NJ Teacher Posts Anti-LGBT Rant on Facebook

[Dalton]

Link to the petition

HRC is urging its members and supporters to take action after a teacher at Union High School in New Jersey posted an anti-LGBT rant to her public Facebook wall. Viki Knox unleashed a torrent of hateful comments after her school put up a bulletin board commemorating LGBT history month.

Garden State Equality has the full PDF of Knox’s remarks. Her rant included:

“Homosexuality is a perverted spirit that has existed from the beginning of creation… how they live and their actions, behaviors -CHOICES are against the nature and character of God! …I know sin and it breeds like cancer!”

“Why parade your unnatural immoral behaviors before the rest of us? AND YOU ARE WRONG! I/WE DO NOT HAVE TO ACCEPT ANYTHING, ANYONE. ANY BEHAVIOR OR ANY CHOICES! I DO NOT HAVE TO TOLERATE ANYTHING OTHERS WISH TO DO.”

Act now and tell Union Township Schools Superintendent Dr. Patrick Martin to take appropriate steps to counter Knox’s dangerous message. 2200 people have signed out petition in just the first two hours – add your voice to the growing calls for action.

As bigoted and hateful as the comments were, this asswipe still has free-speech rights. She's posting her personal opinion on her personal Facebook page and as long as she's not discriminating against LGBT students I don't know if this is actionable. She is still a worthless stain on humanity, but there is a fine line here.

[Atlan]

Free-speech rights are protection from the Government, unless I'm sorely mistaken.

She has the right to shoot her mouth off, and other people have the right to let her employer know she's a hateful piece of shit whom they'd rather not see as a teacher. Nobody's rights are being violated here. But for every action there's a reaction, and that's what's happening here.

[Dalton]

Free-speech rights are protection from the Government, unless I'm sorely mistaken.

She has the right to shoot her mouth off, and other people have the right to let her employer know she's a hateful piece of shit whom they'd rather not see as a teacher. Nobody's rights are being violated here. But for every action there's a reaction, and that's what's happening here.

Her employer is the government.

[Broomstick]

No, her employer is her local school district.

[Soontir C'boath]

Which unless the definition radically changed is part of the local government. Whether the government can take action or not, HRC does have the right to voice themselves about this to the person's employer.

[DPDarkPrimus]

Teachers have been fired over things on their Facebook such as pictures of them on vacation in Europe, holding a glass of wine. Because proof that they consume alcohol is not the sort of image the school district wants them to promote.

I'm not seeing how this is more defensible than that.

[Darth Lucifer]

It's Jerry Buell (the Florida Teacher who made anti-gay remarks on Facebook a couple months ago) all over again. I wonder if this will result in any disciplinary action by her district?

After reading the PDF file with Knox's FB posts, she makes Buell look positively tame by comparison. Whereas Buell made a couple of brief comments, Knox is in full-on psycho-fundie mode with her huge rants railing against EVIL and SIN!

[TheFeniX]

Kids have had disciplinary (not legal) action taken against them by their schools for posting pictures on Facebook of them drinking, smoking, or doing other drugs. Even comments such as personal attacks against teachers/administrators have landed them in shit with their school district and that's not even illegal (no matter how many times you call a teacher a dumbass or lazy, outside of school).

Why should teachers be exempt from these idiotic administrative actions? I figure if you're going to let stupidity run the American ISD system, may as well apply it across the board.

[Rogue 9]

No, her employer is her local school district.

Which is a government institution.

[Kanastrous]

The problem seems to me to be that this blows from the water any possibility that GLBT students in need of counseling, assistance, or protection can rely upon her (in her capacity as a teacher and employee of the school district) for fair treatment.* And if the district's policy toward GLBT students is supportive (which their commemoration of the month suggests it is) this places her at odds with that policy.

Her right to spew as she pleases may be inviolable, but what about the right of her students, gay or otherwise, to spend the school day in an atmosphere free of censure, bigotry, and hate coming from the faculty? Even if she keeps it to herself when on school grounds, as noted above she can't be taken seriously when it comes to looking out for the safety of students even suspected of being gay. And why should the district assume that liability? All it takes is one student to get injured, or attempt suicide, or anything like that connected to anti-gay bullying, and the family's attorneys have a ready-made case: the school district promoted a hostile and threatening atmosphere, and exhibit 'A' is retention of someone like Knox on the faculty.

The idea that she can believe all this on her own personal time, and not bring any of it to work is a non-starter. I'd guess that the district can and should dismiss her as soon as possible.

*edit - in fact, I doubt they can even rely upon her for fair treatment, where academics are concerned. After reading that screed, does anyone really think she would even -grade- a student she believed to be gay, on the same fair grounds as a student whom she believed to be straight?

[Kanastrous]

ghetto edit - according to some of her students, she -doesn't- keep it out of the classroom. Starting to wonder why she's even been kept on, this long. Teachers' Union protecting her, maybe.

[Rahvin]

Freedom of speech != freedom of employment. She cannot face legal repercussions from her speech, but she can face consequences from her employer.

I don't understand why so many people still confuse "freedom of speech" with the ability to say anything you want at any time in any format without any consequences whatsoever. You have the freedom to say what you want without going to jail, not the freedom to say whatever you want and keep your job.

Teachers can face dismissal for all manner of behavior outside of work. Teachers have been fired for photos of even excessive drinking posted on a Facebook page. I don't see how this should be different, except in that I think intolerance of a subset of students is significantly more relevant to her ability to provide a healthy learning environment in the classroom.

[Serafina]

Let's apply the usual litmus-test: How would you react if the teacher had said the same thing about interracial relationships?

[Kanastrous]

^ excellent point

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The government sure as hell can fire her for not being an effective teacher to all her students, including LGBT students. If kids are coming forward saying she isn't keeping this out of the classroom, she should be flying down a greased pig chute to unemployment.

[Serafina]

It is extremely unlikely that she would keep this out of the classroom altogether.

Furthermore, this viewpoint makes her unable to fulfill any pedagogic function towards LGBT-students.
Obviously, she would be unable to give any advice to LGBT-students about LGBT-related topics that would not harm them. But even if we say that this is not her function, there are other issues:
If a student gets bullied due to being gay, she can not honestly tell the bullies that she thinks that their actions are wrong - if she did she would be a liar, undermining her authority. In general she would be a figure standing for such actions if her opinion ever became known, regardless of whether she acts on it or not. This is simply unacceptable in a teacher.

[Themightytom]

You know the outrage can be for the LGBT community, but I think most people can agree, her comments and the manner in which she expressed them is extremely unprofessional. She can go work for WBC

[Alphawolf55]

It is extremely unlikely that she would keep this out of the classroom altogether.

Furthermore, this viewpoint makes her unable to fulfill any pedagogic function towards LGBT-students.
Obviously, she would be unable to give any advice to LGBT-students about LGBT-related topics that would not harm them. But even if we say that this is not her function, there are other issues:
If a student gets bullied due to being gay, she can not honestly tell the bullies that she thinks that their actions are wrong - if she did she would be a liar, undermining her authority. In general she would be a figure standing for such actions if her opinion ever became known, regardless of whether she acts on it or not. This is simply unacceptable in a teacher.

Then they go to a different teacher. I think you're overstating the power and relevance teachers have in the American public school system. My view is let her touch but if her personal views cant be kept out of the school or it's shown that she did indeed have knowledge of LGBT students being tormented and did nothing then fire her. But specifically keep a total eye on her, see if she's grading kids that seem to be LGBT friendly more harshly, first sign of a problem don't be lenient but until she does make that action let her keep her job.

[Kanastrous]

Why impose that managerial burden upon her supervisors? Is she owed something, that she should be entitled to kid-glove handling once she has made clear where she stands?

If -one- student in need of aid has the misfortune to run across this woman, and suffers for it, that's too many. There's zero reason to require that anyone run the risks implicit in keeping her around.

[Alphawolf55]

Why impose that managerial burden upon her supervisors? Is she owed something, that she should be entitled to kid-glove handling once she has made clear where she stands?

If -one- student in need of aid has the misfortune to run across this woman, and suffers for it, that's too many. There's zero reason to require that anyone run the risks implicit in keeping her around.

Because people have a right to a personal life until they make it clear through actions that they can't keep the things separately? I'm not defending the teacher's views but what if she hates religion? Or atheist? Or the military? Or even hipsters? Should a teacher be fired for voicing any strong opinion outside of class if there's a chance a student might be alienated by them?

Edit: I will admit though that the fact that she said it's not something to be tolerated, rather then accepted does suggest she wouldn't be able to keep it separate.

[Serafina]

If she outright states HATE towards any such group? Yes, the same standards should apply. Tolerance is actually a desirable (or even necessary) attribute for a teacher.

Extremists have no place in the government - and teachers are working for the government after all. Moderate discussion should be encouraged, but i fail to see how her statements qualify at that at all.

[Alphawolf55]

If she outright states HATE towards any such group? Yes, the same standards should apply. Tolerance is actually a desirable (or even necessary) attribute for a teacher.

Extremists have no place in the government - and teachers are working for the government after all. Moderate discussion should be encouraged, but i fail to see how her statements qualify at that at all.

Should it be applied to other things though. For example my history professor (at a public university run by the city of New York) is a global warming denier who believes that vaccines cause autism and that corporations put flouride in the water and human growth hormones in our food to sterilize the population while making us watch Alex Jones documentaries. I would under no circumstances call the man a moderate though, should he be allowed to keep his job?

*Note I apologize if it sounds like I'm straw manning, I'm legitimately interested in what ways extremism should be considered relevant or irrelevant to education)

[Serafina]

None of his opinions express hate towards any group of humans, so they do not qualify as the kind of extremism i am talking about. The issue you are presenting (scientific credibility) is different from the one we are talking about (tolerance towards human beings).
However, i would like teachers (and especially professors) to be educated in the sciences and in scientific thinking - those are actual requirements for their job, after all! Failing your basic job requirements should disqualify you from that job, obviously.

[Kanastrous]

@ Alphawolf - I can't speak for anyone else, but all I'm responding to is the story of an aggressively bigoted and hateful person, placed in a position of authority and power over vulnerable younger people, whose bigotry and hate are focused upon what's probably the -most- vulnerable segment of that population.

If you want to go haring off into abstracted theoreticals that don't actually relate to the issue at hand, that fine, but I don't see any reason to go there, with you.

[Serafina]

Put simply, it should be the schools/governments job to protect young people from discrimination as much as possible. Putting a person who discriminates against them into a position of authority over these young people is obviously utterly contradictory to that goal.