Appeals Court rules professor cannot be forced to use someone's preferred pronouns

 PJ Media:

An Ohio university may have violated the free speech and religious freedom rights of a Christian philosophy professor by requiring him to refer to a biological male student with feminine pronouns and a feminine title, a court ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Shawnee State University professor Nicholas Meriwether, Ph.D. Meriwether sued the university for violating his free speech and religious freedom rights by requiring him to refer to a biologically male student with feminine pronouns. A district court dismissed Meriwether’s lawsuit, but the Sixth Circuit reversed that ruling, allowing the lawsuit to proceed.

“Since Meriwether has plausibly alleged that Shawnee State violated his First Amendment rights by compelling his speech or silence and casting a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom, his free-speech claim may proceed,” Judge Amul Thapar, a Trump appointee, wrote in his opinion. Thapar also argued that the university likely violated Meriwether’s religious freedom by dismissing his religious arguments with hostility.

“This case forced us to defend what used to be a common belief—that nobody should be forced to contradict their core beliefs just to keep their job,” John Bursch, senior counsel at Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) and one of Meriwether’s lawyers, said in a statement on Friday.

...

Life may not be easy for people who try to force others to agree with them.  It will not be easy for those who insult the intelligence of others because they feel insulted. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t
Read more