Feel the Rainbow? Texas teacher fired over rainbow stickers

I think for today's Republicans and yesterday's Republicans (and tomorrow's Republicans), there is a subset who strongly believe that LGBT and Q+ people are destroying the country. This subset of people believe that group is evil, influential, and out to harm everyone's kids. And through the political process, they're able to vote for state representatives who share this position. Gerrymandering aside, if people who didn't share this Republican subset's view voted at the same levels as their online and public passion, this wing of the Republican party woudn't be so strong. And I'm talking about voting in midterms, state elections, county elections, city elections, school board elections...not just the presidency. Who is your State Senator who works in Austin? Who is your State House Member? Who is your county commisioner? 99% of us don't know this and don't vote on this. So I agree with your take that this movement is feuled by hate of a subset of a group that is making it poltical because they can. But they vote more, and that's represenational government.

 

Again, it is sad that such a simple recognition of diversity, equity, and inclusion is being seen as "political activism". That there is politics connected to accepting a person as a person.

And to answer your question, a rainbow delay or pin isn't the same thing as "vote for my candidate" or "vote green" (or other political "activism").

And interesting your concern over "righteous"... while God teaches people to accept all... I really don't think of a rainbow decal as even being "righteous" in a religious sense beyond accepting all for who they are is simply the right thing to do.

Sorry for the delay in answering... I was at my church.

 

Sadly, it's the same type of people that believe LGBTQ+ are inherently pedophiles.

 

OK, and I recognize that she may not have intended it in that way. It’s a matter of how it would be perceived by others. And my understanding is the rainbow symbol has been used to represent the universal values you’re talking about, and also for more explicit political purposes (which probably we both were supportive of).

 

The "perceived by others" should not be something that is legislated. I would hope that we don't create laws, or even "social norms" based on the "perceptions" of the most ignorant, or the most bigoted, or the most hateful of people. In the past, those same people's "perceptions" thought African Americans were dangerous and/or inferior.

 

We are talking about what teachers are allowed to say or not say in the school. How what they say may be perceived has to matter. If we knew, for certain, that no one would care, then there would be no reason to restrict it. It’s the fact that there might be some people who are offended, regardless of the intentions of the teacher, that ultimately matter.

If, for example, a teacher put up an “ All Lives Matter” sign, it is the potential perception that it was put up to push back against the Black Lives Matter movement that would make it inappropriate in a classroom.

 

The rainbow flag is political because it was intentionally adopted as a symbol of group advocacy (and has been modified to change the meaning of the advocacy, as well as spawning copycat advocacy flags). All civil rights movements are political. Their goal is to influence policy and public opinion.

Is a Gadsden flag political? Is it only made political because the people who have trouble not being tyrannical made it political? Is the thin blue line flag political? Is it only made political because the people who have trouble empathizing with the police made it political?

I think the teacher should be allowed to have whatever sticker she wants. I think the parents can complain to the school board if they want. Freedom of speech is an important concept for everyone. It is silly to deny that the speech she is engaging in is political though.

 

Actually, a lawyer defending your viewpoint would lose heavily in court if they chose this tactic in your rebuttal.

A big reason why libs lose the big ones they feel are slam dunks.

 

If this were to become a red tape issue, i imagine the teacher would have to come up with more creative ways to signal to certain minorities to feel safe.

What's unclear is whether the teacher was truly discriminated against as a result of the symbol or got fed up with the red tape and decided to become emboldened by virtue of having the synbol taken down as some form of political martyrdom. It sounds subtle but that's how millions come out of these decisions.

 

I believe all lives matter. Especially the lives not in the majority. While I think people who oppose "BLM" usurping the phrase I don't have any issue with someone saying it.

Now... you explain to me what the rainbow sticker said to you that you find so offensive. And don't hide behind what "socially conservative perceptions". What did the rainbow sticker say to you that required it to be removed or worse, the teacher to be silenced?

 

I didn’t find anything offensive about it. Me personally being offended by it was never the argument. I think I explained my view in my very first post. It appears to send a single of support for a particular political movement, and I’m not sure it’s a good idea to allow that (irrespective of my support for that movement). I can be convinced that overt political speech should be allowed, but that’s the issue being debated. Not whether gay rights is a good thing or not.

 

Again, you didn't explain how a rainbow sticker is a political movement. Is Jesus' statement to love others as I have loved you a political statement? How about all men are created equal? Or do they all represent the same thing... we are all people, and we should accept all.

 

Do you think civil rights has nothing to do with politics? It’s a long thread, and how this relates to politics has been described many times, by multiple posters. I don’t feel the need to rehash it yet again.

It’s entirely possible the teacher didn’t intend it as a political statement. The question is whether a person could see it and reasonably interpret it as a political statement. I think the answer is yes, but evidently there is disagreement over that in this thread.

 

I remember growing up when rainbows could be distributed, viewed, and stickied to my forehead without fear of political statements or discrimination. What dark times we live in

 

Seems vile and hateful to me. ****ing politicians do absolutely nothing except these low effort attempts to gum up the edges of government, yet are successful in presenting those issues as "what's wrong with government/society" by virtue of staying in office.

I sometimes wonder what other people are really concerned about when they vote.

Let me guess...yer family, yer neighbors family, one upping damn libruhl families cuz dem snobs deserve it!!
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out...e-prevention-resources-state-websit-rcna18376

The Health and Human Services Department has not returned a request for comment.

Sam Ames, director of advocacy and government affairs at The Trevor Project, said mental health is not a partisan issue, and removing suicide prevention resources from a government website “because they are specific to LGBTQ youth is not only offensive and wrong, it’s dangerous.”

“We’re talking about a group of young people who are more than four times as likely to attempt suicide compared to their peers,” Ames said, citing Trevor Project research. In another survey, the group found that more than 80 percent of LGBTQ youths said it was important that a crisis line include a focus on young LGBTQ people.

“Especially during this time of unprecedented political attacks against LGBTQ youth, we encourage all youth-serving organizations and government agencies to learn more about The Trevor Project’s lifesaving crisis services and to publicize them to the youth and families who most need support,” Ames said.

This isn’t the first time Texas officials have removed suicide prevention resources for LGBTQ youths — and The Trevor Project, specifically — from state websites.

In August, following criticism from one of Gov. Greg Abbott’s Republican primary challengers, Texas officials removed a webpage titled “gender identity and sexual orientation” and a page devoted to Texas Youth Connection, a program run by the Department of Family and Protective Services, which included a link to The Trevor Project.

The page on sexual orientation and gender identity still shows an error message. The Texas Youth Connection website also displays the same message that it did in October: “The Texas Youth Connection website has been temporarily disabled for a comprehensive review of its content,” the website says. “This is being done to ensure that its information, resources, and referrals are current.”​

 

If I saw the phrase "all men created equal"... would I think first hat it was an equal rights statement, a political statement... or ? Would I remove it from the classroom? If I saw a picture of Martin Luther King and saw the phrase that began... "I have a dream..." would I think it was a political statement? Would I remove it from the classroom?

Your sensitivity to bigoted people that would be "offended" by the rainbow sticker only validates and empowers their belief system. It is sad that we have so much further to go as a country.

 

Yes. Even his opponents in the lawsuit indicate they are not opposed to his private prayers. I think the issue is gathering players around him for the prayer/motivational speech with religious overtones. The modern understanding of the establishment clause is terrible though, not at all what the framers had in mind. They didn't have any objection to prayers being said in schools or whatever, they didn't want a National Church of America (like the Church of England) that was deeply entangled in the administration of the state. I prefer the more modern view of it, in that I think it is more fair to all Americans to completely remove religion from the state, but I don't think that is what the Constitution calls for. Certainly that can be implemented either through Constitutional amendment or legislation at the state level.