Teacher behind anti-military classroom rant fired

a reply to: DBCowboy

When free expression becomes conditional, then it's not really free expression.

"When?"

There is no right to freedom of expression in the workplace.

My kids' civics teacher doesn't have an inherent right to belittle my kid over his clothing choice.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: DBCowboy

When free expression becomes conditional, then it's not really free expression.

If they had "free expression" in that profession there would be no district approved curriculum.
Or are you ok with science teachers teaching the bible?

I'm okay with free expression.

I don't have to like it, I might even hate it, but I can't abide censorship in any form.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Shamrock6

Nothing wrong with teachers attempting to inspire kids to strive higher... In fact, its kinda what their supposed to do.

But that implies that there's something wrong or "less-than" with joining the military. And that is pure opinion, and one that doesn't need to be slung at students in a belligerent manner in a classroom setting by their former teacher.

Everybody could learn something more about themselves if they joined the military, even if they didn't like the military service itself.

I'd be willing to bet that I could run circles around this former teacher, both physically and intellectually, and probably could have done it at 19 when I enlisted, too. These types of people are uncultured and have small, closed minds. All that they know is their own ideology formed off of (most likely) the opinions of others, and are incapable of critical thinking or forming opinions based on such.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: DBCowboy



There is no right to freedom of expression in the workplace.

Hmmpf.

If there isn't, and if there is precedent, then you are correct.

Had his rant been inline with the majority of the school administration then I believe he would not be in this situation.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

That is contradictory. "Total freedom of speech in a classroom" amounts to anarchy.

Just to be clear, there is a difference between complete freedom and chaos. Free speech and order can coexist.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: DBCowboy

When free expression becomes conditional, then it's not really free expression.

If they had "free expression" in that profession there would be no district approved curriculum.
Or are you ok with science teachers teaching the bible?

I'm okay with free expression.

I don't have to like it, I might even hate it, but I can't abide censorship in any form.

Employers are paying you for your time. You don't have a right to free expression, as you have given that up when you sign whatever paperwork represents their employee handbook/HR manual. Im sure if you flip through the one at your company, assuming you aren't self employed or the like, you'll see that you can be terminated for saying things to whoever buys your product/pays for your services, and cause the company to lose reputation or revenue.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: DBCowboy

When free expression becomes conditional, then it's not really free expression.

If they had "free expression" in that profession there would be no district approved curriculum.
Or are you ok with science teachers teaching the bible?

I'm okay with free expression.

I don't have to like it, I might even hate it, but I can't abide censorship in any form.

But he is not being censored. He is being punished for bullying and browbeating his students.

He got to say his opinion, but he isn't free from consequences.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Shamrock6

Nothing wrong with teachers attempting to inspire kids to strive higher... In fact, its kinda what their supposed to do.

But that implies that there's something wrong or "less-than" with joining the military.

Theirs nothing wrong with any honest profession/job that a person ends up doing for a living... But their are plenty of professions/jobs that are definitely "less than" just about any cushy job with no risk factor, which has lots of perks and pays a 150-250k salary, for example... That's just a fact of life.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Hmmpf.

If there isn't, and if there is precedent, then you are correct.

Come work for me.

If free speech means anything to you guys, the teacher should not have been fired for his rant.

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: DBCowboy

When free expression becomes conditional, then it's not really free expression.

If they had "free expression" in that profession there would be no district approved curriculum.
Or are you ok with science teachers teaching the bible?

I'm okay with free expression.

I don't have to like it, I might even hate it, but I can't abide censorship in any form.

But he is not being censored. He is being punished for bullying and browbeating his students.

He got to say his opinion, but he isn't free from consequences.

Exactly.

I wouldn't support the decision if they had terminated his employment because of his opinions. To put a point on it, I think if military recruiters are going to be allowed on high school campuses then by all means, a teacher can let students know the downsides to military enlistment.

But that's not what he was doing, and that's not what got him fired. He got fired for being a bully and an asshole to teenagers who, presumably, don't show up to class to hear a teacher call their family members stupid.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
If free speech means anything to you guys, the teacher should not have been fired for his rant.

He wasn't.

He was fired for being an asshole.

a reply to: Shamrock6

He wasn't.

He was fired for being an asshole.

But only because he said something you do not like.

a reply to: Shamrock6

a teacher can let students know the downsides to military enlistment.

Only if those are informed pro/con arguments.

Politically charged BS and opinionated browbeating and bullying isn't the same thing as we both agree.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Shamrock6

He wasn't.

He was fired for being an asshole.

But only because he said something you do not like.

School policy. He violated it and brought disrepute to the institution.

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Shamrock6

He wasn't.

He was fired for being an asshole.

But only because he said something you do not like.

School policy. He violated it and brought disrepute to the institution.

Out of curiosity, which policy?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
If free speech means anything to you guys, the teacher should not have been fired for his rant.

His rights stopped where the rights of his employers (and their customers, i.e., the taxpayers paying the teachers salary) began. He stepped over that line.

The first amendment isn't first simply because it trumps all others.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
If free speech means anything to you guys, the teacher should not have been fired for his rant.

His rights stopped where the rights of his employers (and their customers, i.e., the taxpayers paying the teachers salary) began. He stepped over that line.

The first amendment isn't first simply because it trumps all others.

I am speaking of free speech, not the first amendment. He stepped over no such line. People could have easily refuted what he said without the death threats and loss of employment.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I would have to review the policy manual for the district, but the standard in the field is for teachers to utilize approved lesson plans.

The reports of prior issues seems to indicate he was given fair warning through progressive disciplinary action. Im unsure what the state laws are, but in Texas that is exactly what you would expect: a series of 3-4 warnings on a behavior, then termination.