Teacher: Christian faith prohibits treating transgendered students with respect and dignity

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You believe that homosexuality and transgenderism are the same thing?

Aspects of the same thing, absolutely. It has to do with what the external body sex traits are, and the internal mental sex identity is.

The two are not a choice, as you seem to believe.

IF IT WERE A CHOICE? WHEN DID YOU CHOOSE TO BE STRAIGHT?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Why do you label it "assumed birth sex" or "apparent birth sex"?

There is only one aspect of gender that is obvious at birth-- whichever the external sex traits seem to be. Note-- sometimes these are blended traits, with physical aspects of either gender.

Since hermaphrodites do exist? That absolutely destroys anyone's claim of it being a simple binary condition.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Aspects of the same thing, absolutely. It has to do with what the external body sex traits are, and the internal mental sex identity is.

The two are not a choice, as you seem to believe.

IF IT WERE A CHOICE? WHEN DID YOU CHOOSE TO BE STRAIGHT?

I have seriously had some homophobes respond that they did choose to be striaght. That only supports the observation that many homophobes are latent homosexuals. Homophobia is not a "fear of homosexuals" . It is a fear of being homosexual.

 

[Jose Fly]

The pronoun was not a direct communication and mistake. Use of names is completely normal.

Now you're arguing from a completely different angle? Now it's "it's just a name and wasn't direct communication, so it doesn't matter"?

What's really going on here? What's compelling you to argue on behalf of this teacher no matter what? Do you have an issue with transgenderism?

Not if it violates the 1A

Wrong, look up the 1A and compelled speech.

Then you need to show where the First Amendment prohibits the government from having a say in how its employees speak to the public.

In both cases the schools were public thus government. In both cases the employee and student were mandated to say something against their religious views by government. Same core, different targets.

Yet one is illegal (forcing JW students to recite the pledge) and the other isn't (forcing teachers to teach the curriculum). Now, most intelligent folks will spot the difference right away....can you?

Did you not read "breach of contract". It's the second paragraph.

"A breach of contract occurs when the agreement is not kept, because one party to the contract does not fulfill their obligation according to its terms."

Yep, and that's nothing at all like what you've been claiming (if something isn't specifically covered in a contract, the employer is powerless to do anything about it).

You manufactured a quote or do not know what a quote is. I did not quote a source ergo I have no obligation to find a quote I never made. Paraphrasing vs quotes. Look it up.

Exactly. You made an assertion that you cannot back up. Therefore the assertion can be dismissed.

This is teaching a science thus curriculum itself. It is not an endorsement of a personal view nor validation of one.

And by the same token addressing a student by their preferred pronoun is not an endorsement of a personal view or validation of one.

Names changes would be groundless as there is no referenced link between it and TG. TG would be covered under an objective moral code thus a truth. Use of a pronoun would require one to renounce a moral truth.

Wow....every time I think you've made your most ridiculous argument, you manage to top yourself. You're actually arguing that there's no association at all between the student being transgender and the request that the teacher refer to the student as "him" (when previously he had gone by "her")? You might want to think on that some more. Sheesh.

And where did you get this "objective moral code/truth" standard from? Is another one of your made-up legal concepts?

A is not an endorsement of X. Part of B is an endorsement of X.

How so? How is compelling a teacher to state that the earth is spherical not an endorsement of a spherical earth while compelling a teacher to refer to a trans student as "him" is an endorsement of transgenderism?

No as he had to modify his worldview to fit someone else's by government.

Really? How exactly did he have to modify his worldview?

Wrong. The school is part of government thus can not force an endorsement of speech.

We just established that they can and do...all the time. A flat-earth believing teacher can be forced to tell their students that the earth is spherical. A biology teacher who believes HIV is God's punishment for gays can be forced to tell their students that HIV evolved from SIV. A history teacher who believes the holocaust was a hoax can be forced to tell their students that it happened. A Park Service tour guide can be forced to read a script when giving tours, whether that employee agrees with its contents or not.

If you're going to persist in this "the government has no ability to control the speech of its employees" argument, you're going to have to produce a citation or something like that. Otherwise, you're once again just making stuff up.

You babbling about dragons is not working no matter how many times you say it. All you have done is segment your personal time into the smallest possible time frames to avoid detection. A sleight of hand, nothing more. If you are contract to work for 4 hours but spend 30 mins of that babble about dragons you only work for 3 1/2 hours. This is a contract breach covered under failure to meet contractual obligated hours of work. Productivity decline can also be used due to the unproductive disruption between work.

Here's the content of the email...

Mr. Smith,

This is Jose Fly of Kramerica, and I have a couple of questions about the Johnson project. First, when do you expect to begin drawing funds? My supervisor wanted to let you know that the funds are available, so whenever you're ready to begin the funds will be there. Second, can you please explain why the project does not account for the purple monkey dragons on Mars? They are an important component in what we do, so your answer would be most helpful.

Thank you,
Jose Fly​

On what basis can my employer do anything about this? There's nothing in my contract about writing bizarre emails. Clearly this is not "personal time" and is entirely work related. Given all you've said previously about contract law, what can they do?

No you just didn't know what I was talking about as you never bothered to ask nor look it up.

Looks more like you're just making stuff up off the top of your head and dodging around when called on it.

 

[Shad]

Now you're arguing from a completely different angle? Now it's "it's just a name and wasn't direct communication, so it doesn't matter"?

Yes as it was addressing a different point.

What's really going on here? What's compelling you to argue on behalf of this teacher no matter what? Do you have an issue with transgenderism?

Only the factor of compelled speech against one's religious view. I have no issues with using a pronoun if requested. I even using pronouns by reflex due to names. Caitlyn Jenner is a female name. The female pronoun is a natural use of language given the name. You seem to miss the point of government forcing someone to violate their religious views then punishing them when they refuse. If he was a Muslim being ordered to denounce Muhammad people would be losing their ****. However anti-Christian bias is big on the left so ignored.

Then you need to show where the First Amendment prohibits the government from having a say in how its employees speak to the public.

There is the JW case I already mentioned. Other cases of:

National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra
Wooley vs. Maynard (1977)
Pruneyard Shopping Center vs. Robins (1980)
Janus v American Federation of State, Local, & Municipal Employees (2018)

Yet one is illegal (forcing JW students to recite the pledge) and the other isn't (forcing teachers to teach the curriculum). Now, most intelligent folks will spot the difference right away....can you?

One is an endorsement of while the other is the job itself with no endorsement

Yep, and that's nothing at all like what you've been claiming (if something isn't specifically covered in a contract, the employer is powerless to do anything about it).

Wrong. First off part of your question was loaded as you manufactured a quote I never made. I have no obligation to meet your demand for a quote I never made. Paraphrasing vs citation. This is grade school stuff here.

The breach of contract has the explanation you wanted if you bothered reading it. You didn't.

Exactly. You made an assertion that you cannot back up. Therefore the assertion can be dismissed.

Wrong. I backed it up. I just can not force you to read something you have no interest in reading. I have no obligation to answer a quote you manufactured. Again read the breach of contract link.

And by the same token addressing a student by their preferred pronoun is not an endorsement of a personal view or validation of one.

Yes it is. Her is a female pronoun. The student is not female. Language and religious endorsement is required for this case. Cat is dog, up is down.

Wow....every time I think you've made your most ridiculous argument, you manage to top yourself. You're actually arguing that there's no association at all between the student being transgender and the request that the teacher refer to the student as "him" (when previously he had gone by "her")? You might want to think on that some more. Sheesh.

Never said that. I said the rejecting use of the new name is groundless. The pronoun use has a basis is the whole "made male and female" God speak. Read it again.

And where did you get this "objective moral code/truth" standard from? Is another one of your made-up legal concepts?

No it is a religious concept. You should know this due time to RF alone.... But alias you do not retain much of what is posted here if you couldn't figure this out.

How so? How is compelling a teacher to state that the earth is spherical not an endorsement of a spherical earth while compelling a teacher to refer to a trans student as "him" is an endorsement of transgenderism?

Again read the linked thread. Science is not truth but model which are more probable than not. If you are really in brain in a vat in a simulation (a truth) then science only represent the simulation not a truth.

Again the whole "made male and female" fundamentalist Christians spout. They do it for homosexuality as well claiming it is a choice thus not natural

Really? How exactly did he have to modify his worldview?

By treating a male like a female, addressing them as such, etc, etc

We just established that they can and do...all the time. A flat-earth believing teacher can be forced to tell their students that the earth is spherical. A biology teacher who believes HIV is God's punishment for gays can be forced to tell their students that HIV evolved from SIV. A history teacher who believes the holocaust was a hoax can be forced to tell their students that it happened. A Park Service tour guide can be forced to read a script when giving tours, whether that employee agrees with its contents or not.

Wrong. Science isn't a truth it is model and representation. If science is a truth it is unfalsifiable. Read Popper.

If you're going to persist in this "the government has no ability to control the speech of its employees" argument, you're going to have to produce a citation or something like that. Otherwise, you're once again just making stuff up.

Again regarding the employee's religious view government can not do this. You are conflating teaching something which is a science vs a claim of reality. Or do you think TG people are claiming a probability based identity? IE they could be wrong.

Here's the content of the email...

Mr. Smith,

This is Jose Fly of Kramerica, and I have a couple of questions about the Johnson project. First, when do you expect to begin drawing funds? My supervisor wanted to let you know that the funds are available, so whenever you're ready to begin the funds will be there. Second, can you please explain why the project does not account for the purple monkey dragons on Mars? They are an important component in what we do, so your answer would be most helpful.

Thank you,
Jose Fly

​

You have changed the story. At no point before did you mention a relation to any work project itself. Ad hoc rescue​

On what basis can my employer do anything about this?

Was this actually part of the employer's project itself? If no this is personal time and content made during work time. While a minor infraction you can still be fired for breaching the contract by using work time for personal time. You are not actually working ergo in breach.

There's nothing in my contract about writing bizarre emails. Clearly this is not "personal time" and is entirely work related.

Ad hoc rescue. You can not use details you provided after the fact to counter a point made in absence of those details.

Given all you've said previously about contract law, what can they do?

See above. Ad hoc rescue.

Looks more like you're just making stuff up off the top of your head and dodging around when called on it.

Say the guy that changes the example after the fact. Hilarious.

Calling X a dodge does not make it so oh manufacture of fake quotes. Try again son.

 

[Prestor John]

Let's start with your "Merry Christmas" claim. Though that one is a bit weak if you think about it. Please find some links that support you.

No.

I told you before that I am not going to expend any time and effort on you anymore.

All my past discussions with you proved that you ignore any and all evidence that combat your arguments.

You can look them up yourself. Type "Jehovah's Witness fired "Christmas Merry"" into any search engine.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No.

I told you before that I am not going to expend any time and effort on you anymore.

All my past discussions with you proved that you ignore any and all evidence that combat your arguments.

You can look them up yourself. Type "Jehovah's Witness fired "Christmas Merry"" into any search engine.

I don't ignore your pitiful arguments, I refute them. Running away is a bad habit.

Perhaps you should learn what is and what is not evidence. I know that creationists do not understand the concept, at least when applied to the sciences. And though you may not like it transgenderism is a concept that is supported by the sciences.

And I did look them up. I came up with nothing:

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1...0..0.64.64.1......0....1..gws-wiz.tPIKQHK3q8s

You do not seem to understand how claims work either. If I make a specific claim you are free to demand that I support it. If I cannot I just did the same as admitting that I was wrong. You could not support your claim. I even did your homework for you and came up with nothing. You just did the same as admitting that you were wrong.

 

[Prestor John]

Of course you don't.


And you think that a trans kid won't learn this lesson without a teacher making the point to demonstrate it?


Requiring a teacher to follow a reasonable non-discrimination policy as a condition of employment is not "forcing an adult to accept an ideology."

And we aren't talking about the demands of the child; we're talking about the instructions from the teacher's employer. Yes, the instructions are made with regard to the well-being of the students, but we aren't talking about a child ordering their teacher the way you suggest.


A Christian school could.

And this has nothing to do with respect. A better analogy would be that a teacher can't call a Christian child a "kafir" (or maybe "Papist") even if the teacher believes the term would be accurate.


Again: we're talking about following a demand from the school, not one directly from the child.

And again: a more apt analogy would be a teacher calling a Muslim child a "Mohammadan." Not appropriate even if the teacher thinks it would be accurate.


So the school administration should not be forced to conform to the beliefs of anti-trans teachers?


No, the sham argument is that this is a free speech issue for the teacher. A classroom is not a pulpit that a teacher is free to use however they want.

Any employer, but especially a public school board, is certainly entitled to enact and enforce non-discrimination and respectful workplace policies.

You don't seem to understand what happened in this scenario.

The teacher admitted that his reference to the student by her biological sex was a "slip of the tongue" and that he had been avoiding the use of pronouns in reference to that child up to that point to conform to the school's policies.

That was reasonable.

However, the parents of the student claimed that his refusal to use pronouns also violated the policy, even though he never once referred to the child by her actual sex (excluding that one time mistake).

They said that the teacher had to refer to their child by the chosen pronoun.

This was when we entered into the realm of unreasonable.

This demand from the parents came because of the delusions had by their child.

A child being confused does not magically turn either of these pronouns into derogatory terms.

Claiming that referring to the child by their biological sex is a form of "discrimination" is ridiculous and evidence that the child (or rather the parents of the child) is not fit to live in society.

This teacher was never trying to be an advocate, nor is he anti-trans.

He is simply an educator who is unwilling to replace fact with delusion. Objective reality with fantasy.

And I'm guessing you believe it is reasonable for any employer to force their employees to accept any ideology, no matter the employees personal beliefs?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

To sum up all the biblical/theistic argument so far?

 

[Prestor John]

Because unless the teacher ran a DNA or genital check it is assumed right? They don't know.

That is not what you said though.

You said, "A person identifying as different from their assumed birth sex, are not disconnected with reality."

Everyone knows what their sex is upon the moment of birth, including transgendered persons. There is no assumption.

You were arguing from the point-of-view of the transgendered person. That the sex determined at birth was "assumed".

That is delusion.

Also, as to your question about the teacher, it is fairly easy to differentiate between the sexes without such invasive scrutiny.

 

[Prestor John]

Aspects of the same thing, absolutely. It has to do with what the external body sex traits are, and the internal mental sex identity is.

The two are not a choice, as you seem to believe.

IF IT WERE A CHOICE? WHEN DID YOU CHOOSE TO BE STRAIGHT?

When did I say that either were a matter of choice?

No one chooses when to suffer from psychosis or same-sex attraction.

That doesn't make transgendered people any less delusional.

There is only one aspect of gender that is obvious at birth-- whichever the external sex traits seem to be. Note-- sometimes these are blended traits, with physical aspects of either gender.

Since hermaphrodites do exist? That absolutely destroys anyone's claim of it being a simple binary condition.

There is a reason that extreme outliers do not establish precedent.

In the overwhelming majority of cases it is still fairly easy to determine the dominant sex of intersex cases.

Only about 0.018% of births cannot be classified as either male or female.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

That is not what you said though.

You said, "A person identifying as different from their assumed birth sex, are not disconnected with reality."

Everyone knows what their sex is upon the moment of birth, including transgendered persons. There is no assumption..

Citation Needed. As it turns out? You are beyond wrong on this one. It's back to WHEN DID YOU CHOOSE TO BE STRAIGHT, once again.

You were arguing from the point-of-view of the transgendered person. That the sex determined at birth was "assumed"..

That is only logical: Ask the person whom is affected, what they feel/think/are.

You don't ask the plumber, 3 cities over, what is wrong with your electric outlet...

That is delusion..

Citation Needed.

Also, as to your question about the teacher, it is fairly easy to differentiate between the sexes without such invasive scrutiny.

False. You think there are only.... two sexes?

Oh. My. You have MUCH learning to do...!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

When did I say that either were a matter of choice?.

With nearly every post you made-- you strongly imply that a trans person somehow "chooses" to be trans.

Just because you, personally, don't like it.

No one chooses when to suffer from psychosis or same-sex attraction..

Psychosis? Now you are just being nasty. It's not a psychosis to be what you are.

That doesn't make transgendered people any less delusional..

More nastiness by you-- without a shred of anything (apart from your own ugly attitude) to justify it, either.

There is a reason that extreme outliers do not establish precedent..

Non-sequitur.

In the overwhelming majority of cases it is still fairly easy to determine the dominant sex of intersex cases..

Absolutely, 100%, false-- until they reach puberty? YOU HAVE ZERO WAY OF KNOWING.

Only about 0.018% of births cannot be classified as either male or female.

Only by bigots who think there are only 2 sexes, and mental sexual identity isn't real.

 

[Curious George]

That is not what you said though.

You said, "A person identifying as different from their assumed birth sex, are not disconnected with reality."

Everyone knows what their sex is upon the moment of birth, including transgendered persons. There is no assumption.

You were arguing from the point-of-view of the transgendered person. That the sex determined at birth was "assumed".

That is delusion.

Also, as to your question about the teacher, it is fairly easy to differentiate between the sexes without such invasive scrutiny.

I did not know what my birth sex was from the moment I was born. In fact, i don't think anyone can know. Generally, if not always, the brain lacks the capacity to understand sex or gender let alone take part in a meta-analysis in order to understand one's own gender.

But no, i was suggesting that the person is identifying with something different than the onlooker assumes. But I supppse it is applicable to the individual as well. Afterall, they are assuming as well. It may be apparent that I was born with a penis, and I identify as male, but did I know prior to DNA testing? Honestly, I was pretty certain, but I cannot say that I knew.

 

[Curious George]

That is delusion.

Also, as to your question about the teacher, it is fairly easy to differentiate between the sexes without such invasive scrutiny.

Except it is not delusion. What is delusional? You dont think transgender people are aware of their apparent birth sex?

I am not so sure it is always fairly easy to differentiate.

 

[Shad]

Your healthcare is not my business, either; it's between you and your doctor). You don't know me and you don't even seem to realize that female to male people like me even exist, since you keep vomiting up transphobic bile about trans women. I'm a man, not a woman. I'm not transitioning to female. At least get the basics straight.

When did you get your chromosomes changed? By what process? When did you start producing sperm and stop producing eggs? Are you intersex?

I see a lot of word games here flipping between terms when it suits an argument.

 

[Prestor John]

I don't ignore your pitiful arguments, I refute them. Running away is a bad habit.

Perhaps you should learn what is and what is not evidence. I know that creationists do not understand the concept, at least when applied to the sciences. And though you may not like it transgenderism is a concept that is supported by the sciences.

And I did look them up. I came up with nothing:

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GUAJ_enUS804US804&ei=jbYmXPTaGeXE0PEPr4-UgAM&q="Jehovah's+Witness"+fired+"Christmas+Merry"&oq="Jehovah's+Witness"+fired+"Christmas+Merry"&gs_l=psy-ab.3...26592.26592..27453...0.0..0.64.64.1......0....1..gws-wiz.tPIKQHK3q8s

You do not seem to understand how claims work either. If I make a specific claim you are free to demand that I support it. If I cannot I just did the same as admitting that I was wrong. You could not support your claim. I even did your homework for you and came up with nothing. You just did the same as admitting that you were wrong.

You never support your claims. You always come up with a reason not to.

Again, I am not going to exert any effort or time for you.

 

[Prestor John]

To sum up all the biblical/theistic argument so far?

When have I used any theological or Biblical argument here?

 

[Prestor John]

Citation Needed. As it turns out? You are beyond wrong on this one. It's back to WHEN DID YOU CHOOSE TO BE STRAIGHT, once again.


That is only logical: Ask the person whom is affected, what they feel/think/are.

You don't ask the plumber, 3 cities over, what is wrong with your electric outlet...


Citation Needed.


False. You think there are only.... two sexes?

Oh. My. You have MUCH learning to do...!

There are only two sexes.

Facts do not care about our feelings.

 

[Prestor John]

With nearly every post you made-- you strongly imply that a trans person somehow "chooses" to be trans.

Just because you, personally, don't like it.


Psychosis? Now you are just being nasty. It's not a psychosis to be what you are.


More nastiness by you-- without a shred of anything (apart from your own ugly attitude) to justify it, either.


Non-sequitur.


Absolutely, 100%, false-- until they reach puberty? YOU HAVE ZERO WAY OF KNOWING.


Only by bigots who think there are only 2 sexes, and mental sexual identity isn't real.

You are making a lot of claims about me with no evidence.

I never claimed that being confused about your sex was a choice.

On the contrary, I have explained that those who are confused need professional help to overcome their confusion.

If anyone believes that they are something they are not - like the opposite sex or another species etc. - they suffer from psychosis and are delusional.

It is not nasty or rude or wrong to point out the obvious biological facts.

When a human being is born, they are either male or female and this is determined by a simple visual inspection.

How a person feels does not alter biological reality.

Only about 0.018% of births need a specialist to determine what sex the child is.

You have entered into the realm of ideological zealotry. A trait you often try to label your religious peers as.

These are facts.