Mod- Thread title updated to reflect what has actually happened, and the op's text link has been turned into a working link
Lazy effort op, don't do it again
Threadbanned
john123470
Both parties have an argument but the teachers behaviour is what will have him removed from his position.
This is the whole thing in a nut shell.
Both sides probably had an argument to make which would have needed to be worked out by all concerned via the appropriate review/mediation processes.
But Enoch Burke chose a different path - A path where he was absolutely right and everybody else was wrong and where he would simply not be told what to do.
That arrogance and hubris has landed him in jail for as long as he wants to martyr himself. It will also ultimately lose him his current job and likely any chance of a future job in this country.
And none of that has to do with Pronouns.
the government doesn't.
I agree entirely with your assessment of the matter.
However, I think it was reported that the principal brought up the Equality Act with the teacher. This could be interpreted as a threat.
Legally, the whole situation is a quagmire. I'm not a lawyer but I would think - his behaviour apart - under the law he is likely on more solid ground than the principal here. It looks as though an attempt might have been made to shut him up by using the act as a threat. Also we only know about what happened in public view - other stuff may have happened out of sight. There may even have been emails etc going back and forth. We may only be seeing the tip of the iceberg here regarding events in the school. We will probably never know.
On a personal level, I have very little sympathy for Burke, he and several members of the family have been portrayed in a very negative light indeed. People on this forum have attacked them - maybe even going beyond fair comment.
But there are other issues here too, serious social, medical, ethical (not religious) and legal issues which as a society we have to sort out. People who are genetically men participating in female sports and the use of changing facilities would be perhaps the most visible of these. They won't go away by claiming, for instance, that some women have a penis.
Eh science deems it biologically impossible. Y’know that branch of science, biology?
😂😂😂😂 that it is.
thanks- I was hoping someone would reply to that post I made as I genuinely didn’t know- it’s an interesting juxtaposition and a recipe fit for a long drawnout case at the four goldmines (Courts)
Even the term “religious beliefs” is a massive opportunity for interpretation -I mean what two individuals will ever agree fully on what their own religion stands for?
saying all of that, I just think it’s sick that he’s making such a fuss where a child is concerned and doing so in such a public fashion- I hope the child is ok as I’m sure they’re feeling very vulnerable right now with all the attention this case is getting- I also hope they’re school buddies support this individual as I reckon they need supporting
The original story said he followed the principal around and "questioned her loudly". Now boardises says he 'abused' her which gives a false impression imo.
I only mentioned it as this is the basis that the school have put forward as one of the reasons in their decision to address the pupil as per their wish. I would assume the school were afraid of the legislation being used against them if they refused the pupil, the pupil would have said they were being discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation, the exact definition of the term 'sexual orientation' is not clear within the legislation so could be argued. But on the same hand Religion is one of the 9 areas protected under the Equality legislation and also in Ireland religious discrimination in the work place is illegal under the Constitution.
Both parties have an argument but the teachers behaviour is what will have him removed from his position
He wasn't asked to refer to them as a different gender... They is gender neutral and names can be applied to either gender. So if anything, both parties were accommodated. Meanwhile he actively behaved in a way that was potentially negative for the well-being of students...
Thinkingaboutit threadbanned
The irish government recognises a change of gender so I would think it is covered.
It's not very clear that gender in the current sense is covered by the act, but religion very definitely is.
I think religious freedom is protected under the constitution, not so sure that gender is.
Ths whole matter - the wider matter of what the words - gender, man, woman - mean is a huge can of worms. I don't know how it will pan out in the end, but in the meantime it's a great distraction from the housing crisis isn't it?
However , the key element is in the title - Equality , meaning that his "rights" is regards to his religion cannot take precedence over anothers rights on the basis of gender or sexuality (among others).
A completely fact free pronouncement.
He can leave Mountjoy anytime he likes without having to violating any of his "beliefs" - He just has to agree to stay away from the school until he has gone through the disciplinary process etc.
But therein lies the rub , he believes that everyone else should simply acquiesce to his position and that he should be welcomed back with open arms by all the people that he shouted at and abused in public without any review or penalty.
It's consistent with all the previous Burke "issues" - "We're right and God is on our side so we simply refuse to engage in any of your processes , just bow down and give us everything we want"
if you don’t believe in transgender due to your religious beliefs
Have a look at the equality act, religious beliefs are protected. Mad, but there you are.
No Enoch you just need to stop showing up at a school like a creepy bug eyed fúck.
Then you can leave Mount Joy.
The parents did not make it a public issue? They supported their child's decision, and approached the school, who - it appears - already had a policy in place for dealing with this. The school (presumably) informed staff, as they would have had to do, and Burke objected, then disrupted a church service and reception, and we ended up where we are now.
On we go.
No, they haven't, unless it has been discussed at a synod or the like.
Currently this is a school matter, and I haven't heard that church law has changed on the matter, but then again I wouldn't normally be interested in the internal doings of our churches.
You're the second ( at least) to mention equality legislation, but AFAIK it's pretty restrictive in what it covers. Unless it has been amended to cover so-called gender issues in general and pronouns in particular, the school won't be able to rely on it IMO.
I kinda mentioned it before but I do feel a bit sorry for the siblings. They were raised in an isolated cult. A small cult to be fair, but nevertheless a cult.
Imagine how hard the brainwashing must have been that they're all still clinging to these beliefs well into adulthood.
Burke is "seeking martyrdom", something that has been done for many centuries ( see Thomas a Becket )
He wants to be ... well, martyred , thinking erroneously it is right according to his beliefs to suffer for those beliefs. in whatever way he finds to do .Regardless of all else. A fanatic.
Needs to refer to the words of Jesus who does not condemn ,
As a former teacher? I would have carefully followed what the school was asking. By asking for THEY this was allowed. Whatever my beliefs as this is not about belief but about caring and respect. For my responsibilities to my employers and student , And no it would not have altered my beliefs which are about my conduct and my life. And there would have been compassion even though I agree that the parents were ... wrong to make it such a public issue.
So you think he's be ok refusing to talk to parents who are in a same sex marriage? Because he's campaigned against it and drawn links between homosexuality and pedophilia. I'm asking if you think it's ok because if you think it's ok to allow a "belief" against trans people to interfere with his work, then you should be ok with him harassing or ignoring gay people when he's in work.
All those beliefs should be left at the door when he's working.
Edit: I went a bit hard there. Sorry. But you get my point. The guy should have respected the child's wishes and left his beliefs at the door. I have a feeling you'd do that in his position. And I might disagree with your views, but I think you'd at least be respectful to the student.
That will follow, for sure, but it's early days yet
Does the teaching council not have a role here. He should get membership removed due to aggresion towards principal and his contempt of court. They are the professional body charged with upholding standards in the teaching profession.
He can't. If he does and they don't agree with him, all he can do is appeal or escalate to the next court in charge.
Do Duffy's circus pay that well?
If he gets the boot they may well end up being involved though he wouldn't have grounds for a successful case IMHO as the school will make sure any action is watertight
How funny would it be if the same adjudicator was appointed to his case as Ammi's lol
The school - they made the decision to honour the pronouns and they made the decision to suspend him. The WRC haven't been involved.
She has been unemployable since apparently, she could do with the work.
Although they would need to put a tea towel over the mothers head to keep her quiet.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c33618a99b1d02afaf5370e8c02bf147.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbba4c22aa1d352d2cdbb076e36aea8c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6cf5dc758823be7b2ebdb601ec3d15b8.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/540d8cb314832a1dac2dc9192a568ed1.svg)