The Wisconsin English teacher, Jordan Cernek, argues in the suit that the district violated his freedom of religion and free speech in mandating the use of the students' preferred names and pronouns.

The Wisconsin English teacher, Jordan Cernek, argues in the suit that the district violated his freedom of religion and free speech in mandating the use of the students’ preferred names and pronouns.

A high school English teacher is suing a Wisconsin school district, alleging it did not renew his contract last year because he refused to use the preferred names of two transgender students.

Jordan Cernek’s federal lawsuit alleges the Argyle School District violated his constitutional and civil rights to be free of religious discrimination and to be able to express himself according to his religious beliefs when it did not renew his contract because he refused to abide by a requirement that teachers use the names or pronouns requested by students.

  • @[email protected]
    7•3 months ago

    In school, a teacher is an employee. It’s their job.

    It’s my job, as a teacher, to support my students. I do this by calling them by their preferred name if they ask.

    Feel free to complain about that.

    • @lath
      -5•3 months ago

      Your job as a teacher is whatever the contract asks of you. Anything you do beyond that is a choice that might not be supported by the administration of the school that employs you.

      I mean, good for you for being supportive of your students. But if your school decides you shouldn’t do that and you refuse, well bye.

      • ObliviousEnlightenment
        2•3 months ago

        Well, the administration of the school in op clearly felt that the teachers religiously motivated insistence on being a dick violated their contract; so where’s that leave you lol

        • @lath
          1•3 months ago

          It leaves me at my original post. This particular teacher’s dumb reasons doesn’t change the idea in itself.

          Sure the teacher was dumb, sure the institution didn’t agree. But it’s just the circumstances of this case. Can’t say things will be the same every time, when the circumstances will be different.

          • ObliviousEnlightenment
            1•3 months ago

            Sure, but the problem is that leaves states and districts open to enforce a form of bigotry

            • @lath
              1•3 months ago

              They are always open to enforce a form of bigotry. So your focus should be instead on that and prevent reaching this situation. Or what? You expect to stop a series of arsons with one bucket of water?

                • @lath
                  0•3 months ago

                  Can you though? One has to take precedence eventually.