Teacher back in class despite opposition from gay privilege advocates

[Ravi]

Teacher Wins Free-Speech Battle After Anti-Gay Diatribe - TIME



Thoughts?

Are his students his "friends" on facebook? If so I can see him getting fired.

What if they're not, but he allows the world to view his page?

I dunno....what if he ranted against blacks or Christians or Jews? Should he get fired or not?

Are bigots a protected class?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'll leave this up to the people of his school district. I have more important things to worry about.

Later.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Our nation has so many other problems, far more important issues. Yet gay this and straight that works its way into the discussions of the day so often. I don't get it. Let's focus on what matters first, then we can address all this trivial shit.

 

[Ravi]

Interesting to see that the righties don't think civil rights are very important.

I wonder why they even bothered commenting on the thread.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Interesting to see that the righties don't think civil rights are very important.

I wonder why they even bothered commenting on the thread.

We leave the meddling and whining about everything and nothing to you guys... you're quite good at it.

 

[martybegan]

Family man. Republicans like to call themselves the "Party of Family Values". What a joke.

Maybe because they believe in the one true meaning of a family; man + woman = family. Anything else is just abnormal and wrong!!!

Historically, marriage has been lots of different combinations. Not even sure if one on one has been the most common. We're still here.

Maybe you should try "school". It might broaden you knowledge base.

Not true on the historical marriage question. Monogamy has been the base norm, with some cases of polygamy seen as acceptable, but usually only for the upper classes, for obvious reasons of means of support. furthermore the sexual relation has always been male-female, even in the polygamous marriages, with the females almost always taking a subservient role, and the varied wives usually used to assure a male heir.

The historical record of same sex marriages is sparse at best prior to the past 30 years.

 

[bodecea]

Maybe because they believe in the one true meaning of a family; man + woman = family. Anything else is just abnormal and wrong!!!

Historically, marriage has been lots of different combinations. Not even sure if one on one has been the most common. We're still here.

Maybe you should try "school". It might broaden you knowledge base.

Not true on the historical marriage question. Monogamy has been the base norm, with some cases of polygamy seen as acceptable, but usually only for the upper classes, for obvious reasons of means of support. furthermore the sexual relation has always been male-female, even in the polygamous marriages, with the females almost always taking a subservient role, and the varied wives usually used to assure a male heir.

The historical record of same sex marriages is sparse at best prior to the past 30 years.

So...if the wife is not subservient, it isn't traditional marriage.

 

[hortysir]

Teacher Wins Free-Speech Battle After Anti-Gay Diatribe - TIME

Jerry Buell is back in the classroom, as he should be. Or, perhaps, shouldn't be. Buell, 54, a devout Baptist, family man and veteran teacher of American history at public Mount Dora High School in central Florida, might as well be the faculty heavy in an episode of Glee: this summer, he set off a national First Amendment fracas by announcing on Facebook that gay marriage is a "cesspool" that makes him vomit and mocks God. Buell's employer, the Lake County School District, removed him from the classroom last week for the first three days of the new school year, pending an investigation of the Facebook comments, then reinstated him on Aug. 25 presumably because it realized his speech in this case was protected.

Thoughts?

If his students were able to see his comments I would take issue with his behavior.

If not, he's no different than Yignore on here.
Just a hateful person with the right to speak what's left of his mind...

 

[StevenC]

My hard-wired bias has me wanting to applaud this teacher's reinstatement as well as the gay porn teacher's firing. I won't deny that. But something about the two strikes me as an inconsistent application of our 1st Amendment freedom of expression. As we were all reminded in mudmissile's epic fail thread yesterday (spilling into today), the 1st Amendment protects us from the government infringing upon our rights to free speech etc. And in both cases here it's a public school which qualifies as government. In one case, the teacher cannot be fired for spreading hatred on his own time because it's protected speech, but in the other case the teacher can be fired for allowing himself to be filmed having gay sex on his own time (before he even took the teaching job). So setting aside my built-in bias (and yours too), why would the 1st Amendment protect one teacher's job but not the other?

both should be reinstated.

there's gotta be another way. nobody wants a gay porn star teaching their kids. seriously. and nobody who understands and values tolerance wants a raging homophobe teaching them either. how do we inject a sliver of common sense into the equation that justifies dumping both of them but doesn't push us closer toward the proverbial slippery slope?

anyone up to that mental challenge?

The only thing that should matter is if they are doing a good job as a teacher and not pushing a personal agenda.

 

[martybegan]

Historically, marriage has been lots of different combinations. Not even sure if one on one has been the most common. We're still here.

Maybe you should try "school". It might broaden you knowledge base.

Not true on the historical marriage question. Monogamy has been the base norm, with some cases of polygamy seen as acceptable, but usually only for the upper classes, for obvious reasons of means of support. furthermore the sexual relation has always been male-female, even in the polygamous marriages, with the females almost always taking a subservient role, and the varied wives usually used to assure a male heir.

The historical record of same sex marriages is sparse at best prior to the past 30 years.

So...if the wife is not subservient, it isn't traditional marriage.

No, its more for the example that most polygamous marriages were not a marriage of equals, or even close to equals. The point rdean brought up was that marriage was many different combinations, my retort that is was not.

Polygamy in the anicen regime case was really plural 1 man 1 women marraiges of economic conveinece and displays of power, there was no relationship between the multiple wives.

Nice attempt to make it appear I am saying something I am not though.

 

[manifold]

Are his students his "friends" on facebook? If so I can see him getting fired.

What if they're not, but he allows the world to view his page?

I dunno....what if he ranted against blacks or Christians or Jews? Should he get fired or not?

Are bigots a protected class?

We are all protected class when it comes the 1st Amendment.

 

[manifold]

I'll leave this up to the people of his school district. I have more important things to worry about.

Later.

No worries.

Intellectual exploration isn't for everyone.

 

[manifold]

Our nation has so many other problems, far more important issues. Yet gay this and straight that works its way into the discussions of the day so often. I don't get it. Let's focus on what matters first, then we can address all this trivial shit.

The fact that you view the central issue here as a gay/straight thing says a lot.

You couldn't be more wrong about that by the way.

 

[Qball]

Our nation has so many other problems, far more important issues. Yet gay this and straight that works its way into the discussions of the day so often. I don't get it. Let's focus on what matters first, then we can address all this trivial shit.

I would agree, but I also think the left tries to play both sides. They only want us to mention gay and straight on their terms -- meaning, when we're applauding openly gay people as being pioneers in a horribly oppressive world, and demonizing straight people who dare to question the christening of the gay community, it's fine. But on any other terms, then they want everybody to just go on about their lives and stop worrying about other people and their business.

I don't think it does us any favors to ignore that distinction. It's not the most important issue in the world -- hell it doesn't even crack the Top 10 -- but we can't just dismiss it because that's how certain attitudes become ingrained...when they go unquestioned.

 

[manifold]

both should be reinstated.

there's gotta be another way. nobody wants a gay porn star teaching their kids. seriously. and nobody who understands and values tolerance wants a raging homophobe teaching them either. how do we inject a sliver of common sense into the equation that justifies dumping both of them but doesn't push us closer toward the proverbial slippery slope?

anyone up to that mental challenge?

The only thing that should matter is if they are doing a good job as a teacher and not pushing a personal agenda.

And how do you confirm that to everyone's satisfaction?

 

[kaz]

Family man. Republicans like to call themselves the "Party of Family Values". What a joke.

Hmmm.... I totally thought he should have been fired. But what does this have to do with anything?

 

[kaz]

If rdean had it his way, kids would have to have homosexual sex as part of their education

Schools like any employer have every right to fire teachers who take public positions that are counter to the interest of their job. This is a great case in point. If I were gay, I would be very uncomfortable having my child be in the class of someone who said those things openly. It clearly affects their ability to do their job, which is teach children.

I would also support firing a teacher who's on TV doing extreme pro-gay demonstrations. But I'm consistent, this is no more appropriate. He needs to either get a job where his public statements don't directly affect his performance, which includes the classroom environment he creates, or he needs to be discrete. Or the choice can be made for him.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Gay porn teacher soliticited explicit sexual acts with his picture demonstrating a level of discretion and judgement not becoming of an educator.

Gay protester teacher spoke his mind seperate and distinct from his employment.

 

[manifold]

If rdean had it his way, kids would have to have homosexual sex as part of their education

Schools like any employer have every right to fire teachers who take public positions that are counter to the interest of their job. This is a great case in point. If I were gay, I would be very uncomfortable having my child be in the class of someone who said those things openly. It clearly affects their ability to do their job, which is teach children.

I would also support firing a teacher who's on TV doing extreme pro-gay demonstrations. But I'm consistent, this is no more appropriate. He needs to either get a job where his public statements don't directly affect his performance, which includes the classroom environment he creates, or he needs to be discrete. Or the choice can be made for him.

I completely agree with your sentiment, as I believe my posts reflect. So I guess the answer is leave it up the school board to determine whether the circumstance in question runs counter to the interests of the job, and let fired teachers challenge their ruling in court if they believe it was unjust. On that jury I'd rule against both of these two teachers.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'll leave this up to the people of his school district. I have more important things to worry about.

Later.

No worries.

Intellectual exploration isn't for everyone.

When did getting your panties in a bunch over the affairs of some school district in Florida become intellectual exploration?

God you people are goofy.