Compelled use of pronouns

“(Spoiler: it isnt)”

You got that from him winning his appeal? Weird. No the case isn’t over but he won the first amendment issue.

ugh this site and its editing of a word is making posting the link hard:

https://tinyurl.com/35zpfd5d

Fake Pie -
VirusHoax - 
Fake Pie -
VirusHoax - 

If your religion insists that you treat people poorly, maybe your religion is shit.

How was he going to treat anyone poorly? He offered to call the student by the student’s own chosen name. He simply wouldn’t say Mrs. but he was happy to stop saying Mr. if it offended the student. That wasn’t enough.

He also even offered to say Mr. if he could add to his syllabus that he would only use preferred pronouns under compulsion and protest, but that wasn’t OK either.

How far does it go? You have to call anyone whatever they want to be called? What if they want to be called “COMMANDER AWESOME!” I know I prefer to be called that.

He offered many polite, not mean, not treating anyone poorly options, they turned them all down.

It also doesn’t really matter about his religion. Anyone could object on first amendment grounds of compelled speech (though he did make a free exercise claim, you can easily pretend that part of the case doesn’t exist and still think it is wrong to be forced to call someone something).

Is this where we pretend that he didn’t make a big deal of not complying 2 years before he even has a circumstance where he was asked?

Again, why would we pretend that? How is he treating anyone poorly. They wanted to be called “Diane” (making up the name as the case doesn’t identify) and he offered to say “Diane.” He just wouldn’t use Ms/Mrs. Is that treating someone poorly? What does him letting the university know ahead of time the policy was going to be an issue for him mean to you? How does that mean he treated anyone poorly?

It obviously meant that he didn’t intend to comply with it, which then resulted in the totally unavoidable conflict when he encountered a situation where it applied.

in fact, the whole situation could have been avoided by just acknowleding the situation and avoiding using the pronouns. The negotiation is obviously something no one is going to agree to.  Literally no employee of any company, anywhere would get this accommodation.

it would be like saying to a gay subordinate in the workplace “my religion doesn’t allow me to recognize your husband, Bruce as your husband. Because to me, he’s not your husband. Howsabout I just call him Bruce? Is that ok?”

First Amendment freedoms apply to government actors, not private universities

The freedom of expression and speech guaranteed by the First Amendment does not fully protect academic freedom. Under the state action doctrine, the First Amendment applies only to government actors. Therefore, while the First Amendment applies to all public universities, it does not apply to private or religious institutions.

In addition, academic freedom often extends beyond the speech rights protected by the First Amendment to others, such as the right to determine the curriculum of the Institutional rules and regulations, individual contracts, faculty handbooks, collective bargaining agreements, and academic customs protect these broader concerns of academic freedom.

VirusHoax -
darkm -
VirusHoax -

If your religion insists that you treat people poorly, maybe your religion is shit.

Is he as a professor supposed to lie to make someone feel better?

am I supposed to lie to make you feel better?

the answer, you retard, is no. 

If you work for any decently sized company, I recommend looking into your policies on sexual orientation and gender identity, contact your Human Resources like this guy did and inform them that you will not be able to comply.

report back about how your “buh am I sposed to lie?” objection goes.

I recommend you go play in traffic you pathetic fuck! Oh I'm sorry you pathetic Xe/Xer faggot! 

VirusHoax - 
Fake Pie -
VirusHoax - 
Fake Pie -
VirusHoax - 

If your religion insists that you treat people poorly, maybe your religion is shit.

How was he going to treat anyone poorly? He offered to call the student by the student’s own chosen name. He simply wouldn’t say Mrs. but he was happy to stop saying Mr. if it offended the student. That wasn’t enough.

He also even offered to say Mr. if he could add to his syllabus that he would only use preferred pronouns under compulsion and protest, but that wasn’t OK either.

How far does it go? You have to call anyone whatever they want to be called? What if they want to be called “COMMANDER AWESOME!” I know I prefer to be called that.

He offered many polite, not mean, not treating anyone poorly options, they turned them all down.

It also doesn’t really matter about his religion. Anyone could object on first amendment grounds of compelled speech (though he did make a free exercise claim, you can easily pretend that part of the case doesn’t exist and still think it is wrong to be forced to call someone something).

Is this where we pretend that he didn’t make a big deal of not complying 2 years before he even has a circumstance where he was asked?

Again, why would we pretend that? How is he treating anyone poorly. They wanted to be called “Diane” (making up the name as the case doesn’t identify) and he offered to say “Diane.” He just wouldn’t use Ms/Mrs. Is that treating someone poorly? What does him letting the university know ahead of time the policy was going to be an issue for him mean to you? How does that mean he treated anyone poorly?

It obviously meant that he didn’t intend to comply with it, which then resulted in the totally unavoidable conflict when he encountered a situation where it applied.

in fact, the whole situation could have been avoided by just acknowleding the situation and avoiding using the pronouns. The negotiation is obviously something no one is going to agree to.  Literally no employee of any company, anywhere would get this accommodation.

it would be like saying to a gay subordinate in the workplace “my religion doesn’t allow me to recognize your husband, Bruce as your husband. Because to me, he’s not your husband. Howsabout I just call him Bruce? Is that ok?”

From the record:

Turning to the facts, the university’s interest in punishing Meriwether’s speech is comparatively weak. When the university demanded that Meriwether refer to Doe using female pronouns, Meriwether proposed a compromise: He would call on Doe using Doe’s last name alone. That seemed like a win-win. Meriwether would not have to violate his religious beliefs, and Doe would not be referred to using pronouns Doe finds offensive. Thus, on the allegations in this complaint, it is hard to see how this would have “create[d] a hostile learning environment that ultimately thwarts the academic process.”

It is telling that Dean Milliken at first approved this proposal. And when Meriwether employed this accommodation throughout the semester, Doe was an active participant in and ultimately received a high grade.


Yeah he sounds awful. In any event, the first amendment doesn’t turn on hurt feelings, though I still don’t think he treated anyone poorly.

1 Like
VirusHoax -

If your religion insists that you treat people poorly, maybe your religion is shit.

People of all faiths can come together and agree that you're a faggot.

1 Like
Fake Pie - First Amendment freedoms apply to government actors, not private universities

The freedom of expression and speech guaranteed by the First Amendment does not fully protect academic freedom. Under the state action doctrine, the First Amendment applies only to government actors. Therefore, while the First Amendment applies to all public universities, it does not apply to private or religious institutions.

In addition, academic freedom often extends beyond the speech rights protected by the First Amendment to others, such as the right to determine the curriculum of the Institutional rules and regulations, individual contracts, faculty handbooks, collective bargaining agreements, and academic customs protect these broader concerns of academic freedom.

Academic Freedom | The First Amendment Encyclopedia

I acknowledge and understand the distinction you are making, but this would also provide for all sorts of other speech protections for government employees that don’t exist for private employees and I do not believe that has been established.

VirusHoax - 
Fake Pie - First Amendment freedoms apply to government actors, not private universities

The freedom of expression and speech guaranteed by the First Amendment does not fully protect academic freedom. Under the state action doctrine, the First Amendment applies only to government actors. Therefore, while the First Amendment applies to all public universities, it does not apply to private or religious institutions.

In addition, academic freedom often extends beyond the speech rights protected by the First Amendment to others, such as the right to determine the curriculum of the Institutional rules and regulations, individual contracts, faculty handbooks, collective bargaining agreements, and academic customs protect these broader concerns of academic freedom.

Academic Freedom | The First Amendment Encyclopedia

I acknowledge and understand the distinction you are making, but this would also provide for all sorts of other speech protections for government employees that don’t exist for private employees and I do not believe that has been established.

It absolutely has. Of course they exist for public employees and not private. The bill of rights only apply to state actors… the government.

This is not new. I forget, were you not US? Only asking because it might make sense why this is confusing, not trying to be a dick about it.

See the link I provided on the last page. The sixth circuit goes into detail on how 1A applies to government employees. It never does to private employees.

This is just something you got wrong bro. NBD.

VirusHoax -

If your religion insists that you treat people poorly, maybe your religion is shit.

Do you say that to all religions?

VirusHoax -
Fake Pie - First Amendment freedoms apply to government actors, not private universities

The freedom of expression and speech guaranteed by the First Amendment does not fully protect academic freedom. Under the state action doctrine, the First Amendment applies only to government actors. Therefore, while the First Amendment applies to all public universities, it does not apply to private or religious institutions.

In addition, academic freedom often extends beyond the speech rights protected by the First Amendment to others, such as the right to determine the curriculum of the Institutional rules and regulations, individual contracts, faculty handbooks, collective bargaining agreements, and academic customs protect these broader concerns of academic freedom.

Academic Freedom | The First Amendment Encyclopedia

I acknowledge and understand the distinction you are making, but this would also provide for all sorts of other speech protections for government employees that don’t exist for private employees and I do not believe that has been established.

Fake Pie is a lawyer, and you are not. That much is clear.

Different case but:

No one is better off by having others participate in their delusions by force.