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

[Jumi]

My favourite question in Finland was by a bartender at the airport (all of Finland I have seen).
Seven in the morning local time, and she asked me and my Swedish friend if we minded if she poured herself a beer as well as us.

Nice.

I've only known about 5 Finns, and only a couple of those IRL. But they all had that quality of just saying enough. Or occasionally not even that.

That is very observant. If you do well with minimal information you'll get along fine with us.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I don't have to engage when people troll me, and you need to stop blowing up my notications. I will not change my mind, so you are wasting your time. As a moderate Republican, I have an issue with both parties, but conservatives have me on free speech, and religious liberty. I affirm your rights, so you are selfish not to affirm mine. Peace and joy, me.

But. You do not have the right to force your religion onto anyone else.

If you see not being able to persecute others who do not believe as you do, somehow "loosing rights"? Too bad.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Religions attempt to stay more natural. Transgender requires all forms of artificial changes, which are not natural but which require science and medicine for cosmetic changes. These are all used to create a visual illusion for everyone else. Like in any magic trick, the magician needs the audience's attention directed a certain way or else the trick does not work properly.

The logical conclusion of your intolerance, above? We should destroy all eyeglasses immediately, as they create a "visual illusion" that people can actually see.

Likewise, we must destroy all hearing aids-- they create the "illusion" that people can hear.

Out goes any prosthetic limb, too-- they are created by medical processes, and create the "illusion" that legless people can walk, or armless people can dress themselves.

Lets also get rid of all artificial joints-- they create the "illusion" that people can move their limbs again, without nerve-racking pain.

Like any magic trick, these things overcome natural limitations given to humans by "god".

RIGHT?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I would say that if you have an ideology that doesn't allow for you to call people what they prefer to be called, then you are following a stupid ideology that forces you to be a rude, disrespectful person, and you should stop following it.

 

[Shad]

How was the teacher not? The teacher here chose to behave with silliness and is no longer employed. Seems fitting.

Nope as that was the ultimatum of compelled speech he was fired for. His choice was to use the students name which the teacher was not fired for.

 

[Shad]

This is why I did my 180 from my initial post. The teacher was OBVIOUSLY well aware of the guidelines handed down from the Department of Education. In my view, he then, in a predatory fashion, zeroed in on the young person directly involved and made his rather pathetic stand. The teacher was fired for insubordination and rightly so (I see now). (Edit: The decision to terminate was unanimous, I might add.)

Said guidelines equate gender to sex which is nonsense in this regard. The guidelines must use a distortion to have any power in law.

 

[Curious George]

Nope as that was the ultimatum of compelled speech he was fired for. His choice was to use the students name which the teacher was not fired for.

Trying to understand how your answer relates to my question. The teacher still had a choice. The only consequence the teacher faced was the consequence to insubordination. If you want to argue that a school should not have the authority to regulate teacher behavior or speech as it relates to the students, then please do. But I am struggling to understand your point.

 

[Shad]

Trying to understand how your answer relates to my question. The teacher still had a choice.

Which he made by compromising on the name. That choice was never pressed by the admins nor even brought up until he made a single mistake.

The only consequence the teacher faced was the consequence to insubordination.

The order from the admin had no legal power behind it. Gender policy was removed in 2017. Ergo he said no to a tyrant

If you want to argue that a school should not have the authority to regulate teacher behavior or speech as it relates to the students, then please do.

The school had no legal power to regulate this behavior as per removal of guidelines in 2017. Unless you can show a policy he violated your point is moot.

But I am struggling to understand your point.

Point is he didn't violate an existing policy that had legal power but merely the authoritarian tendencies of the admins ergo the ultimatum.

 

[Curious George]

Which he made by compromising on the name. That choice was never pressed by the admins nor even brought up until he made a single mistake.



The order from the admin had no legal power behind it. Gender policy was removed in 2017. Ergo he said no to a tyrant



The school had no legal power to regulate this behavior as per removal of guidelines in 2017. Unless you can show a policy he violated your point is moot.



Point is he didn't violate an existing policy that had legal power but merely the authoritarian tendencies of the admins ergo the ultimatum.

You have access to the teacher contracts for this school or district?

 

[Shad]

You have access to the teacher contracts for this school or district?

There was an earlier reference to federal education policy. The reference was to the 2015/16 policy which was rescinded by Trump in 2017. In 2018 Trump pushed for definitions of sex based on biology. This push is part of Trump and Betsy's changes to Title 9 which are currently in progress. Changes include more than definition but all together it is part of the same reforms.

If you are claiming his termination was justified it is your burden. I just disagreed based on what I know of policy.

 

[Curious George]

There was an earlier reference to federal education policy. The reference was to the 2015/16 policy which was rescinded by Trump in 2017. In 2018 Trump pushed for definitions of sex based on biology. This push is part of Trump and Betsy's changes to Title 9 which are currently in progress. Changes include more than definition but all together it is part of the same reforms.

If you are claiming his termination was justified it is your burden. I just disagreed based on what I know of policy.

And i disagree with you based on knowledge of school contracts. Why would you imagine that conduct that deviates from express administrative direction would be protected when that behavior does in fact directly impact instruction time.

 

[oldbadger]

.

"High school teacher in Virginia fired for refusing to call transgender student male pronouns

A few days ago, the West Point Public School Board in Virginia voted unanimously to fire Peter Vlaming, a French teacher who had taught for seven years, because he refused to call a transgender freshman with the pronouns “he” and “him.” Vlaming said his Christian faith prohibited him from treat the student with respect and dignity.

View attachment 25939 ​

Peter Vlaming, who taught French class at West Point High School for nearly seven years, lost his job after a five-hour long public hearing he requested Thursday night.

The original complaint stemmed from a rising-9th-grade student who had transitioned and requested to be called by the male pronouns "he" and "him."

Principal Jonathan Hochman told the School Board that Vlaming refused to use the male pronouns to refer to the student because he considered it a "lie."
source​

Your thoughts on the statement that his "Christian faith prohibited him from treat[ing] the student with respect and dignity."

(A note on the thread's title. It is not a quote from the teacher.)​

.

So you're painting Christianity in its entirety on the actions of one man.
Brilliant, Skwim.
Where do you dig up this junk from?

 

[Father Heathen]

I don't have to engage when people troll me, and you need to stop blowing up my notications. I will not change my mind, so you are wasting your time. As a moderate Republican, I have an issue with both parties, but conservatives have me on free speech, and religious liberty. I affirm your rights, so you are selfish not to affirm mine. Peace and joy, me.

One, it wasn't "trolling", it was a legitimate question regarding the establishment clause of the 1st amendment. Do you think freedom of religion and freedom of speech only apply to Christians?
Also, I am a staunch supporter of free speech and religious liberty, but I understand that employers also have the right to terminate for insubordination. Would you consider it a violation of the 1st amendment if a Hindu employee was fired from McDonald's for refusing to serve beef to customers due to their religious convictions, or if an employee was fired for screaming racial slurs at customers? The 1st amendment protects you from the government but not from your employer's policies, who are not obligated to provide you with a soapbox on their time and dime.
As for "blowing up your notifications", that wouldn't happen if you didn't litter the forum with turds.

 

[Monika0711]

Faithful mind brings forward faith. Prohibitions are birthed by prohibitive minds — and of pain is such labor

 

[Prestor John]

Are you suggesting there should be no recourse?

If anything, the only recourse needed here is the student being placed in a secure and hopefully padded location where she can receive the help she desperately needs.

If I was a teacher at a school and you were enrolled as "brother" and you preferred to be called "brother," i would have no issue calling you that and would think anyone that refused to call you that because doing so would be a "lie" was silly.

I may be mistaken, but I don't think this scenario involved what name the student preferred, but rather the pronoun.

An obviously male student can be enrolled as "Susan", but he is still a he.

It is up to the individual whether or not they want to participate in any ideology.

I personally may call an obvious male a "she" if he asked me to. It would depend on my relationship with them and how they approached me about it.

That, however, is my personal choice and I don't believe there should be any "recourse" against me if I decided not to indulge them.

The most you can argue is this may be a matter of manners and consideration, but then again, there should be no "recourse" for anyone who decides not to say please or thank you.

Nah. It is more situational.

Exactly.

And it is up to the individual to decide how to act given the situation.

If my student was being a total jerk about their mental illness and demanding that I say a particular thing, I may refuse.

But, if they are more humble about it, I may relent.

No one is making anyone do anything.

"Do this or you are fired!" - That's not a use of coercion or force?

Is it your understanding that a gun needs to be pointed at someone in order to justify it being a matter of force?

But there are consequences for your choices.

Sure.

Like telling people to refer to you as "he" when you are a "she".

A consequence of that is that not everyone is going to want to indulge your delusion.

If you can't accept that, then you are not prepared to live in a free society and should seek proper psychiatric help.

 

[Prestor John]

Even if it's a religious belief? several posters have indicated that it is inappropriate to conflate religious belief with delusion.

It don't think it would be appropriate to conflate the two.

However, neither should be pandered to.

I can't force anyone to call me brother because they may subscribe to a different ideology than me, therefore no one should be forced to refer to anyone as a particular pronoun if it conflicts with their personal beliefs.

 

[Curious George]

If anything, the only recourse needed here is the student being placed in a secure and hopefully padded location where she can receive the help she desperately needs.

I don't know anything about his mental health. I do know that the teachers supervisors gave instructions on behavior and that teacher refused to comply. Seems pretty cut and dry.

I may be mistaken, but I don't think this scenario involved what name the student preferred, but rather the pronoun.

You are the one who brought up the Brother conversation. I agree this is about pronouns. But I was responding to your scenario.

An obviously male student can be enrolled as "Susan", but he is still a he.

If that "obvious" male student is enrolled as a female and the student and your supervisors have asked you to refer to that "obvious" male student as a she, then you should use she.

It is up to the individual whether or not they want to participate in any ideology.

You can participate in your own ideology on your own time. But when you are dealing with instructional time, yes the school may require you to behave in a certain manner.

I personally may call an obvious male a "she" if he asked me to. It would depend on my relationship with them and how they approached me about it.

That, however, is my personal choice and I don't believe there should be any "recourse" against me if I decided not to indulge them.

Your personal choice doesn't really matter. Either follow the guidelines or accept the consequences. Those are your choices.

The most you can argue is this may be a matter of manners and consideration, but then again, there should be no "recourse" for anyone who decides not to say please or thank you.

I don't need to argue respect and politeness. This os a teacher refusing ro abide a specific behavior instructed by his supervisors. Those supervisors have the authority to dismiss the teacher.

Exactly.

And it is up to the individual to decide how to act given the situation.

Yes, either act in accordance with the instruction or do not. But if the individual does not, they should not be surprised when they must face the consequence.

If my student was being a total jerk about their mental illness and demanding that I say a particular thing, I may refuse.

But, if they are more humble about it, I may relent

Sounds like you have some control issues. If you want to disobey your supervisors because of how respectful the student is or is not, then it seems to me that you are engaging in childish behavior with a child. Only one of you can use the excuse that they actually are a child.

"Do this or you are fired!" - That's not a use of coercion or force?

Are you trying to say that the real world is coercive? Yes, if you do not do what your employer wants and what your employer wants is related to your job, then you can be dismissed. I am sorry no one has told you this before now.

Is it your understanding that a gun needs to be pointed at someone in order to justify it being a matter of force?

No, but I don't think I have said as much.

Sure.

Like telling people to refer to you as "he" when you are a "she".

A consequence of that is that not everyone is going to want to indulge your delusion.

I do not know if that is a consequence. But If I had a child who wanted to be referred to as a he and that child was born and developed like someone of the female sex, then I would surely let that child know that not everyone would be willing to call that child a he. No one here is delusional about people in the world. Realistically, there are plenty of people who will make mistakes and there are plenty of others who are disrespectful and bigoted.

If you can't accept that, then you are not prepared to live in a free society and should seek proper psychiatric help.

I do not think that is the problem here. It doesn't matter what the teacher calls the child now. They were fired because they chose to refuse to comply with the supervisors direction.

 

[Woberts]

Of course the Latter Day Saint is going to spout nonsense.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Of course the Latter Day Saint is going to spout nonsense.

We can always hold out hope for Tomorrow.

Who knows? Maybe someday, everyone in the class will grow up and recognize that Santa really is just a Child's Story.

And no-- lest you be confused-- that glass is neither half empty, nor half full.

It simply possesses a 50% overflow safety margin.

 

[Prestor John]

I don't know anything about his mental health. I do know that the teachers supervisors gave instructions on behavior and that teacher refused to comply. Seems pretty cut and dry.

You are the one who brought up the Brother conversation. I agree this is about pronouns. But I was responding to your scenario.

If that "obvious" male student is enrolled as a female and the student and your supervisors have asked you to refer to that "obvious" male student as a she, then you should use she.


You can participate in your own ideology on your own time. But when you are dealing with instructional time, yes the school may require you to behave in a certain manner.

Your personal choice doesn't really matter. Either follow the guidelines or accept the consequences. Those are your choices.

I don't need to argue respect and politeness. This os a teacher refusing ro abide a specific behavior instructed by his supervisors. Those supervisors have the authority to dismiss the teacher.

Yes, either act in accordance with the instruction or do not. But if the individual does not, they should not be surprised when they must face the consequence.

Sounds like you have some control issues. If you want to disobey your supervisors because of how respectful the student is or is not, then it seems to me that you are engaging in childish behavior with a child. Only one of you can use the excuse that they actually are a child.

Are you trying to say that the real world is coercive? Yes, if you do not do what your employer wants and what your employer wants is related to your job, then you can be dismissed. I am sorry no one has told you this before now.

No, but I don't think I have said as much.

I do not know if that is a consequence. But If I had a child who wanted to be referred to as a he and that child was born and developed like someone of the female sex, then I would surely let that child know that not everyone would be willing to call that child a he. No one here is delusional about people in the world. Realistically, there are plenty of people who will make mistakes and there are plenty of others who are disrespectful and bigoted.

I do not think that is the problem here. It doesn't matter what the teacher calls the child now. They were fired because they chose to refuse to comply with the supervisors direction.

Why do you believe that an employer can strip an employee of their Constitutional rights?