30 "Prepare Yourselves, People:

In the Qunited States of Gaymerica
EVERYONE must believe as Dan does....
Posted by YOU'RE FIRED"

Thank god for that. PS: Fuck off, Stormfronter.
@30 "Prepare Yourselves, People:

In the Qunited States of Gaymerica
EVERYONE must believe as Dan does....
Posted by YOU'RE FIRED"

Thank god for that. PS: Fuck off, Stormfronter.
Whatever technicality it takes.

Having spent the morning talking to yet ANOTHER polite liberal federal govt employee trying to tell me we can't dare to worry too loudly about queer people, I sure hope someone can at least protect people at the state level, even if it IS via a technicality.

I'm trying to remember why I thought things were going to be different after we got rid of Bush. You know, somehow I thought that people would actually have their civil rights protected, and enforced by the government (not fucking UNDONE by the government) and that we could AT LEAST talk about sex and sexual minorities openly.

Gotta love a country where a trans person has to consider that if she goes to a GOVERNMENT OFFICE she might get hate-bashed.
@7: This would certainly be a grievous violation here in WI. As a state employee with access to personal information, if I use any of the private information to which I have access (or release it in any fashion) for something not work-related, I not only get fired, I'm subject to criminal prosecution. This includes contact information that has not been explicitly made public. This case should be a HUGE concern to everyone concerned with privacy rights (that would include all of those members of the Religious Right who think Big Gum'ment is an evil Nazi Socialist scheme that wants to force them to give up Christianity and turn them into slaves).
The DMV clerk violated DMV policy, California state law, and U.S. federal law (specifically, Chapter 123 of Title 18 of the United States Code). Getting fired *immediately* will hopefully be the least of his worries.
From the SF Chronicle:
Yust's lawyers identified the employee as Thomas Demartini...

DMV spokesman Armando Botello said the department would not comment on the complaint. He also said the DMV would not disclose whether the employee still works there or has been the subject of any disciplinary action, because "it's a personnel matter."
Okay, but why are transgenders so ugly?

Ugly minds see ugly things.
I think someone needs a good ass-kickin'.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.