This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
Homosexuality General Discussion
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Azazel
I'm suprised dildos isn't caught by the language filter...
Post by
Jubilee
women's best friend
Post by
Azazel
women's best friend
QFT. This post is now saved forever. :P
Post by
44284
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
xaratherus
Just to liven this thread back up a bit:
Florida teacher suspended from teaching for anti-homosexual remarks on Facebook
A quick summary of the details as I understand them:
Jerry Buell made comments one evening on his personal Facebook page regarding homosexuals; in the comments, he likened same-sex relationships to a "cesspool", and compared the value of anyone who disagreed with him (especially homosexuals) to "the kidney stone I had in 1994".
After viewing his comments, one of the ~700 friends on his Facebook page contacted the school regarding the comments. The school system, which appears to have an ethical code to which teachers agree (and which they reaffirm agreement with on a regular basis), suspended Buell from teaching and moved him into an administrative position with minimal contact with the students, and are investigating to see if his comments violate that ethical code.
Buell asserts that these were private comments made on his personal Facebook, and that they in no way should be construed as hateful - just "the way he interprets things".
So, with that out of the way: Thoughts on the issue? I'll (as usual) withhold my thoughts until we get a few responses in.
Post by
324987
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
Heh, I don't know, you post stupid ^&*! on Facebook, where anyone can see it, can't be surprised when it comes back to bite you; knew a few women I worked with, who called in sick then went out for a 3 day party...and got caught because the guy in charge of attendance was on her Facebook(yes, she was a genius).
As for the bigot here; sad that they just shifted him into a backroom position instead of actually firing him, but guess they didn't want a lawsuit.
Post by
124027
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
xaratherus
Heh, I don't know, you post stupid ^&*! on Facebook, where anyone can see it, can't be surprised when it comes back to bite you; knew a few women I worked with, who called in sick then went out for a 3 day party...and got caught because the guy in charge of attendance was on her Facebook(yes, she was a genius).
As for the bigot here; sad that they just shifted him into a backroom position instead of actually firing him, but guess they didn't want a lawsuit.
Well, the shift is temporary. Their policy (according to other articles) states that in cases where a teacher may have made remarks that violate the school's ethical code, and thus could influence or endanger his/her students, the teacher would be suspended pending the investigation's outcome.
In this case, they moved him into an administrative position instead, where has no student contact. But if the investigation shows he violated that code, and the school's regulations allow them to fire him over it, then he could still lose his job.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
156138
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Sweetscot
On the teacher: He wants to teach at a school that uses an ethics code and he agreed to it...then (allegedly) violated it..just desserts.
We can debate the sense of ethics codes, but debating someone getting actioned for knowingly violating a contract they signed is pointless.
Post by
Thror
Having said that, there does still seem to be a question in peoples minds as to whether or not a statement on a social networking site can be classed as a public or private statement. Some, seem to content it's the equivalent to making a statement amongst a group of close friends. While others, myself included, believe it is more akin to standing up in a room and yelling your statement out loud while engraving it on the wall. Everyone can hear it, and anyone who sees your profile in the future can read it, unless you're smart enough to delete it.
Since the teacher we speak of is mentioned to have 700 friends, I think it is safe to say that posting anything equals saying it "in public". Especially if you consider that any of those friends can like or comment or share it, which makes the statements viral.
Being a person whose words are respected is quite a big responsibility. Such people should get used to the fact that they simply are not free to say just anything they might want to. (I find it stupid how some people are so dumbed by "freedom of speech" arguments that they forget about what weight and consequences could their words have.)
Post by
Skreeran
Being in love with someone of the same sex isn't wrong, morally. It isn't even "abnormal", IMO. You are attracted to who you are attracted to. However, it curbs your ability to reproduce; therefore from an evolutionary point of view, it is a flaw. I consider it Darwinism at work to be honest.
^ Atheist opinion.
This is scary, does this mean then 100,000 years of this and men will be able to bare child like a woman through evolution.I just facepalmed myself unconscious.
Edit: Also, Xaratherus, I think you'll get a kick out of
this
.
Post by
Thror
Edit: Also, Xaratherus, I think you'll get a kick out of
this
.
Because I live in England and not some developing country like Nigeria, Iran, or the USA, I was unable to locate a church that would perform a gay exorcism on me (lame), or even find one with strong antihomosexual leanings.
<3 <3 <3 <3
Post by
xaratherus
Edit: Also, Xaratherus, I think you'll get a kick out of
this
.
Because I live in England and not some developing country like Nigeria, Iran, or the USA, I was unable to locate a church that would perform a gay exorcism on me (lame), or even find one with strong antihomosexual leanings.
<3 <3 <3 <3
Hah!
That's awesome Skree, thanks for sharing.
In regards to the most recent topic in the thread (the one I introduced about Jerry Buell): Someone likened posting on Facebook to going to a mall's food court with your friends, and then standing up and shouting something. You may have meant the message to only be heard by your friends, but it's not a private setting.
I feel that this is only a question of Constitutional liberties
if
there is some question that the ethical code to which Buell agreed is found to unlawfully limit those liberties.
There are already rulings in place that show that those ethical codes, when suitably phrased, are legal and do not violate Constitutional freedoms; although I don't remember the name, there was a case awhile back where a college professor was let go for posting an adult video on the Internet. While pornography is protected by freedom of expression, the courts ruled that it was reasonable for the college to limit its employees' rights to that form of expression since they could negatively impact the college's reputation - and in this case, since the professor was clearly identifiable in the video, they were justified in firing him.
The same holds true in Buell's case: If the ethical code is found to be Constitutionally sound (i.e., it doesn't unreasonably limit an employee's freedoms), then he doesn't have a legal leg to stand on.
That's my "reasoned" opinion. My "emotional" opinion is that he should be fired. I wholeheartedly defend his freedom of speech and his right to voice his opinion - but nowhere in the Constitution are we guaranteed that exercising that freedom will be free of any non-violent retaliation.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I think an educational institution has the right to decide that they want to teach their students tolerance and about respecting other people, as well as math and science. We ask our schools to be responsible for many aspects of preparing children for adulthood. They are asked to teach people to be literate, do math, learn the basics of science and history, etc. to prepare them to choose a profession. We ask them to teach music, foreign language, art, etc. to help them develop well-rounded interests. We ask them to teach physical education and health, so that children can develop healthy habits and stay in shape. We ask them to teach sexual education so that they have the information to make informed choices in that arena. We ask them to host programs about the dangers of drugs and alcohol, and to organize sports teams to teach children about team-work and how to work towards goals. We ask them to punish our children for disobeying rules or misbehaving, to teach them the consequences of their actions. It is completely reasonable that we also ask them to teach children that it's not ok to treat other people with disrespect and that racism and prejudice are not good qualities.
Most schools have a code of conduct where saying comments of a discriminatory nature would result in the notifying of parents, forced apologies and probably a suspension. They expect the teachers ro enforce these rules, the same way that they expect them to enforce rules about drugs, underage smoking and drinking, not resorting to violence to solve conflicts, no stealing, etc. It's reasonable that they require that the teachers maintain a certin public image, so that the lessons are not undermined by people appearing hypocritical.
If you're a kid in the public school system, and you found a video of your teacher getting into a fist fight or snorting coke, how seriously would you take them telling you this isn't acceptable behavior. If you went online and found comments by your history teacher that the Holocaust was faked, or the moon landing was faked, how seriously would you take the rest of the information he was trying to teach you. If your school is campaigning for safe sexual practices, and your teachers are writing blogs about how anyone who uses condoms isn't getting the full effect, it sends mixed messages.
If this school wants part of it's overall education to be that intolerance and bigotry are not acceptable,then they have the right to ask teachers to follow a personal code of ethics to not compromise the education they're giving. If a teacher posts something on a website with 700 subscirbers/friends, which might also be searchable by others if it's a public profile, then they have the right to make sure in falls in line with the agreement he signed. If he had said the same kind of thing about inter-racial relationships, or about non-Christian relationships, there wouldn't even be a discussion as to whether or not it was inappropriate to fire him.
Post by
Meggie
In some cultures one needs to breed in order to get a burial. Some cultures require soldiers to overpower other cultures. And some cultures combine these things. Homosexuality poses a great threat to the values of these cultures.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.