Freedom of Speech

I read a recent article about the Bucks County high school teacher fired after they found the blog she wrote last year.  Attached to this particular piece were several links to the previous news coverage of the story including an impassioned speech made by the principal.  In his statement, he compares the privilege she has to write the blog versus the moral and ethical right to do so.  Her blog was filled with anger and vitreous comments about her students where she called them names and chastised their parents insinuating they were irresponsible.  The principal went on to quote statistics showing his school is ranked high in the nation, that they have high SAT scores, and that a large percentage of students go on to prestigious colleges.  It seemed to me quite a defensive plea meant to impress upon the listening public that his students are nothing like the kids she was talking about.

One thing that struck me about the whole issue is whether the school district had the right to fire her.  She does have freedom of speech and a legal right to express her feelings.  Not reading the blog I am not sure if she identified her students or spoke anonymously as she claimed she did.   But even if she did not name names, clearly the principal’s main job to maintain order and as her comments inflamed and enraged the student body they had to have had a large impact on moral.  On one hand I think that people have to get a backbone and stop being so overly offended.  On the other, I totally understand his decision because no school should have such a tenuous moral due to public scrutiny as this issue created.  It begs the general question of whether employees have a responsibility to maintain the façade an organization is trying to portray if there are a few people who are causing unrest.  It is a complex situation, no doubt.

I spoke to a coworker whose sister is a teacher.  His sister had read the blog and said it accurately described the majority of students’ behavior and that the blog was meant to be a tongue-in-cheek expose rather than anything abusive.  From what he said, parents these days are very defensive and will blame the teachers for the bad behavior rather than their children or themselves.  His sister apparently has been a teacher for a while and has seen a subtle shift over the years toward this kind of blame placing.  It’s sad really, that any blame placing has to be done and it is sad that a teacher would resort to name calling and profanity to express her frustrations about her job.  As an “educated” woman I would expect her rants be more civilized. While I will fight for her right to say what she wants, I have to agree that taking her out of the situation that can cause such angst for the student body is, unfortunately for her, the right thing to do.

Equal Rights Protection

I did not realize this, but Pennsylvania is one of the few states who do not have a non-discrimination clause in their constitution. In this state one can actually get fired for being gay. They can be denied service in a restaurant, refused housing, and turned away from getting a job simply because of who they love. It makes no sense to me.

Section 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution is entitled Inherent Rights of Mankind and it says:

All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.

I guess they are talking white men, landowners, and un-indentured servants here. Back in 1776 when the Pennsylvania Constitution was first adopted, that’s who was making the laws. However it has not been changed and the “all men” part is taken over time to mean "mankind". Mankind should mean humanity and humanity should be devoid of labels.

At any rate because Pennsylvania does not have language in its constitution, there are a few representatives sponsoring HB 300

An Act amending the act of October 27, 1955 (P.L.744, No.222), known as the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, further providing for the title, for findings and declaration of policy, for right to freedom from discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodation; defining "sexual orientation" and "gender identity or expression"…

This bill has languished in committee. It was brought to the floor once and didn’t pass. So because the state has not passed this legislation, various municipalities, and some counties, and decided to do their own thing. One of these municipalities is Abington, and they are having a tough time doing it. I don’t understand why as it seems like such a no brainer to me.

When I was a council person in Norristown back in 2003, I tried to pass Domestic Partner legislation in order to make our municipality a more welcoming place. Again, it seemed like a no brainer. I thought I had support from my colleagues, but after the meeting where we got 7-8 mini sermons basically telling us we were all going to Hell if we passed this, it died. Every time I hear of municipalities having problems with this, I shake my head in utter disbelief. We live in a world were pretty much anything goes, but I suppose that means if you are a white male under 50, married with children, own a home, and work in a corporate job. If you are in that class pretty much anything goes. If not, you’re screwed.

This country was born of freedom which means that you should be accepted no matter how God made you. We don’t live in a dictatorship, we don’t live with communism, and we don’t live in a monarchy. There should be no reason why everyone one should be treated the same regardless. Just regardless, because there should be no definitions or classifications needed.

Freedom of Speech

Do we have freedom of speech? Our constitution guarantees us freedom of speech with the first amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression, which was ratified 12/15/1791. It states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Our founding fathers realized that the one thing that our new country could provide was to give people the ability to live their lives in a manner that was free from persecution for their beliefs. For example the early members of the Religious Society of Friends, were tortured and harassed for believing and practicing their religious beliefs in their homeland of England.

However, I sometimes believe we take this right a little too far. The most recent situation of the teacher in Bucks County caught blogging about her students is case in point. Did she really have the right to say all those things under this amendment? Or are we harnessed by our employers to watch our words carefully for fear of retaliation and expulsion from our places of employment. My personal belief is that we are somewhat restricted based on the potential ramifications our words can realize. Even though she has the right to say what she wants she represents her school – her place of employment – and as such should have been mindful of how others might think of the school. If she had blogged in such a way to be totally anonymous, then maybe she could have vented all she wanted and not caused such a fury.

This incident reminds me of a story I just finished reading; The Help by Kathryn Stockett (a great book IMHO). Back in Mississippi during the 1960s a black person could be beaten to death for interacting with a white person. The maids in this story were given the opportunity to possibly turn these unspoken rules around if they would only speak up and tell stories about their experiences in a book. At first they were reluctant to do so for fear they would be fired, or worse, beaten for the stories. But after a while, they began to come forward one after another to allow the person compiling the stories to submit the manuscript. However the author, a white woman, did not put her name to the title because she too was fearful of retribution due to her involvement with the maids. They had the right but there were potential consequences if they exercised that right to its fullest.

So the question remains. Do we have full freedom of speech? Freedom denotes the ability along with the absence of consequences. Until our society is willing to accept without agreement, I believe we don’t.