Should this teacher be fired?

[SCitizen]

According to Talmud, executions in Ancient Israel were rare. According to Sanhedrin, a major court which sentences someone to death once in 7 years was considered cruel. Most of those sentenced to death were killers. Very few LGBT people were punished by courts.

But many practices are morally prohibited.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

he has taught for how long?

and has any of his students ever said his views were expressed in his classrooms?

no....

his views were sent to a newspaper....a school newspaper as a counter to the articles that they were running....an op ed if you will

i believe the 1st amendment still exists and ones thoughts and views, no matter how putrid are allowed

if expressed in the classroom....he would have overstepped his bounds....he didnt....he sent them in an article to a newspaper

i dont agree with his position, but i believe he has a right to express it

and this country was founded on the principle of free speech for all....not just those you agree with

or are you afraid of counter views, and counter public opinion

I Didn't say he didn't have a right to say them, I specifically said there are consequences to one's words.

 

[Crosscheck]

He posted it in a school publication, which could have chosen not to publish it, or delete it, as applicable.

Writing a letter to the editor in your local newspaper is different than writing a letter to the high school newspaper. May have been more appropriate in a University newspaper.

A little common sense is so had to find anymore.

 

[matchlight]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Living_Translation

Maybe yours is the unusual version

That might be, but so what? The teacher had the right to quote from whatever version of Romans he pleased in his letter. I think the Supreme Court's decisions on speech in schools--particularly Tinker, Papish, Widmar, and Rosenberger--strongly suggest that any action by the school to punish this teacher for his letter would have violated the First Amendment.

 

[matchlight]

I Didn't say he didn't have a right to say them, I specifically said there are consequences to one's words.

That is doubletalk. If a person has a constitutionally protected right to say certain things, that is just another way of saying that government may not force him to suffer negative consequences because of his speech. Because the First Amendment does not restrict what private persons may do, they are free impose negative consequences--e.g. through mockery, denunciation, or ostracism--on other private persons for saying things they don't like.

 

[Master PO]

Not at all, just adhere to a measure of honesty. Teach American history as it actually happened, not as a rank propaganda, movie reel.

since we don't want ideologies in teaching and those in that department, we must rid ourselves of those who would promote fascism, socialism and communism in our schools

since the dept of education embraced ideologies such as those in oct of 2010 they need to go.

 

[Bodi]

Quoting the bible is "hate speech"? You are being absurd

If the verse says that gays should die... then yes. It is hate speech.

 

[SCitizen]

The Bible condemns many sins -- I will not judge LGBT people since I do not follow many Laws -- mostly due to laziness. Everyone has sins and must face his/her own demons. But banning Bible? That is Communism.

 

[camlok]

since we don't want ideologies in teaching and those in that department, we must rid ourselves of those who would promote fascism, socialism and communism in our schools

since the dept of education embraced ideologies such as those in oct of 2010 they need to go.

You can do all you want in the school system, it won't change the fascist nature of US governments. And the people don't seem much inclined to change it either, even though they are helping to pay for the illegal invasions and all the terrorism, not to mention the huge armaments used to blow up innocents.

 

[Master PO]

You can do all you want in the school system, it won't change the fascist nature of US governments. And the people don't seem much inclined to change it either, even though they are helping to pay for the illegal invasions and all the terrorism, not to mention the huge armaments used to blow up innocents.

whether it helps or not, the education of kids should not be in Washingtons hands anyway, but at the local level.

 

[camlok]

whether it helps or not, the education of kids should not be in Washingtons hands anyway, but at the local level.

That's how it was and it didn't help prevent the formation of fascist/war criminal/terrorist US regimes. Not much ever came of Abe's BS about of the people by the people ..., did it? But locals would still teach the same crap.

 

[Master PO]

That's how it was and it didn't help prevent the formation of fascist/war criminal/terrorist US regimes. Not much ever came of Abe's BS about of the people by the people ..., did it? But locals would still teach the same crap.

we seem to be on 2 different paths

iam on the shrinking government down, while you seem to be on beating up on American history

 

[camlok]

we seem to be on 2 different paths

iam on the shrinking government down, while you seem to be on beating up on American history

America's history does all that is necessary to beat up on the myth that is America. Telling that doesn't mean that I am doing any beating.

 

[Master PO]

America's history does all that is necessary to beat up on the myth that is America. Telling that doesn't mean that I am doing any beating.

tell me, do you think whats happening today will be better?

 

[Crovax]

If the verse says that gays should die... then yes. It is hate speech.

Well that's not what the verse says. It says that an unrepentant sinners punishment is death. And no that doesn't mean to kill someone for sins but when they die it will be an everlasting death and they won't get the gift of eternal life in heaven.

People have cherry picked words and taken the wrong context of verses to create false outrage and further thier hatred of religon.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

That is doubletalk. If a person has a constitutionally protected right to say certain things, that is just another way of saying that government may not force him to suffer negative consequences because of his speech. Because the First Amendment does not restrict what private persons may do, they are free impose negative consequences--e.g. through mockery, denunciation, or ostracism--on other private persons for saying things they don't like.

It's not doubletalk. If gay students in her class feel threatened about his speech, the school has a duty to rectify the situation.

 

[gdgyva]

I Didn't say he didn't have a right to say them, I specifically said there are consequences to one's words.

so free speech for him ends the moment he becomes a teacher?

what other professions does that extend to?

sorry, but no....

he is still allowed his opinion...and his right to voice it

as long as he doesnt do so in the actual classroom....

or have we become 30's Germany?

 

[ThoughtEx.]

No. This Gay movement in its origin asked for tolerance. Today it has itself become intolerant. Shame on all you Liberals and Progressives. You're killing America.

Ah yes, the old "if you don't tolerate me calling for your death because my imaginary friend says so, you are intolerant" argument. Does no see the irony that conservatives are crying foul because people are making death threats against a person who, in a school paper, expressed the opinion that homosexuals deserve to die.

Shame on you for defending the same behavior you're calling out, in the same Post no less. If gays don't accept people calling for their death, they are intolerant? Good luck not looking like an idiot arguing that one.

 

[ThoughtEx.]

so free speech for him ends the moment he becomes a teacher?

what other professions does that extend to?

sorry, but no....

he is still allowed his opinion...and his right to voice it

as long as he doesnt do so in the actual classroom....

or have we become 30's Germany?

Ah, so if I'm a teacher, and I put in the paper that people who commit heterosexual acts deserve to die. Would you want me teaching your kids?

 

[Bodi]

Well that's not what the verse says. It says that an unrepentant sinners punishment is death. And no that doesn't mean to kill someone for sins but when they die it will be an everlasting death and they won't get the gift of eternal life in heaven.

People have cherry picked words and taken the wrong context of verses to create false outrage and further thier hatred of religon.

Everlasting death sounds even worse. The Bible can truly spread hate.

 

[DA60]

so free speech for him ends the moment he becomes a teacher?

what other professions does that extend to?

sorry, but no....

he is still allowed his opinion...and his right to voice it

as long as he doesnt do so in the actual classroom....

or have we become 30's Germany?

Well said.

He wrote a letter to the school newspaper...he did not teach it in class.

The First Amendment is not something that should be just discarded whenever it makes us uncomfortable.

He has a right to his personal views and to express them on his own time...which he did here.

No...I do not think he should have been fired strictly on the basis of this letter he wrote.

 

[DA60]

Ah, so if I'm a teacher, and I put in the paper that people who commit heterosexual acts deserve to die. Would you want me teaching your kids?

No.

But I think at least 50% of teachers in the public school system are useless and I would not want them teaching children of mine.

But what are you going to do? If you can't afford provate school (not that ALL of those teachers are perfect either), that is that.

I would just tell my child that their teacher is 100% wrong, that there is NOTHING wrong with homosexuality whatsoever and I would remind them that teachers are there STRICTLY to teach you the subject of the class. And that is ALL they should be teaching.

 

[Mario]

Yes. There is no place for hate speech in schools. Let alone from an authority figure.

What hate speech?

 

[matchlight]

It's not doubletalk. If gay students in her class feel threatened about his speech, the school has a duty to rectify the situation.

If you don't like the term "doubletalk," I'll be glad to call it gibberish instead: This teacher has the freedom of speech, and yet government has authority to punish him--for quoting the Bible--if the quotation happens to peeve some student who likes to engage in homosexual acts. Gibberish--like proclaiming piously that Mr. Jones should be perfectly free to leave his property, while at the same time saying he should be arrested if he sets foot outside it. The ugly fact you are trying to hide by talking gibberish--that you hope no one will see--is that you disdain the freedom of speech.

Luckily for those of us who love individual liberties like life itself, the Supreme Court has never even come close to interpreting the First Amendment to mean what you would like it to.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

The 1st Amendment is NOT absolute when it comes to what happens in schools, and that includes school newspapers. The caselaw that discusses this is Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. The "Tinker Test" is still used today to determine whether or not 1st Amendment rights apply or have been violated. What school officials cannot do is restrict speech because they want "to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint". However, they CAN restrict speech if that speech "materially and substantially interferes with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school." That's the "Tinker Test". So, the question is, did the speech disrupt the discipline and the operation of the school? Possibly. Depends on how gay students perceived what was said and whether or not there were repercussions towards them surrounding it. The second part is far more important and indicative of the "Tinker Test" than the first.