04-12-2003 07:46									#91
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Why should parents be prevented from opting their child out if they feel the sex education is of very poor quality, inappropriate for the age, or directly contradictory to religious beliefs? Again, I would argue that schools are poor venues because the teachers are not properly trained in the medical aspects of sex education.

Well a lot of parents feel this way about public education, if you had your way parents would be responsible for children's entire education in general... does that really seem to be a good idea?

"The school doesn't teach history well, so it shouldn't teach it at all. Leave it up to Maw and Paw to teach Billy about that darn war we faught back then."

	04-12-2003 07:56									#92
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Yep. If it can be shown, or that you believe they are doing a poor job then you ought to find an acceptable alternative, even if it means homeschooling.

On the whole, I do think schools do a reasonable job with history, and other subjects unlike the case of sex education.

Even so, where is in in the mandate for a school to teach sex education on par with reading and writing and arithematic? Why should they waste precious classtime on frivolities?

	04-12-2003 07:59									#93
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I have to give propr to BK for so carefully and non-hysterically making such a baseless and incorrect arguement about what transpired. Though those props can go only so far, for hiw method also shows how rational people can rationalize their way into anything.

	04-12-2003 08:22									#94
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Can a public school force a teacher to say their is nothing wrong with gay couples if her religion says otherwise? If she refuses to approve of gay couples because of her religion, can she be fired?

	04-12-2003 08:48									#95
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

And Ned reads between the lines very well.

This case has been on the back of my mind throught the thread.

Now, to be charitable I will cite the opposing arguement.

CHRIS KEMPLING CASE:

http://www.bccla.org/pressreleases/03kempling.html

Civil Libertarians to Argue that Teachers Have No Right to Express Intention to Discriminate

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association will intervene on Monday July 28, 2003 in the appeal by Quesnel high school teacher and counselor Chris Kempling against the B.C. College of Teachers. The BCCLA will argue that some of Mr. Kempling's statements expressed an intention to discriminate against gay and lesbian students or against those who are questioning their sexual orientation. Such statements do not enjoy the protection normally afforded to speech because they express a commitment to act in an intolerant and discriminatory way and are a violation of Mr. Kempling's professional duties as a teacher and student counselor.

In 2002, the B.C. College of Teachers found that anti-homosexual statements made by Mr. Kempling in letters to the editor that were published in the local newspaper constituted "conduct unbecoming" a member of the teaching profession. Earlier this year, the College imposed a one month suspension as a penalty for his misconduct. Mr. Kempling has appealed these decisions to the B.C. Supreme Court. The BCCLA has been granted intervenor status in the case.

In almost any other context, the BCCLA would defend Mr. Kempling's right to express anti-homosexual opinions. But here, Mr. Kempling's statements clearly cross the line by indicating an intention to use his role as a public school counselor to discriminate against homosexual students.

BCCLA Vice President, John Russell said, "Mr. Kempling can no more use his position to persuade homosexual students of the immorality of their behaviour than he could use his position to persuade students of immorality of inter-racial dating or marriage." Russell added that, "The Supreme Court has held that public schools must reflect and uphold standards of tolerance, respect and equality where homosexuals are concerned. By publicly refusing to be a false teacher about the supposed perversity and immorality of homosexuality, Mr Kempling has clearly promised to violate those legally mandated requirements. Clearly, this is unacceptable."

Mr. Kempling's statements that cross the line include: "Sexual orientations can be changed... My hope is that students who are confused over their sexual orientation will come to see me... It could save their lives." In another letter, Mr. Kempling states: "I refuse to be a false teacher saying that promiscuity is acceptable, perversion is normal, and immorality is simply 'cultural' diversity of which we should be proud. Section 95(2) of the School Act states that teachers must 'inculcate the highest moral standards'. To all my critics I say, 2 Peter 2:4-19. Read it and weep."

	04-12-2003 08:53									#96
	Put an end to popups!

So yes, a teacher can be fired for expressing an opinion IN A NEWSPAPER let alone for expressing an opinion in class.

I could be arrested for making the same statements in a church, if I were a teacher.

Mr. Kempling never had any complaints about his counselling or teaching in all the years that he teaches, even from other gay students. He may believe that these children can be changed, but that it is not proper for his role as a teacher to fulfill these beliefs in the school. His conduct speaks for itself.

	04-12-2003 08:58									#97
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Now, I would have no problem with the child saying that he has two moms, and that they like each other, just as I would allow for a child to say that he has a mom and a dad and they both like each other. Where I disagree is having to explain the term gay, and what it means to be gay, an explanation provoked by the use fo the word gay, in the example, " I have two gay moms."

So a kid can say he has two moms, that they like or even love each other--which of course leads to the obvious conclusions--but should he utter g-a-y, it suddenly becomes wrong?

Since when did "gay" become a dirty word? Gee, all this time, I've been referring to myself with an expletive, apparently!

quote: I disagree with how the teacher handled that situation, which is why I posted my own response rather than merely criticising.

Yes, and I pointed out where your method was also inappropriate.

	04-12-2003 09:01									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Ned Can a public school force a teacher to say their is nothing wrong with gay couples if her religion says otherwise? If she refuses to approve of gay couples because of her religion, can she be fired?

When she's acting as a school official? You bet it can. When the teacher disciplined Marcus, she acted in her official capacity as a representative of the school. She has no right to inject her personal beliefs into official school business. She can be what she wants on her own time, but when on the job she can and should be expected to adhere to a level of decorum that includes not prostelyzing.

	04-12-2003 09:04									#99
	Put an end to popups!

Typical. The thread is about a case in which a boy was scolded for talking about his mommies, not a teacher who was suppressed in her views. Looks like in this case the teacher's views were given full reign.

	04-12-2003 09:05									#100
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Since when did "gay" become a dirty word? Gee, all this time, I've been referring to myself with an expletive, apparently!

When man can be fired as a teacher for expressing his beliefs on homosexuality, I would prefer to avoid the issue as much as possible.

Should true freedom exist, not only for the students, but also for the teacher, than I would agree that the word gay holds no bogeymen.

	04-12-2003 09:08									#101
	Remove this text

Nope, BK--a guy getting fired in British Columbia doesn't have diddly-squat to do with a kid getting scolded in Louisiana. How you contort yourself into these ludicrous associations, I have no idea.

	04-12-2003 09:09									#102
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ned Can a public school force a teacher to say their is nothing wrong with gay couples if her religion says otherwise? If she refuses to approve of gay couples because of her religion, can she be fired?

NO, she can't. If she treat people differently, hands out different punishments or rewards or grades becuase of someone being gay, or being the child of gays, then they can be tossed out in their ear, which is why BK's little post remains facicious: the man was fired for stating he would discriminate in HIS JOB against gays..so, he would be moving from the realm of his own beliefs into taking action based on these beliefs that were detrimental and discriminatory.

If you believe homosexuality is wrong, and plan to act in discriminatory ways against gays, then stay away form public sector work, cause in doing so you are violating your offices, and thus have every right to loose your job.

	04-12-2003 09:19									#103
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Nope, BK--a guy getting fired in British Columbia doesn't have diddly-squat to do with a kid getting scolded in Louisiana. How you contort yourself into these ludicrous associations, I have no idea.

Then you fail to see the whole point of my post.

GePap understands.

There is a moral difference between expressing a belief and acting upon your beliefs. It would be wrong for Kempling to act in this way as a counsellor in the school, which he has not done.

Now, conversely it is not wrong for a teacher to speak out against homosexuality in the class. It is only if the teacher treats this child differently from the others, that it would be wrong for her to do so.

Now, which would you prefer, my approach in the letter or a more activist one?

	04-12-2003 09:26									#104
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi No. I would hope that his dad likes his mom. Both senses should apply. Bringing this back to the point at hand, Boris and Azazel both understand that the child does not fully understand, nor should he ought to fully understand what it means to be gay. Now, I would have no problem with the child saying that he has two moms, and that they like each other, just as I would allow for a child to say that he has a mom and a dad and they both like each other. Where I disagree is having to explain the term gay, and what it means to be gay, an explanation provoked by the use fo the word gay, in the example, " I have two gay moms."

What was wrong with him explaining the term gay? Should the other child be protected from the knowledge that *gasp* some women like other women? If so, he should be EQUALLY protected from the knowledge that some men like women (and vice-versa).

	04-12-2003 09:26									#105
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Now, conversely it is not wrong for a teacher to speak out against homosexuality in the class. It is only if the teacher treats this child differently from the others, that it would be wrong for her to do so.

This is the crux of why your argument fails, because it IS wrong for a teacher to speak out against homosexuality in the class. This is your double standard - seven-year-old can't say the word "gay," but teacher can spout off about homosexuality to the class? Absolutely not.

Public school is not a vehicle for teachers to espouse their personal beliefs, and where you get the idea that teachers are allowed to say such things, I have no idea. You're being disingenuous to the extreme if you think that a teacher's saying such things can have just as much effect as the counselor's.

quote: Now, which would you prefer, my approach in the letter or a more activist one?

False dichotomy. The correct answer is neither: The teacher does nothing until the kid actually does something wrong.

	04-12-2003 09:29									#106
	Got spare money?

The problem BK is that Kempling supposedly made statements (do you have the actual transcript?) that indicated he was capable of acting against gays, not just disapproving of them, in his position. That is what got him in trouble. If you make a threat, even if you never carry it out, you will get in trouble, and this is what the admin. claims, that he made the threat of dicrimination on his job. Now, you can perhaps question interpretations of his words, but if he did make threats of acting in a discriminatory manner, then good ridance.

And this teacher remains absolutelky wrong. NO letter was necesary becuase no type of reprimand was warranted.

	04-12-2003 09:30									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

BK - stop threadjacking

	04-12-2003 09:36									#108
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

As I said, this issue demonstrates the major culture clash that is occurring, it appears across, North America and perhaps across the whole world. Perhaps one can pass laws preventing discrimination against gays. But to punish people for stating one's belief that gay activity is immoral is a violation of the first amendment's speech clause. Punishing them for refusing to say to the kids that gay activity is OK is similarly a violation of the first amendment and also a violation of the free exercise portion of the Constitution to the extent this belief is based upon their religion.

Since one cannot ban people from being teachers because of their religion, it would be better to keep the subject of "gaydom" entirely out of the public schools so as to not provoke unpleasant discussions.

The ACLU here is completely wrong, both in the LA and BC cases. This is a free speech issue and a free exercise of religion issue.

To be totally accepted in society, Gays must convince the major religions of the world that gay activities are "normal" and blessed by God. You simply cannot short-circuit this process by force.

	04-12-2003 09:37									#109
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Skywalker:

This is the crux of the argument.

If I cannot speak on my beliefs about homosexuality when the issue comes up, than no one gets to speak about their beliefs. Censorship only begets censorship.

I would be perfectly happy to allow the child to talk about his family, provided I can also say what I believe without fear of reprimand.

Boris:

False dichotomy? Now in what sense can such a teacher teach, if he cannot express himself? Why would it be right to muzzle the teacher and allow the child to speak?

	04-12-2003 09:46									#110
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi False dichotomy? Now in what sense can such a teacher teach, if he cannot express himself?

Who are you talking about? The Louisiana teacher? She can teach fine without expressing herself. Her job is to teach the textbook subject matter, not to espouse her moral philosophy to her kids.

quote: Why would it be right to muzzle the teacher and allow the child to speak?

Because the teacher is an employee who acts in an official capacity while teaching. While on the job she doesn't represent her own views, she represents the school, and in public schools, the entire local education system. Such systems have no right to impart religious beliefs on students.

Students aren't employees, are they?

Would it be acceptable to allow a teacher to spout off about interracial marriages, if she felt so inclined, should a child happen to mention his daddy is white and his mommy black? Or will the child be scolded for even saying such a horrendous thing?

	04-12-2003 09:49									#111
	Support Apolyton

Here are some samples of Kempling's writing.

http://www.bcptl.org/gay.htm#Kempling

	04-12-2003 09:51									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Skywalker: This is the crux of the argument. If I cannot speak on my beliefs about homosexuality when the issue comes up, than no one gets to speak about their beliefs. Censorship only begets censorship. I would be perfectly happy to allow the child to talk about his family, provided I can also say what I believe without fear of reprimand.

The child is not an employee and representative of the state. The teacher is. You are perfectly free to express your views, but not in your capacity as a teacher. Thus, the child cannot be reprimanded.

	04-12-2003 09:59									#113
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Because the teacher is an employee who acts in an official capacity while teaching. While on the job she doesn't represent her own views, she represents the school, and in public schools, the entire local education system. Such systems have no right to impart religious beliefs on students.

Agreed. Doesn't mean that the teacher cannot speak for herself, and make sure that she distinguishes between the two when doing so as the issue arises.

It would never be brought on by the teacher, but if she were asked, she ought to answer what she believes to be true and not have to muzzle her response.

quote: Would it be acceptable to allow a teacher to spout off about interracial marriages, if she felt so inclined, should a child happen to mention his daddy is white and his mommy black?

All you need to say is, "I don't happen to agree with that. I think it's wrong."

Then you move on. If she starts to berate the child, than she has crossed the line, into treating the child differently.

	04-12-2003 17:28									#114
	Suffering from ads?

quote: quote: Would it be acceptable to allow a teacher to spout off about interracial marriages, if she felt so inclined, should a child happen to mention his daddy is white and his mommy black? All you need to say is, "I don't happen to agree with that. I think it's wrong."

Really!? You mean all these centuries, the cure for bigotry has been so simple and everybody's been missing it? All Matthew Shephard needed to say was, "I don't happen to agree with this. I think it's wrong." Huh. Imagine that.

Stop being an apologist for ugliness. The teacher had no cause to write the letter. Period. End of debate. Marcus wasn't proclaiming from a Gay Rights Manifesto, he was merely giving a factual description of his home situation and why it was that way. Not bad for a seven-year-old.

	04-12-2003 17:36									#115
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ned Can a public school force a teacher to say their is nothing wrong with gay couples if her religion says otherwise? If she refuses to approve of gay couples because of her religion, can she be fired?

And what if the teacher is a white supremicist, or a Islamic Jihadist? Bigots shouldn't be teachers.

	04-12-2003 17:40									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ben Kenobi Agreed. Doesn't mean that the teacher cannot speak for herself, and make sure that she distinguishes between the two when doing so as the issue arises.

Wrong. It does mean she can't do so, when acting in her official capacity as a teacher. So whether it is in scolding Marcus in school or sending your hypothetical letter, it is inappropriate. There is a big difference between a child describing his moms as gay in a private conversation to another kid and an authority figure using her position to preach her moral tenets.

quote: It would never be brought on by the teacher, but if she were asked, she ought to answer what she believes to be true and not have to muzzle her response.

Yes, she does. Take the example of the students in KY who were prohibited from wearing T-shirts with Christian symbols on it. The ACLU sued on their behalf that such a prohibition was wrong and won, as they should have. This doesn't mean a teacher can now go up to a student wearing a Christian symbol and say, "You know, I think your religion is a bunch of crap."

Likewise, while a teacher is obligated to stop any sort of anti-gay harrassment at school among students, such a teacher shouldn't get up and start preaching about the joys of homosexuality should such a situation arise. I'm sure Christians would get their panties in a knot over that one.

There is a big difference between a student expressing themselves individually and a teacher using the bully pulpit to broadcast her beliefs. Authority figures have far more influence over kids and their beliefs than a single child has on his peers, so equating the expressions is simply disingenuous.

	04-12-2003 18:05									#117
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Ned But to punish people for stating one's belief that gay activity is immoral is a violation of the first amendment's speech clause. Punishing them for refusing to say to the kids that gay activity is OK is similarly a violation of the first amendment and also a violation of the free exercise portion of the Constitution to the extent this belief is based upon their religion.

No, it's not a violation, because a workplace can enforce standards about speech and conduct. While in official capacity, teachers don't have freedom of speech. I can't get on the phone in my office, dial up people and start hurdling expletives at them, can I? When did people get this false notion that workplaces are havens for free expression?

quote: Since one cannot ban people from being teachers because of their religion, it would be better to keep the subject of "gaydom" entirely out of the public schools so as to not provoke unpleasant discussions.

This could be applied to so many situations to the length of ludicrousness. Can kids mention interracial parents, or do we cowtow to racists who disaprove and make such a mention verboten? How about Anti-Semites, should we allow their bigotry to curtail mention of even the word "Jew?"

quote: The ACLU here is completely wrong, both in the LA and BC cases. This is a free speech issue and a free exercise of religion issue.

First, I don't see where the ACLU is involved in the BC case!

Second, as stated above, you're dead wrong. Public schools aren't places where teachers have unlimited freedom of speech, expression or religion. I'm the son of two teachers, I can guarantee you this is the case. And that's as it should be.

quote: To be totally accepted in society, Gays must convince the major religions of the world that gay activities are "normal" and blessed by God. You simply cannot short-circuit this process by force.

Nice (irrelevant) rant, but this isn't about gays trying to "force" anything. It's about a little boy who was scolded for saying his mommies were gay. That you can twist into this kind of hyperbole is, again, astounding.