moonbattery logo

Feb 21 2020

LGBT Agenda v First Amendment at Shawnee State

If you want a textbook example of soft tyranny, look at the way leftist radicals have imposed the LGBT agenda. People aren’t being thrown into gulags much less stood in front of firing squads. But it is raw tyranny nonetheless. The worst of it can be found in the primary breeding ground of leftism, the university.

Via Daily Wire:

A Christian professor at Shawnee State University told a biological male student who identified as a female that he would not use the student’s preferred pronouns due to his religious beliefs.

That is the right of this employee of a government-supported school, under the clauses of the First Amendment that defend freedom of speech and religion. The ultimate violation of free speech is coerced speech.

But LGBT militants answer to a higher authority — namely, moonbattery:

The student, according to Alliance Defending Freedom “became aggressive, circling around him, getting in his face in a threatening fashion, while telling him, ‘Then I guess this means I can call you a c**t.’” The student then threatened the professor’s job and went on to file a formal complaint with university officials.

Such crude intimidation tactics work only when the authorities side with the bullies.

The Federalist’s Chad Felix Greene reported that the professor, Nicholas Meriwether, sued with the help of ADF after SSU sided with the student and agreed the professor had created a “hostile” environment in violation of the school’s anti-discrimination policy.

Failing to capitulate to a threatening thug = creating a “hostile” environment. Not even George Orwell could get his head around the absurdity.

Like the educrats at SSU, an Ohio court sided with the perverted young thug, decreeing that the professor can be compelled to tell lies that violate his religious principles. The reasoning was preposterous:

The court rejected the professor’s religious objections, saying the reasonable-person standard would not consider using preferred pronouns as unreasonable and that the anti-discrimination policy is “neutral” and therefore not specifically affecting any religious group or belief. Most shockingly, the court upheld the university’s position that it could not accommodate the professor due to his religious objection, as it would then be required to make similar accommodations for racist or sexist views as well.

In short, the court took the opportunity to ram the liberal agenda down everyone’s throats by proclaiming outrageous demands by LGBT militants to be reasonable, and by equating Christianity with racism and sexism, i.e., with a liberal’s conception of pure evil.

Let’s hope this gets to the Supreme Court, and that this time the result is not radical social engineering.

On a tip from Wilberforce.

Comments are closed.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy