Anti-gay teacher under suspension (Canadian)

[davidinalameda]

http://www.canada.com/vancouver/theprovince/soundoff/story.html?id=6e3c9d91-c31d-4062-92cf-dc4946f19a08

A Quesnel teacher/counsellor vowed yesterday to fight a three-month suspension for writing a letter against homosexuality and gay marriage to a local newspaper.

"It is truly unfortunate that the Quesnel School Board believes that only those who support same-sex marriage are able to comment publicly on a matter of national importance," Chris Kempling said. "It is a sad day for freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and freedom of political association."

District superintendent Ed Napier said yesterday the suspension is effective immediately and stems from the letter Kempling wrote in the Quesnel Cariboo Observer on Jan. 12 arguing against homosexuality and gay marriage.

[atreides1]

1. Personally

I feel that the suspension was the wrong thing to do, but, on the other hand this teacher gets a first hand look at what discrimination can be about.

[davidinalameda]

2. why is it wrong

Canada has stronger anti-discrimination laws than the US

this guy is a teacher--his job is to educate the children

by promoting hatred, he's not sending the right message

[atreides1]

4. He had an opinion

And he made it, this is the kind of thing we are trying to keep from happening here in the US.

I may not like what some group has to say, but as long as the First Amendment is part of the US Constitution, I will defend that groups right to say it.

[dsc]

3. Without seeing the exact text it is hard to determine exactly why he got

suspended. But as a gay teacher in the South, I am glad the state education department doesn't have the right to suspend me for speech it doesn't like. Somehow I imagine my lobbying for same sex marriage might have been speech they didn't like.

[Maat]

5. I agree, Dsc.

This PFLAGer couldn't be more pro-human-rights.

But, at the same time, I don't want someone regulating my basic speech - so I'm not going to regulate theirs.

This may sound bad, but I will defend a Religious Wrongie's right to utter bigotry, so long as it is does not create a hostile work environment, does not incite imminent violence or danger.

So, I appreciate anti-discriminatory statutes and hate-crimes statutes if they punish/prevent criminality, but I do not appreciate anything that starts eroding free speech while not on the job (because it is a short distance to where they are attacking my freedoms).

Hope I didn't upset anyone unduly. But I think we progressives have to be mindful of the potential results of our choices (like advocating for certain legislation).

That's why we law students appreciate the KKK case in our textbooks - they have the right to march down the street - so that I have mine. But I have the right to publicly point out how ignorant they are too (as long as I don't incite violence).