Hip-hip-hooray! A school board had the backbone and cojones to face down a bigot, call her by name and label, and punt her sorry ass OUT. Ms. Polk apparently thought that she could use her position as a substitute teacher as a soapbox to broadcast her anti-trans dreck and essentially bully the kids under her care.
She thought wrong and got PRECISELY what she deserved.
I might let her teach in one class. If every student is instructed ahead of time to call her "Mr Polk". When she complains, tell her it's the students sincere religious belief to address teachers as men.
Hemant said “she can’t do the bare minimum job” but, she is morally obstinate. She went seeking an opportunity for ‘persecution’ and that is the hill she chose to die on. She should only sub in Evilgelical Christian schools. I’m so tired of these people!
Did anyone actually point out that Christ himself was in favour of name changes for people? That's how St Peter got his name, his original name was Simon.
Every imaginable horror has been committed in the name of dearly held religious beliefs. The World Trade Center towers were brought down in the name of God, religion and morality. Her religion does not obligate the rest of the world to adjust to her beliefs.
Again we have a bully teacher that insists on calling kids by the names on their birth certificates. I would again point out that many kids don't like their first names or, in some cases may not go by them for another reason. Maybe they discovered last year that there was 14 'Brandons' in their class. Maybe all 6 of their brothers are also named 'George'. Or maybe their first name is Wolfenschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorff and going by their middle name is actually a 'blessing' for the sub. Regardless, a teacher that insists on calling a student by a name the student told them is wrong is a bully.
I recently had an instructor at a community college than insisted on calling me a nickname I didn't like. I ignored him when he called me until he used my proper name. In this case, the name on my birth certificate despite me telling him I go by a shortened version of it. But since I don't mind my first name, I considered that a win. Pushing back at a bully is the only way to get it across to them that they are being a bully. Claiming your religion tells you to be a bully is admitting that your religion is a pile of dung.
There's undoubtedly bullying going on in every school and classroom, it's unfortunately a fact of human life. But the teacher should actually be the first line of defence against bullying not join in!
That wisdom is sadly lost on those who seek positions holding power over others, be they so low on the totem pole as a substitute teacher, or so high as a President, because they enjoy the feeling of power itself.
The nail in the coffin for me - and I'm sad that the courts didn't pursue or emphasize this line - is if she uses nicknames for cis kids. She almost certainly does - it's difficult to get 30 humans together and *not* have one of them using a nickname. But if she does, then that demonstrates that her claim to have a religious opposition to 'not using God-given names' is false. If she's happy to use a not-on-birth-certificate appelation for cis kids and only invokes this religious argument when it comes to trans kids, then that's straight up discrimination, and clearly isn't coming from some religious rule about using only 'God-given' names.
Polk clearly has a chip on her shoulder the size of a California Redwood, never mind the biblical log in her eye. It continues to astonish me how people supposedly raised Christian with the "love your enemies" lesson from the Carpenter-turned-Rabbi can go so far afield.
But then, too, the preachers she and others like her listen to probably don't care much for the Beatitudes.
Yeah I think actually following Jesus' words left the building sometime back in the late '80s. Reagan legalized millions of immigrants, but he also drastically undercut social services for the poor and mentally ill. So that, IMO, is about the inflection point; when the conservative evangelical movement really seriously started turning away from promoting social collective good and turned inwards towards me me me nothing for them.
Kids also 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 their nicknames all the time as they grow into themselves, and nobody bats an eyelid at that- but when it's a 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴 kid asking to be called something new, it's the end of the bloody world. If the same teacher has taught kids in more than one grade, at any point- as a sub may need to do- then they've almost certainly had to adapt to the same kid going by a different name in a different grade, more than once.
Plus, a sub is going to be learning everyone's names and nicknames for the first time on a routine basis. They can't possibly keep track of every kid in the district; by the nature of their job, most classes they walk into are going to be full of strangers, so we're likely not even talking about a person having trouble getting used to a kid they already knew using a different name... we're more probably talking about someone who's learning all the kids' names for the first time, but refusing to learn the 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵 name for the 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘬𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳 who may be trans in any given class.
Which is, in fact, more work than just calling said kid by the name they've asked to be called by. It will never cease to amaze me that bigots will expend additional effort, over the most trivial things, just so they can show off their bigotry. They're not content to just hate quietly; everyone's got to 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 about it, or they don't get that dopamine hit from the power trip.
I know of a trans kid who changed his name. His name happens to be a homophone of his dead name. So in effect he changed the spelling but the pronunciation is unchanged. I asked him if that made anyone’s head explode. He chuckled delightedly and nodded.
My family name (the one on my birth certificate, anyway) is one of those short, but difficult-to-pronounce ones that isn't spelled phonetically because it doesn't originate in English. My regular teachers all eventually got the hang of it- two of them having an easier time than most because my grandmother was their teacher when 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 were schoolchildren- but substitutes over the years showed me just how incredible a range of mispronunciations and misspellings one could derive from a six-letter name. Very few of them ever thought to just ask "how do I pronounce this" or "how do you spell that"- they just made their own assumptions, then frequently got angry when corrected. One time, I wound up in the Principal's office because the sub's ego was just too fragile to stand admitting the mistake... and 𝘰𝘩 𝘣𝘰𝘺 did that sub ever get an earful when mom showed up. A proper, 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦-𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯-𝘵𝘩𝘦-𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨- it put the biggest smile on my face. The Principal knew what was up; my sister went to the same school, and our name getting screwed up was by that point (4th grade, as I recall) a well-known phenomenon, but the sub 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 on getting parents involved, so...
It's been my experience that subs, generally, have bigger egos than regular teachers. Perhaps it's the insecurity of stepping into an unfamiliar class- their way of establishing their authority quickly, but rudely- or perhaps it's just a quirk of the profession that attracts such people. I dunno. But I can count the good K-12 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘴 I had on one hand, and I don't even need all five fingers to do it.
Further Thought: This continuing dodge of "sincerely-held religious beliefs" needs to be called out for the lame excuse that it is. Religion is being repeatedly employed as a wedge to sneak in bigotry and discrimination to suit the bigot's skewed POV.
It is one thing to have religious beliefs. It is quite another to use them aggressively against other people, whether to make her feel better or superior or whatever. Polk acted as a bully, and she should not have been surprised when she was treated like a bully.
I should think that someone claiming "sincerely-held religious beliefs" before a court of law has the responsibility to demonstrate that they hold to, and have held to, *all* the teachings that are part and parcel within that system. Ignoring any of those teachings should immediately invalidate their position.
This should, but likely wouldn't, stop (well... in court anyway) all such claims and excuses.
"I believe A so I demand my rights!"
"What about B, B.1, D, E.4?"
"What? Oh. Er. Those were different times! You're taking them out of context! I don't read the Qura... what do you mean it's in the Christian bible?!"
No. The point of the 1a is to protect every individuals' own beliefs from majoritarian religious dominance. When you start insisting that only some specific, majoritarian interpretation of Christianity is afforded 1a protection while wierd little offbrand individualistic versions of Christianity get no protection, you're doing exactly the opposite of what the founders and 1a is supposed to do.
We already have the solution, the courts found it in the 1800s and refined it through multiple cases in the 1960s. 1. The government can regulate *conduct* but should never try to regulate what people can believe. 2. It regulates conduct only when it can show a good reason (here "when you're speaking as a representative of the government, not as a private individual" is a good reason to regulate conduct). 3. Reasonable accommodations should be attempted when possible (example: if she wants to practice this rule with the other teachers in the teacher lounge, fine. Just not to the students).
How do you separate conduct from belief? Don't get me wrong, I understand you can't regulate belief (or even identify whether it is "sincere" or not. Not truly), and the situation here you fairly point out is a conduct issue, but a person's conduct, their actions, are either generally in accordance with their beliefs, or are informed by their beliefs (my distinction here being that while their beliefs may not directly dictate their actions, they will likely affect them in some way).
So, while I was being sarcastic and facetious in reference to obvious religious hypocrisy, the SCOTUS (and many lower courts) *have* ruled in favor of "sincerely held religious belief", regardless of the impact of the conduct in evidence (think of a cake baker being allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ+).
Belief is whats in your head, and what you express verbally. Conduct is what you do. So the Mormons can believe God wants them to practice polygamy, but practicing it remains illegal. Rastafarians can believe God wants them to smoke dope, but smoking dope is still federally illegal. And this lady can believe God wants her bully trans kids, but if she does so, she can still legally be fired because teacher harassment of a student remains illegal even if she deeply believes God requires it of her.
So yes, the government can force you to act against your beliefs in some cases.
And while I don't agree with many of the recent SCOTUS 1A religious expansions, I'm pretty sure none of them are saying "you can't regulate conduct." In most of them, the court is saying "if someone can quote a nonreligious reason for conduct and you let that go, then you have to let it go when they quote a religious reason too." So for example, the PA adoption case the city allowed secular POC-focused adoption agencies to *preferentially* match black children with black parents. So the court said - okay Philadelphia, if you allow that, then you have to allow a religious adoption agency to preferentially match kids with parents who share the agencies' religion. (PA response after losing the case: "okay, we choose none". And that worked.). Similar thing with Maine and the schools - the court said you can't have one set of rules for Christian voucher schools and a different one for non-Christian ones (Maine response after the loss: "okay, we thought this was obvious but just to be clear, NO voucher school can discriminate against gay kids". And that worked too).
Cakeshop was even more restricted. In that case, SCOTUS out and out said that Colorado could continue to enforce their nondiscrimination laws - but they needed to do it fairly. The court found that the state had showed animus (i.e. bias) against this one defendant because of the defendant's religious beliefs, so they said the case had to be sent back to lower courts and adjudicated more neutrally next time around. IMO it was a complete BS call, but it was much less impactful than "you can't regulate religious conduct".
We are getting these near-constant right-wing attacks on that very traditional, historic, long-standing and clear precedent because these people are not really conservative, not really small government, not really traditional. They simply see the current SCOTUS as having a good chance of pushing their partisan agenda, so they keep the cases coming.
That I cannot get into my head, that people genuinely seem to think that their religion allows/enables/commands them to be beastly to other people, when everything I know of Jesus tells me that he'd be in favour of supporting people and being nice to them.
Perfect decision! I appreciate the court’s stand on this. My name is Elizabeth but my preferred name is Liz. No big deal. Yes, it’s different from being transgender but you get my point.
Our school district policies have always allowed subs to pick what grade levels, schools, hours, and days they sub. Other than that they are trying their best to lean hard into christian nationalism.
I have a dear friend whose name is Elizabeth and she goes by Elizabeth. She'll introduce herself to someone "Hi, my name is Elizabeth" and far too often she gets "Nice to meet you, Liz".
Another friend is an Elizabeth, she goes by Liz.
I'm a Joseph. Mom called me Joey, most folks call me Joe. I'm generally not fussy about it¹. VA dental assistant yesterday simply asked what I preferred to be called - definitely welcoming and respectful.
(¹ Aside from the amused annoyance when the antisocial media goons use the diminutive as an attempted insult. 🙂)
A few years ago my Dad was visiting me and unfortunately he had to be admitted to hospital. Beside his bed was a large whiteboard with questions such as 'My name is ...', 'I like to be called ....', 'I like to drink ....' - which I filled in for my Dad. That way he got his tea without(!) milk and lots of sugar.
The Southern General is a very new hospital. They’ve incorporated many of the new ideas of what a hospital should be like, e.g. all their beds are single occupancy. They have an en-suite accessible bathroom (with shower) and that white board which I mentioned. All the rooms have got a little window to enable the staff to look in on patients (the window has got a little curtain). The reason why the building is star-shaped is to provide daylight for patients’ rooms. The room also has got another feature, which is not common in other places - there’s a high backed arm chair, every bed has got a high-backed arm chair. It provides a place for visitors and more importantly for patients to sit, so that they’re not just stuck in bed.
One other thing, the hospital booked an interpreter to attend during ward rounds. I asked and they said that it was policy, so that there’d be a trained person to translate the conversation between staff and patients. Translate properly.
Northeast Ohio has a couple pretty decent hospital systems: Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals. When I went to the UH's Ahuja facility to get my gallbladder out, I was very impressed with the quality of their service, though they didn't have the whiteboard you suggested.
Seems to me it would be worth noting that to them, though I have NO desire to need their services anytime soon!
Wishing you the same - that you’ll stay out of hospital for a loooooong time to come.
Another little thought, at one point my Dad and me calculated how much his care would have cost him had he fallen ill back home. We came to a figure of E150. His care included a visit to A&E (ER), in-patient care for a few days, calls to the NHS24 helpline, a home visit by a doctor, a visit to a GP, a visit to an out-patient imaging centre and prescriptions. We didn’t pay anything, even my parking at the hospital didn’t cost anything.
For anyone interested this was due to the EHIC system, which provides healthcare to EU citizens in other EU states as if they are locals. So whatever locals are charged, that’s what you’d have to pay as well. Or in this case, my Dad was treated as a local and thus he paid no fees or charges. Because here we pay for our healthcare via our taxes.
The hospital was the Southern General in Glasgow, the new building. Which is occasionally called the Death Star by locals .. a label let's say it's not appreciated by the health board.
One more thought - that board was great, it enabled the nurses to look after my Dad. My Dad was ... practically non-verbal in this setting, he was perfectly fine, no confusion, no dementia, nothing in this regard. It was just that his English language skills were so poor, literally he could do 'Sank you' but not much else. And the board helped with communication.
Umm, nope. As a teacher in a public school, she is an agent of the government. Outside of school? She has all the First Amendment rights to be as bigoted as she wants. While in the school as a teacher? She is supposed protect those rights for the students. Her rights are restricted. Exercising her rights while serving as a teacher is 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 a violation of the Establishment Clause.
One would think that someone educated enough to qualify to teach the nation's children would understand that basic principle.
These are, of course, the same people who are only too happy to curtail teachers' free speech rights when those teachers 𝘥𝘰 want to be tolerant and accepting of diversity in their classrooms. If they didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
[because her religion requires her to be an asshole to them.]
I mean, it doesn't really. Nothing in the book touches on transgenderism, really. A lot of other horrible things... slavery, genocide, misogyny, racism, but nothing really about transgenderism. They have to yank a bit from one of the creation myths and interpret it wrongly to get there.
And they have to ignore their own teachings on the universe being chaotic because Adam and Eve ate a fruit.
And they definitely have to ignore the bit about loving their neighbors and that "neighbor" title applies to all of humanity, not just people like you.
And the bit about trying to live peaceably with everyone.
And, of course, assuming she genuinely believes she's suffering for being "righteous" (she's not), then she should rejoice and count herself blessed and not sit around complaining. Not that Christians like her know what actual persecution for righteousness' sake is. Alex Pretti and Renee Good were persecuted for doing what was right, but I'm sure she'd insist they deserved it.
These people LOVE to cherrypick Leviticus in order to justify their bigotry don't they? Yet they continue to eat shellfish, wear clothing of mixed fibers, and violate every other law written in that book.
Hemant didn’t mention it but this is the same school district that lost the Mahmoud case in SCOTUS. That’s the one where parents can opt their kids out of lessons and the schools need to accommodate them.
MontCo is the most populous county in Maryland. It is the wealthiest. Highest income. And is among the most ethnically diverse counties in America. Governing it must be a bitch.
Accommodating kids religious beliefs? Yes. That's what the First Amendment is for. Accommodating teachers? The government doesn't get to accommodate itself.
Maybe she was an only child and always got what she wanted. Please tell me where these Bible thumpers get their beliefs especially about given names or gender preferences or anything that has nothing to do with or without the Bible. I wish they would stop pretending that they are holy and righteous when all they are is hateful and ridiculous.
Accommodating the public is otherwise known as SERVICE ... and if that isn't what government at any and all levels is about, then I don't know WHAT it's supposed to be about.
Mmmm, ethnic restaurants! Lebanese, Somali, Sudanese! We've had those and others in Cleveland, though the Somali restaurant closed its doors sometime back. But OH, was their stuff GOOD! 😋
We had a great meal in an Uzbeki eatery. I had a lamb dish that had some Chinese flavors and some I don’t know what flavors. A hole in the wall in a shopping center.
And once we were in a Chinese place. The menu was boring. Sweet and sour pork, etc. Across a wall was a huge white board filled with Chinese characters. There were several tables of elderly Chinese men eating stuff that clearly not sweet and sour pork. We asked the waiter what those dishes on the white board were. He waggled his finger at us and said, “not for you”.
MontCo is about 40% white non-Hispanic, 20% Hispanic, 20% black, 15% Asian and 5% other stuff. The Hispanics are diverse, the black subset includes a noticeable share of fairly recent African immigrants, and the Asian subset is also diverse. One really can sample the world’s cuisines there.
I don't know that Cuyahoga County, which includes Cleveland, is quite THAT eclectic. I DO know that we've had Peruvian and other African restaurants here and there, though more than a couple of them have folded, drat it.
What I DO know is that I'm getting to the point where I prefer good ethnic food to a good steak (and I LIKE a good steak - medium rare, please). I mean, let's hear it for VARIETY!!!
She doesn't understand that the government doesn't have free speech, the people do. She also doesn't understand that a public school teacher IS the government.
The best thing about this ruling is that no trans kids, or any other kids, were harmed in the making of it. She objected to the paperwork--the idea--that people should be allowed to go by what they want, apparently without ever actually encountering a trans child in the classroom. Truly amazing when you consider that, according to christian nationalists, trans kids are overrunning the school system and threatening to bring down all western society.
Evidently this was an objection she only raised after a year on the job, too. I dunno whether the district published new guidance, or whether the issue just wasn't on her radar until she thought she saw an opportunity to jump on the Wingnut Welfare gravy train, but... as the kids say, "seems a little sus." (...do kids still say that?)
“𝑛𝑜 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑘 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑎 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑀𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑔𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝐶𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑦” 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑏𝑦 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛, 𝑠ℎ𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑓𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑠𝑒𝑡 𝑏𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑐ℎ𝑜𝑜𝑙 𝑏𝑜𝑎𝑟𝑑.
Hip-hip-hooray! A school board had the backbone and cojones to face down a bigot, call her by name and label, and punt her sorry ass OUT. Ms. Polk apparently thought that she could use her position as a substitute teacher as a soapbox to broadcast her anti-trans dreck and essentially bully the kids under her care.
She thought wrong and got PRECISELY what she deserved.
What she truly deserves is never being allowed to teach public schoolchildren in any capacity ever again.
BINGO! 👍👍👍
I might let her teach in one class. If every student is instructed ahead of time to call her "Mr Polk". When she complains, tell her it's the students sincere religious belief to address teachers as men.
𝐼 𝑑𝑜 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑛 𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑎𝑢𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑛; 𝑠ℎ𝑒 𝑚𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑏𝑒 𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑒𝑡.
-- 1 Timothy 2:12
In that case, she shall be referred to as "Sinner".
Sounds like Timothy never heard of Lillith.
Lilith would have scared the life out of Timothy AND Paul ... and just as well.
In that case, she must be a man in drag.
Sauce for the goose.
With a saguaro cactus/
Hemant said “she can’t do the bare minimum job” but, she is morally obstinate. She went seeking an opportunity for ‘persecution’ and that is the hill she chose to die on. She should only sub in Evilgelical Christian schools. I’m so tired of these people!
Did anyone actually point out that Christ himself was in favour of name changes for people? That's how St Peter got his name, his original name was Simon.
Also Simeon and Cephas.
Also Mythy.
Yeth.
That's a myth!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilzKN-Niosg
Sounds like 𝑀𝑦𝑡ℎ𝐴𝑑𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒𝑠.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythAdventures#Books
Again pointing out things from the book that they have never read will not help to convince them.
That wasn’t rethuglican Jeebus.
Now let's get a similar ruling for pharmacists!
Oh, HELL, YEAH! You either serve ALL THE PUBLIC or you refresh your resume!
Damn straight!
Montgomery County MD is very blue, so I'm not surprised they took this position. Whether it holds up at a higher level, who knows.
And if she wants to be a bigot and bully trans kids she is free to move to Florida.
Please, no encouragement. We have too many MAGAts here already.
Polk will teach the kids how to fulnecky their assignments:
Math: The square root of 12 is Jesus.
Science: The p orbital has no electrons, just Jesus.
History: The 45th,46th and 47th President of the United States was Donald Trump. Biden stole the middle one.
Ummm ... pardon me just a second.
🤢🤢🤢🤮🤮🤮
Every imaginable horror has been committed in the name of dearly held religious beliefs. The World Trade Center towers were brought down in the name of God, religion and morality. Her religion does not obligate the rest of the world to adjust to her beliefs.
Again we have a bully teacher that insists on calling kids by the names on their birth certificates. I would again point out that many kids don't like their first names or, in some cases may not go by them for another reason. Maybe they discovered last year that there was 14 'Brandons' in their class. Maybe all 6 of their brothers are also named 'George'. Or maybe their first name is Wolfenschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorff and going by their middle name is actually a 'blessing' for the sub. Regardless, a teacher that insists on calling a student by a name the student told them is wrong is a bully.
I recently had an instructor at a community college than insisted on calling me a nickname I didn't like. I ignored him when he called me until he used my proper name. In this case, the name on my birth certificate despite me telling him I go by a shortened version of it. But since I don't mind my first name, I considered that a win. Pushing back at a bully is the only way to get it across to them that they are being a bully. Claiming your religion tells you to be a bully is admitting that your religion is a pile of dung.
Shoot, just call the kid, "Wolf!" Other kids might think that was pretty cool! 😁
Especially if his name is Wolfgang Van Halen.
‼️‼️
There's undoubtedly bullying going on in every school and classroom, it's unfortunately a fact of human life. But the teacher should actually be the first line of defence against bullying not join in!
Love the Wolfen...stein ...sen...dorff. very creative. 😂
..
Another Christian who thinks "religious liberty" means "I have the right to treat other people like crap and I'm the victim if you stop me".
Please pardon me for breaking out a semi-old rant:
𝐼 𝑑𝑜𝑛'𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑜𝑢'𝑟𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛, 𝐽𝑒𝑤, 𝑀𝑢𝑠𝑙𝑖𝑚, 𝑀𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑜𝑛, 𝑤ℎ𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟. 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑝 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑜𝑚 𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑡, 𝑜𝑟 𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑎 𝑏𝑎𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎 𝑔𝑢𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑔𝑜 𝑜𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑎𝑡𝑟𝑜𝑙 𝑜𝑟 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑎 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠, 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑜𝑙𝑒, 𝒀𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝑶𝑵𝑳𝒀 𝑶𝒃𝒍𝒊𝒈𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑰𝒔 𝑻𝒐 𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝑳𝑨𝑾. 𝑊ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝐵𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑜𝑟 𝑄𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑟 𝐵ℎ𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑑 𝐺𝑖𝑡𝑎 𝑜𝑟 𝐵𝑜𝑜𝑘 𝑜𝑓 𝑀𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑎𝑦𝑠 𝑯𝑨𝑺 𝑵𝑶 𝑷𝑳𝑨𝑪𝑬 ... 𝑏𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑤𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑦 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑎𝑦 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑛𝑜 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑔𝑜𝑑 𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙. 𝐵𝑒𝑐𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒, 𝑖𝑡 𝑖𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑢𝑝𝑜𝑛 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑡𝑜 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛 𝑵𝑬𝑼𝑻𝑹𝑨𝑳.
𝐼𝑓 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑐𝑎𝑛'𝑡 𝑑𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 ... 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦. 𝑃𝐸𝑅𝐼𝑂𝐷.
This also holds for stepping into a public school classroom.
That wisdom is sadly lost on those who seek positions holding power over others, be they so low on the totem pole as a substitute teacher, or so high as a President, because they enjoy the feeling of power itself.
How does one convey to those who are in such positions that they are there to SERVE more than be served? Wish I knew.
The only things these twisted fucks deserve to be 𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘦𝘥 with are court papers.
That's a great summary! It's a great reasoning why the state should be secular.
Thanks! I'm thinking of rewording it and seeing if I can get it published as an op-ed piece.
You are hereby pardoned. Go thy way and sin no more.😂😂😂😂
ALLLLLLLLLLLLLL Righty, then! 😝
She *does* have the right to treat other people like crap...in her personal life.
What she can't do is sign a contract that says "on this job you represent the State of Maryland, so you can't treat people like crap" and then do so.
The nail in the coffin for me - and I'm sad that the courts didn't pursue or emphasize this line - is if she uses nicknames for cis kids. She almost certainly does - it's difficult to get 30 humans together and *not* have one of them using a nickname. But if she does, then that demonstrates that her claim to have a religious opposition to 'not using God-given names' is false. If she's happy to use a not-on-birth-certificate appelation for cis kids and only invokes this religious argument when it comes to trans kids, then that's straight up discrimination, and clearly isn't coming from some religious rule about using only 'God-given' names.
Polk clearly has a chip on her shoulder the size of a California Redwood, never mind the biblical log in her eye. It continues to astonish me how people supposedly raised Christian with the "love your enemies" lesson from the Carpenter-turned-Rabbi can go so far afield.
But then, too, the preachers she and others like her listen to probably don't care much for the Beatitudes.
Yeah I think actually following Jesus' words left the building sometime back in the late '80s. Reagan legalized millions of immigrants, but he also drastically undercut social services for the poor and mentally ill. So that, IMO, is about the inflection point; when the conservative evangelical movement really seriously started turning away from promoting social collective good and turned inwards towards me me me nothing for them.
♫♪ All through the day / I - Me - Mine, I - Me - Mine, I - Me - Mine ♪♫
-- George Harrison, "I - Me - Mine"
That song disturbed me the first time I heard it. It still does, and I don't think that's a necessarily bad thing.
My preferred pronouns...I, me, mine!
No one, and I mean NO ONE beats ol' Daffy as it comes to that last one!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKMNPQ35OUc
Kids also 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 their nicknames all the time as they grow into themselves, and nobody bats an eyelid at that- but when it's a 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴 kid asking to be called something new, it's the end of the bloody world. If the same teacher has taught kids in more than one grade, at any point- as a sub may need to do- then they've almost certainly had to adapt to the same kid going by a different name in a different grade, more than once.
Plus, a sub is going to be learning everyone's names and nicknames for the first time on a routine basis. They can't possibly keep track of every kid in the district; by the nature of their job, most classes they walk into are going to be full of strangers, so we're likely not even talking about a person having trouble getting used to a kid they already knew using a different name... we're more probably talking about someone who's learning all the kids' names for the first time, but refusing to learn the 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵 name for the 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘬𝘪𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳 who may be trans in any given class.
Which is, in fact, more work than just calling said kid by the name they've asked to be called by. It will never cease to amaze me that bigots will expend additional effort, over the most trivial things, just so they can show off their bigotry. They're not content to just hate quietly; everyone's got to 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 about it, or they don't get that dopamine hit from the power trip.
I know of a trans kid who changed his name. His name happens to be a homophone of his dead name. So in effect he changed the spelling but the pronunciation is unchanged. I asked him if that made anyone’s head explode. He chuckled delightedly and nodded.
My family name (the one on my birth certificate, anyway) is one of those short, but difficult-to-pronounce ones that isn't spelled phonetically because it doesn't originate in English. My regular teachers all eventually got the hang of it- two of them having an easier time than most because my grandmother was their teacher when 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 were schoolchildren- but substitutes over the years showed me just how incredible a range of mispronunciations and misspellings one could derive from a six-letter name. Very few of them ever thought to just ask "how do I pronounce this" or "how do you spell that"- they just made their own assumptions, then frequently got angry when corrected. One time, I wound up in the Principal's office because the sub's ego was just too fragile to stand admitting the mistake... and 𝘰𝘩 𝘣𝘰𝘺 did that sub ever get an earful when mom showed up. A proper, 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦-𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯-𝘵𝘩𝘦-𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨- it put the biggest smile on my face. The Principal knew what was up; my sister went to the same school, and our name getting screwed up was by that point (4th grade, as I recall) a well-known phenomenon, but the sub 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 on getting parents involved, so...
It's been my experience that subs, generally, have bigger egos than regular teachers. Perhaps it's the insecurity of stepping into an unfamiliar class- their way of establishing their authority quickly, but rudely- or perhaps it's just a quirk of the profession that attracts such people. I dunno. But I can count the good K-12 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘴 I had on one hand, and I don't even need all five fingers to do it.
"If I discriminate against or criticize you, it's called religious freedom. If you return the favor, it's called persecution."
-- Betty Bowers
Someone needs to tell Polk that Betty Bowers isn't real and that she's a parody of self-righteous Christians portrayed by an atheist.
Betty Bowers is at least both funny and poignant in her observations. Polk is neither.
Further Thought: This continuing dodge of "sincerely-held religious beliefs" needs to be called out for the lame excuse that it is. Religion is being repeatedly employed as a wedge to sneak in bigotry and discrimination to suit the bigot's skewed POV.
It is one thing to have religious beliefs. It is quite another to use them aggressively against other people, whether to make her feel better or superior or whatever. Polk acted as a bully, and she should not have been surprised when she was treated like a bully.
I should think that someone claiming "sincerely-held religious beliefs" before a court of law has the responsibility to demonstrate that they hold to, and have held to, *all* the teachings that are part and parcel within that system. Ignoring any of those teachings should immediately invalidate their position.
This should, but likely wouldn't, stop (well... in court anyway) all such claims and excuses.
"I believe A so I demand my rights!"
"What about B, B.1, D, E.4?"
"What? Oh. Er. Those were different times! You're taking them out of context! I don't read the Qura... what do you mean it's in the Christian bible?!"
𝐴𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑠 𝑐𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛.
-- David Silverman
No. The point of the 1a is to protect every individuals' own beliefs from majoritarian religious dominance. When you start insisting that only some specific, majoritarian interpretation of Christianity is afforded 1a protection while wierd little offbrand individualistic versions of Christianity get no protection, you're doing exactly the opposite of what the founders and 1a is supposed to do.
We already have the solution, the courts found it in the 1800s and refined it through multiple cases in the 1960s. 1. The government can regulate *conduct* but should never try to regulate what people can believe. 2. It regulates conduct only when it can show a good reason (here "when you're speaking as a representative of the government, not as a private individual" is a good reason to regulate conduct). 3. Reasonable accommodations should be attempted when possible (example: if she wants to practice this rule with the other teachers in the teacher lounge, fine. Just not to the students).
How do you separate conduct from belief? Don't get me wrong, I understand you can't regulate belief (or even identify whether it is "sincere" or not. Not truly), and the situation here you fairly point out is a conduct issue, but a person's conduct, their actions, are either generally in accordance with their beliefs, or are informed by their beliefs (my distinction here being that while their beliefs may not directly dictate their actions, they will likely affect them in some way).
So, while I was being sarcastic and facetious in reference to obvious religious hypocrisy, the SCOTUS (and many lower courts) *have* ruled in favor of "sincerely held religious belief", regardless of the impact of the conduct in evidence (think of a cake baker being allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ+).
Belief is whats in your head, and what you express verbally. Conduct is what you do. So the Mormons can believe God wants them to practice polygamy, but practicing it remains illegal. Rastafarians can believe God wants them to smoke dope, but smoking dope is still federally illegal. And this lady can believe God wants her bully trans kids, but if she does so, she can still legally be fired because teacher harassment of a student remains illegal even if she deeply believes God requires it of her.
So yes, the government can force you to act against your beliefs in some cases.
And while I don't agree with many of the recent SCOTUS 1A religious expansions, I'm pretty sure none of them are saying "you can't regulate conduct." In most of them, the court is saying "if someone can quote a nonreligious reason for conduct and you let that go, then you have to let it go when they quote a religious reason too." So for example, the PA adoption case the city allowed secular POC-focused adoption agencies to *preferentially* match black children with black parents. So the court said - okay Philadelphia, if you allow that, then you have to allow a religious adoption agency to preferentially match kids with parents who share the agencies' religion. (PA response after losing the case: "okay, we choose none". And that worked.). Similar thing with Maine and the schools - the court said you can't have one set of rules for Christian voucher schools and a different one for non-Christian ones (Maine response after the loss: "okay, we thought this was obvious but just to be clear, NO voucher school can discriminate against gay kids". And that worked too).
Cakeshop was even more restricted. In that case, SCOTUS out and out said that Colorado could continue to enforce their nondiscrimination laws - but they needed to do it fairly. The court found that the state had showed animus (i.e. bias) against this one defendant because of the defendant's religious beliefs, so they said the case had to be sent back to lower courts and adjudicated more neutrally next time around. IMO it was a complete BS call, but it was much less impactful than "you can't regulate religious conduct".
This lame excuse was called out by SCOTUS as early as 1879, Reynolds vs. US:
𝐿𝑎𝑤𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑚𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑚𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠, 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑚𝑎𝑦 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑝𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑠...𝑇𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑏𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑤 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑, 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑦 𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑛 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑒 𝑎 𝑙𝑎𝑤 𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑜 ℎ𝑖𝑚𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑓. 𝐺𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑦 𝑖𝑛 𝑛𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑢𝑐ℎ 𝑐𝑖𝑟𝑐𝑢𝑚𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑠..."
We are getting these near-constant right-wing attacks on that very traditional, historic, long-standing and clear precedent because these people are not really conservative, not really small government, not really traditional. They simply see the current SCOTUS as having a good chance of pushing their partisan agenda, so they keep the cases coming.
And here comes the "America was founded as a CHRISTIAN NATION!" whining in 5, 4, 3...
𝑇𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑖𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑠 𝑤𝑜𝑢𝑙𝑑 𝑏𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑤 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑...
THERE IT IS! And THAT is PRECISELY what fucks like Polk want. That needs to be screamed from the rooftops until it is heard!
They want more than that. They want their (and only their) doctrines of religious belief to be superior to the law.
She's whining that she is somehow being persecuted for her religious beliefs while simultneously persecuting those she doesn't like.
If that isn't SOP for the average evangelical, I don't know what is.
That I cannot get into my head, that people genuinely seem to think that their religion allows/enables/commands them to be beastly to other people, when everything I know of Jesus tells me that he'd be in favour of supporting people and being nice to them.
Have I been taught the wrong bible?
All books such as their big book of fairy stories are wrong.
Perfect decision! I appreciate the court’s stand on this. My name is Elizabeth but my preferred name is Liz. No big deal. Yes, it’s different from being transgender but you get my point.
Our school district policies have always allowed subs to pick what grade levels, schools, hours, and days they sub. Other than that they are trying their best to lean hard into christian nationalism.
I have a dear friend whose name is Elizabeth and she goes by Elizabeth. She'll introduce herself to someone "Hi, my name is Elizabeth" and far too often she gets "Nice to meet you, Liz".
Another friend is an Elizabeth, she goes by Liz.
I'm a Joseph. Mom called me Joey, most folks call me Joe. I'm generally not fussy about it¹. VA dental assistant yesterday simply asked what I preferred to be called - definitely welcoming and respectful.
(¹ Aside from the amused annoyance when the antisocial media goons use the diminutive as an attempted insult. 🙂)
A few years ago my Dad was visiting me and unfortunately he had to be admitted to hospital. Beside his bed was a large whiteboard with questions such as 'My name is ...', 'I like to be called ....', 'I like to drink ....' - which I filled in for my Dad. That way he got his tea without(!) milk and lots of sugar.
I thought it was a great idea.
Sounds a really GOOD idea. Maybe one other hospitals could consider adopting.
The Southern General is a very new hospital. They’ve incorporated many of the new ideas of what a hospital should be like, e.g. all their beds are single occupancy. They have an en-suite accessible bathroom (with shower) and that white board which I mentioned. All the rooms have got a little window to enable the staff to look in on patients (the window has got a little curtain). The reason why the building is star-shaped is to provide daylight for patients’ rooms. The room also has got another feature, which is not common in other places - there’s a high backed arm chair, every bed has got a high-backed arm chair. It provides a place for visitors and more importantly for patients to sit, so that they’re not just stuck in bed.
One other thing, the hospital booked an interpreter to attend during ward rounds. I asked and they said that it was policy, so that there’d be a trained person to translate the conversation between staff and patients. Translate properly.
Northeast Ohio has a couple pretty decent hospital systems: Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals. When I went to the UH's Ahuja facility to get my gallbladder out, I was very impressed with the quality of their service, though they didn't have the whiteboard you suggested.
Seems to me it would be worth noting that to them, though I have NO desire to need their services anytime soon!
I looked up where Ahuja is.
Thank you.
Wishing you the same - that you’ll stay out of hospital for a loooooong time to come.
Another little thought, at one point my Dad and me calculated how much his care would have cost him had he fallen ill back home. We came to a figure of E150. His care included a visit to A&E (ER), in-patient care for a few days, calls to the NHS24 helpline, a home visit by a doctor, a visit to a GP, a visit to an out-patient imaging centre and prescriptions. We didn’t pay anything, even my parking at the hospital didn’t cost anything.
For anyone interested this was due to the EHIC system, which provides healthcare to EU citizens in other EU states as if they are locals. So whatever locals are charged, that’s what you’d have to pay as well. Or in this case, my Dad was treated as a local and thus he paid no fees or charges. Because here we pay for our healthcare via our taxes.
The hospital was the Southern General in Glasgow, the new building. Which is occasionally called the Death Star by locals .. a label let's say it's not appreciated by the health board.
One more thought - that board was great, it enabled the nurses to look after my Dad. My Dad was ... practically non-verbal in this setting, he was perfectly fine, no confusion, no dementia, nothing in this regard. It was just that his English language skills were so poor, literally he could do 'Sank you' but not much else. And the board helped with communication.
Could be worse; there is a hospital here that has a cemetery wrapped around two sides of it. A nice view if you're in the right rooms.
I prefer to be called 𝔖𝔲𝔭𝔯𝔢𝔪𝔢 𝔒𝔳𝔢𝔯𝔩𝔬𝔯𝔡 𝔬𝔣 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔲𝔩𝔱𝔦𝔳𝔢𝔯𝔰𝔢.
Short and sweet: She fucked around, she found out.
𝑆ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑖𝑚𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑦 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑐𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑙 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑠 𝑏𝑦 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑔𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑠 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑜𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑐ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑒𝑥𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑜𝑛.
Umm, nope. As a teacher in a public school, she is an agent of the government. Outside of school? She has all the First Amendment rights to be as bigoted as she wants. While in the school as a teacher? She is supposed protect those rights for the students. Her rights are restricted. Exercising her rights while serving as a teacher is 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 a violation of the Establishment Clause.
One would think that someone educated enough to qualify to teach the nation's children would understand that basic principle.
It would be no different if she wanted to open every classroom with a Christian prayer.
I think what we need here is a legalese version of the phrase: "Your right to wave your beliefs about ends at the next person's nose."
Would-be proselytizers won't like it, to which I say, "TOUGH."
These are, of course, the same people who are only too happy to curtail teachers' free speech rights when those teachers 𝘥𝘰 want to be tolerant and accepting of diversity in their classrooms. If they didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
She cited her “sincerely held religious beliefs… based on her understanding of her Christian religion and the Holy Bible.”
Which part of the bible speaks about transgendered people?
Why, it's right here in...LOOK, A SQUIRREL!
The same part that taught them wealth was a sign of virtue.
I found it: When "god" makes Eve, a transgender woman made from a man's rib (Genesis 2:22-24).
So it appears her god is okay with it. Why does she blaspheme 'god"?
Don't forget she is also a clone.
Great point!
It's a question that should be asked of these bigots every time they open their mouths about this issue.
[because her religion requires her to be an asshole to them.]
I mean, it doesn't really. Nothing in the book touches on transgenderism, really. A lot of other horrible things... slavery, genocide, misogyny, racism, but nothing really about transgenderism. They have to yank a bit from one of the creation myths and interpret it wrongly to get there.
And they have to ignore their own teachings on the universe being chaotic because Adam and Eve ate a fruit.
And they definitely have to ignore the bit about loving their neighbors and that "neighbor" title applies to all of humanity, not just people like you.
And the bit about trying to live peaceably with everyone.
And, of course, assuming she genuinely believes she's suffering for being "righteous" (she's not), then she should rejoice and count herself blessed and not sit around complaining. Not that Christians like her know what actual persecution for righteousness' sake is. Alex Pretti and Renee Good were persecuted for doing what was right, but I'm sure she'd insist they deserved it.
TL:DR: Shut the fuck up, bigot.
These people LOVE to cherrypick Leviticus in order to justify their bigotry don't they? Yet they continue to eat shellfish, wear clothing of mixed fibers, and violate every other law written in that book.
Lots of tattoos, too!
Hope they don’t eat cheeseburgers. Or even bacon cheesburgers. Mixing meat and dairy is verboten in their book.
Mmmm, burger! 🍔
Hemant didn’t mention it but this is the same school district that lost the Mahmoud case in SCOTUS. That’s the one where parents can opt their kids out of lessons and the schools need to accommodate them.
MontCo is the most populous county in Maryland. It is the wealthiest. Highest income. And is among the most ethnically diverse counties in America. Governing it must be a bitch.
Fantastic ethnic restaurants!
Accommodating kids religious beliefs? Yes. That's what the First Amendment is for. Accommodating teachers? The government doesn't get to accommodate itself.
Maybe she was an only child and always got what she wanted. Please tell me where these Bible thumpers get their beliefs especially about given names or gender preferences or anything that has nothing to do with or without the Bible. I wish they would stop pretending that they are holy and righteous when all they are is hateful and ridiculous.
Conservative and compassionate have become antonyms in the US.
Accommodating the public is otherwise known as SERVICE ... and if that isn't what government at any and all levels is about, then I don't know WHAT it's supposed to be about.
Mmmm, ethnic restaurants! Lebanese, Somali, Sudanese! We've had those and others in Cleveland, though the Somali restaurant closed its doors sometime back. But OH, was their stuff GOOD! 😋
We had a great meal in an Uzbeki eatery. I had a lamb dish that had some Chinese flavors and some I don’t know what flavors. A hole in the wall in a shopping center.
And once we were in a Chinese place. The menu was boring. Sweet and sour pork, etc. Across a wall was a huge white board filled with Chinese characters. There were several tables of elderly Chinese men eating stuff that clearly not sweet and sour pork. We asked the waiter what those dishes on the white board were. He waggled his finger at us and said, “not for you”.
Uzbek?!? FAR OUT!
MontCo is about 40% white non-Hispanic, 20% Hispanic, 20% black, 15% Asian and 5% other stuff. The Hispanics are diverse, the black subset includes a noticeable share of fairly recent African immigrants, and the Asian subset is also diverse. One really can sample the world’s cuisines there.
I don't know that Cuyahoga County, which includes Cleveland, is quite THAT eclectic. I DO know that we've had Peruvian and other African restaurants here and there, though more than a couple of them have folded, drat it.
What I DO know is that I'm getting to the point where I prefer good ethnic food to a good steak (and I LIKE a good steak - medium rare, please). I mean, let's hear it for VARIETY!!!
Ketchup optional?
Kim Puke is another xtian thug who doesn't understand what free speech entails.
And where does the bble say that Jesus condemned transgenders?
She doesn't understand that the government doesn't have free speech, the people do. She also doesn't understand that a public school teacher IS the government.
She also clearly doesn't understand that, sure, she has free speech. She can also be subject to the CONSEQUENCES of her "free speech."
Seems as though she didn't think of that.
Exactly. They keep making up their bogus beliefs and practices by pretending it's in the Bible. Show me!!
The best thing about this ruling is that no trans kids, or any other kids, were harmed in the making of it. She objected to the paperwork--the idea--that people should be allowed to go by what they want, apparently without ever actually encountering a trans child in the classroom. Truly amazing when you consider that, according to christian nationalists, trans kids are overrunning the school system and threatening to bring down all western society.
Evidently this was an objection she only raised after a year on the job, too. I dunno whether the district published new guidance, or whether the issue just wasn't on her radar until she thought she saw an opportunity to jump on the Wingnut Welfare gravy train, but... as the kids say, "seems a little sus." (...do kids still say that?)