Florida Teacher Suspended for Anti-Gay Facebook Remarks Speaks: VIDEO
Last week, Andrew posted about Jerry Buell, a Florida teacher who was suspended for remarks he made on Facebook saying he "almost threw up" in response to a news story about same-sex marriage in New York. Buell also called the marriages part of a "cesspool" and said they were a sin.
The anti-gay Liberty Counsel stepped in to defend Buell. This week the ACLU joined Liberty Counsel in defending Buell.
The ACLU released a statement to the Sentinel in defense of Jerry Buell, a Mount Dora High School teacher who wrote a Facebook post calling same-sex unions a “cesspool” that made him want to throw up.
“The First Amendment protects his right to share his views – offensive or not,” said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida, in a statement. “Even though we strongly disagree with his opinion, especially considering how hard the ACLU fought to win marriage equality in New York, Mr. Buell should not be subject to disciplinary action by his employer for expressing his views.”
CNN interviews Buell and his attorney about his suspension, AFTER THE JUMP...
(clip via jmg)
Kiwi: we're in agreement on the absolute equality of glbt people, and the equal nature of homophobia to racism and every other wholly irrational form of discrimination.
But to qualify his Constitutionally-protected right as an American to express his views based on his job, however unfortunate, is a very dangerous proposition.
Firings just for being gay are justified for the same reason: "they're too dangerous to be around our kids!!"
Free speech is free speech, and undue punishment is wrong, period.
Posted by: JeffRob | Aug 24, 2011 3:36:39 PM
I'm from Canada. My Canuck ass knows this is not an issue of "free speech". AT ALL>
how come you Americans don't understand this?
he was not thrown in jail. it's not about free speech. its' about the specificities of what he said in relation to his job.
sorry, you're wrong and my canadian ass is right. about YOUR country.
go fig.
Posted by: Little Kiwi | Aug 24, 2011 3:44:28 PM
Well, you're not right, but it's okay.
Posted by: JeffRob | Aug 24, 2011 3:55:39 PM
Kiwi:
Clearly your "canadian ass" is not right. It's you who doesn't understand this. It absolutely is about free speech. Throwing someone in jail isn't the only method of punishing someone for speech. There is a long-standing "public employee speech doctrine" in this country, which deals with when the government (and yes, a school is a government "agency") can fire an employee for speech, particularly political speech.
I realize that as a Canadian, you might not be completely familiar with this, and as such to go around saying "I'm right and you're wrong about your own country" is not only foolish (because you are in fact wrong), but makes you look like an ass.
The problem with saying that his comments render him unfit to teach children is that this rationale leaves that determination to the morality of the prevailing majority. So, if a community is very anti-gay, then they could well say that a teacher's support of gay marriage makes him unfit to teach children. Or to give you a different scenario, what about the teacher who has an atheist blog on which he bashes religion continuously. Would you support his firing because it insinuates that he is not able to treat religious members of his classroom equally or with respect?
Posted by: Jack | Aug 24, 2011 3:56:50 PM
A very difficult issue for me until LITTLE KIWI said something that made me understand my frustation: " He is unrepentent" It means he doesn't accept that as a PUBLIC employee he made a mistake by letting his politcal/social views become public.
I guess, my public statements about Republicans would make me unacceptable to teach in a public school in the Republican suburbs (unless I kept my mouth shut on the subject...HA, that's impossible!)
He does have an obligation NOT to make kids in his classroom feel humiliated. Do his views on FACEBOOK bring his ability to do that in question? He's a public school teacher--not private. Yes, you are entitled to freedom of speech, but members of the community are entitled to challenge what you said.
I can remember teachers who would humiliate me and other Gay kids in front of the whole class. Of course, that was a different time. What bigoted teachers could get away with in 30 years ago was quite different.
The suspension is proper (whether it's legal, we'll find out). If he says something like this inside the classroom using that kind of cruel language--he should be fired.
It's still very difficult issue for me: freedom to voice your personal views publically vs censoring yourself to maintain a civil and fair workplace/classroom place environment
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 24, 2011 3:57:50 PM
He has the right to speak his view without punishment. But I have to say he is wrong to think that all of his gay students will feel safe and respected in his classroom now. If I were one of his students I would know that he is disgusted by my orientation and would have to qualify my relationship with him through that perspective. If he is so concerned with his students having trust in him he should try to imagine what they might feel as a result of his public comments.
Posted by: Arthur | Aug 24, 2011 4:05:22 PM
so glad I live in Canada where we can differentiate hate speech which prohibits others enjoyment of life etc vs free speech which is a basic component for democratic society :)
Posted by: jayjay | Aug 24, 2011 4:36:31 PM
@Jack: If a teacher made public statements that called Christian families (or black families, or Muslim families, or single-parent families) vomit-worthy scum, I think the school would have legitimate questions about whether such public statements create a hostile environment in the classroom for some students and whether that person is capable of treating students from those families in a respectful and dignified manner. Creating a hostile environment is different than using free speech rights to make a civil and reasoned argument, even an unpopular one.
And, like I said before, whatever the legal situation for Mr. Buell, I think any gay parent or parent with a gay child would have the same concerns about Mr. Buell as a parent from a religious family would have if an atheist teacher said religious freedom was a vomit-worthy cesspool.
Posted by: Ernie | Aug 24, 2011 4:41:40 PM
@Derrick From Philly I have to agree with you 110%. This jack ass has the right to his free speech, but he doesn't have the right to humiliate or alienate students who may be in his classroom or who may come from LGBTQ homes.
The teacher (as a public official/civil servant) was wrong in allowing his privately held beliefs to become public. Now that this matter has become national news can this teacher adequately teach in a fair and impartial manner? Will his LGBTQ students still feel that they are learning in a safe, non-hostile, or bigoted environment?
Yes, he has the right to speak his privately held religious beliefs. There are consequences to everything. If the court finds that his speech wasn't in keeping with the "higher standard" that is set for educators then he will and must lose his job. Maybe he can go into the Fundamentalist Clergy where he can spew his anti-gay speech 24/7.
However, his vitriolic speech posed against a specific group of people cannot be tolerated, because he is a representative of the local government.
Teachers should not be fraternizing with their students on Facebook...for both the protection of the student and the teacher.
Posted by: Cody From Texas | Aug 24, 2011 4:42:10 PM
i'm so sick of this "oh, i was just expressing a view" b.s.
it's not about expressing a view, or a "differing view", but a specifically bigoted one that will indeed contribute to not only a tense classroom environment, but the very culture of anti-gay bigotry that drives the young people of this country to suicide
he's unrepentant. he deserves to lose his job.
Posted by: Little Kiwi | Aug 24, 2011 4:42:26 PM
@Ernie:
I don't know what story you read, but I didn't see that he called gay people "vomit-worthy scum," rather he said that about gay marriage. Which is, whether we like it or not a heavily political issue. There is a difference.
@Cody:
As I mentioned, unfortunately gay marriage is a political issue. You cannot ban a teacher from publicly participating in the political sphere just because you don't like his opinions.
@Kiwi:
You still fail to grasp the problem. You find the speech problematic because you think the content is repugnant and antithetical to your moral standpoint. The problem is, that can easily be turned around on you when the majority doesn't like what you're saying.
Posted by: Jack | Aug 24, 2011 4:46:36 PM
I am so saddened by so many of the comments that have been posted. THIS IS NOT A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS CASE! And the ACLU is obviously NOT the organization I thought it was.
Look, a person's first amendment rights to free speech are abridged when they are PREVENTED FROM SAYING SOMETHING BY THE GOVERNMENT. Mr. Buell said plenty. He was never prevented or stopped from saying what he wanted to say. PERIOD. That's the end of the discussion.
The only reason why this issue can be presented as a First Amendment issue is because the society at large is generally unconcerned with statements that denigrate gay people. What if the President of the School Board were black, and on his own time, he posted derogatory things about what a "ape" the School Board President is.
And a million other derogatory things. Shouldn't the school district be able to fire Mr. Buell in that case because he is undermining the mission of the school --to teach children in an atmosphere of respect, decency and fairness. Imagine how the students would respond to such a personal war being waged between the School Board President and some rogue social studies teacher!!
Posted by: dancobbb | Aug 24, 2011 4:50:45 PM
Wouldn't these comments create a very chilly atmosphere for a gay student?? Let's face it, if "teach" is saying that gays make him throw up, then what is "school bully" going to do to the gay kid in class??
Nobody is saying that he doesn't have a right to say what he wants to say --he does!
But the first Amendment says nothing about the right to hold your job as a teacher when you create a very negative, ugly atmosphere for gay kids!
Posted by: dancobbb | Aug 24, 2011 4:53:15 PM
At the bottom of this is that this man is a moronic believer in the impossible. His "passionate" speach is really the speach of a religious zealot. These people tend to have very little understanding of themselves and have very distorted self-images. I love to ask such a person:
If, at the age of 2, you were stolen from your Christian parents in Florida and asported to Algeria and raised there by a devout Moslem family, what are the odds that today you would be a 100% Koran believing Muslim? I'd say the liklihood is about 100% because he is: 1) a zealous personality, and 2) a person with such little self-awareness that he has never seriously considered the provenance of his own religious belief.
Posted by: dancobbb | Aug 24, 2011 5:01:45 PM
You have a right to say what you want, and before you speak you have to be willing to except the consequences for that speech.
A teach is (and should be) held to a higher standard.
I am not arguing his right to free speech...
but Jack don't the children have a right to a learning environment that isn't hostile towards themselves and/or their families or friends?
How would it go over if this same ass hat started saying that all people who live together who aren't married are VILE PERVERTS AND ARE PART OF A MORAL CESSPOOL?...how would that go over with students who's parents may not be married...or who are part of a single parent family and mom or dad's significant other moved in...
Hmmm...
Posted by: Cody From Texas | Aug 24, 2011 5:04:56 PM
Sorry, Jack, but I don't see how his hostile statements about marriage equality can be construed as NOT also statements about gay families. For gay families, equality is no more a political issue than religious belief is for religious families. If I were a teacher and made public Facebook statements that stated that religious freedom was part of a cesspool that made me want to puke, I would fully expect that the school and religious parents would take notice and question my ability to treat their children fairly.
If you would expect to be able to make such statements with impunity, then we simply have a different interpretation of the role of social media in public life and the degree of civility one can expect of teachers, even outside the classroom. I'm not so sure, however, that all of Mr. Buell's defenders would be equally tolerant if he'd spoken with such disgust about, say, the family rights of the devout. Would he want his children taught by someone hostile to religious freedom? I doubt it.
Posted by: Ernie | Aug 24, 2011 5:14:37 PM
@DANCOBB:
You can scream "it isn't a First Amendment case" until you're blue in the face, but you'd still be wrong.
Being punished by the government for speaking directly and emphatically implicates the First Amendment. The Constitution is not the document you thought it was...
Posted by: Jack | Aug 24, 2011 5:16:21 PM
It's good that on this site you rarely hear how tolerant "liberals" are. Cause on this thread it's clear they are not tolerant at all. Once, (gay) "liberals" obtain a degree of power, they will try to silence anyone with an opposing point of view. And Canadian "liberals" surely beat American ones in their intolerance.
Posted by: AG | Aug 24, 2011 5:21:04 PM
hey, AG, my canadian liberal ass isn't the one working to deny your freedoms and equality.
your conservative parents are. newsflash - you're a disappointment to them, you always were, and you always will be no matter how much you try to tell them that you hate black people as much as you do.
this is not a case of "oh, i don't like what he said because it offends my morals" - this is a case of a man using specific words against a specifically targeted group that will INDEED make the LGBT students of this school targeted, and will only encourage anti-gay straight students to arrogantly defend their baseless prejudices.
this is not about "things i dont agree with" and everything to do with the reality that those specific comments indicate a high level of anti-gay bigotry: this will make for a tense environment for the school's LGBT students. this is not an opinion. this is a fact.
AG, stop complaining about Liberals and realize that your conservative parents don't love you or respect you, they merely tolerate you on the grounds that you cut off your balls to appease them.
you could hang yourself tonight and they'd say "great! now we can tell everyone he wasn't really gay, it was just a phase"
never forget, they don't love you. at all.
Posted by: Little Kiwi | Aug 24, 2011 5:28:11 PM
hey, AG, my canadian liberal ass isn't the one working to deny your freedoms and equality.
your conservative parents are. newsflash - you're a disappointment to them, you always were, and you always will be no matter how much you try to tell them that you hate black people as much as you do.
this is not a case of "oh, i don't like what he said because it offends my morals" - this is a case of a man using specific words against a specifically targeted group that will INDEED make the LGBT students of this school targeted, and will only encourage anti-gay straight students to arrogantly defend their baseless prejudices.
this is not about "things i dont agree with" and everything to do with the reality that those specific comments indicate a high level of anti-gay bigotry: this will make for a tense environment for the school's LGBT students. this is not an opinion. this is a fact.
AG, stop complaining about Liberals and realize that your conservative parents don't love you or respect you, they merely tolerate you on the grounds that you cut off your balls to appease them.
you could hang yourself tonight and they'd say "great! now we can tell everyone he wasn't really gay, it was just a phase"
never forget, they don't love you. at all.
Posted by: Little Kiwi | Aug 24, 2011 5:33:16 PM
He has a right to express his views in private of course posting it on face book where all his students might read them was not the wisest choice.
Posted by: jaragon | Aug 24, 2011 5:46:39 PM
Buell's repulsive commentary made me nauseous. Did this man actually mention love? Gross. Honestly, knowing the facts, would you want this wad to continue teaching your kids? The mere thought is unsettling.
Posted by: Ishaq | Aug 24, 2011 5:47:28 PM
What's a "private FaceBook page"?
"I love them, I respect them... even if they are part of that cesspool I wrote about on FaceBook".
Posted by: BobN | Aug 24, 2011 6:18:06 PM
The code of ethics that you subscribe to (and I taught school) is about your in school conduct. I could be a stripper at night if I wanted to --not that I do....unless it would bother @Rick. Ahem.
Wouldn't you rather people have the free speech so you know what you're dealing with???
Dr King said once that he knew where he stood in Alabama, and felt safer there than the North. I say this and no one seems to ever get it, but...
If you force people to hide what they think it will just come out anyway passive aggressively. It is better to know where people stand and address it up front than for them to do slithery things back door.
If my child were gay I would rather know how this teacher felt so I could confront him straight up and tell him if he ever discriminated against my kid I'd kick his old tired ass.
Posted by: Rin | Aug 24, 2011 9:02:56 PM
inciteful, RIN. thanks. kinda a close issue; it's easy to forget the perspective you mention.
Posted by: just_a_guy | Aug 24, 2011 9:25:17 PM