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
Why does everyone keep saying the Burkes are intelligent. Seems like this is all based on them doing well in the Leaving Cert.
2 of them have now seriously damaged their careers and made no PR gain from it. How is this "intelligent"?
Intelligence and common sense are two completely different things.
A lot of clarity to be gained by looking at what the High Court Judge said:
In his ruling the judge accepted the school’s board of management argument that the application before the court today was not about Burke’s opposition to transgenderism nor his religious beliefs.
It was as the school submitted, about Burke’s refusal to comply with the terms of his paid suspension and the terms of the injunction obtained by the school.
Issues raised by Burke, the judge added, were matters for either the full hearing of the dispute, or at the hearing of the disciplinary process commenced by the school against the teacher.
I'd argue intellectual rather then intelligent. Saying the leaving cert is a test of someone's intellgence is like saying jumping into a small puddle is a test of someone's swimming ability.
I see no discussion on Boards about the other major Westmeath story.
Theres no legal proceedings underway, so are the Google China rules in place?
Crazy thread. I can't believe people are happy that a person in Ireland is locked up indefinitely, for the reason of sitting in an empty classroom (in breach of a court order not to sit there).
The problem here is that the injunction requires that he agrees to be suspended, but he's had no fair hearing with regards to this suspension, no representation, no right to reply. Realistically this isn't right - whatever you think about the circumstances - and is a breach of natural justice and basic human rights. There are plenty of avenues for him to take here between legislation on industrial relations, unfair dismissals, employment equality, defamation and so on.
I'm purely discussing the suspension and imprisonment as, as posters keep pointing out, this isn't about pronouns.
You could start one if you want.
They tend to descend into a sh1t show quite quickly however with the same usual posters making assumptions, as did the most recent one.
To an extent. But I don't think assessing the potential impact of actions on your career and your cause is the realm of common sense. An intelligent person who lacked common sense would easily be able to see that their previous actions have not furthered their cause even 1% and has completely damaged their reputation. They are not intelligent.
500 points in the leaving cert does not equal intelligence regardless of whether someone has common sense or not.
nobody .....
imagine that i am typing this very slowly, if it helps
nobody *agrees* to be suspended.
I'd say they're neither. Their beliefs are based on revealed truth of scripture, not some rationalist interpretation. In my view they are idiots in every sense of the word. And I'm not just saying that because I disagree with them politically.
Yes of course
The injunction is to stay away from the school while the disciplinary process was taking place, and he didn't stay away. He broke the injunction repeatedly.
He has no one to blame but himself.
I don't think he broke it repeatedly, did he? I believe the warrant for his arrest was issued once he sat in the empty classroom?
Nevertheless, he's in prison indefinitely for breaching an injunction that enforces a disciplinary procedure for which he's had no hearing. It's not right, and the school could have dealt with this in far better ways, for both the teacher and the student.
He broke the injuction twice - once on Friday for when a warrant was issued, and once on the Monday when they actually arrested him. If he hadn't shown up on the Monday, he'd probably have convinced the court not to take further action.
No, he turned up on several different days and each time was asked to leave, and refused. He was given multiple opportunities before finally being arrested. When brought before the High Court judge for breaking the injunction, he told them he would continue to break the injunction and turn up even though ordered not to do so.
The date for his disciplinary proceedings to be heard had been set for sometime this week, so its not like it was being ignored. Schools are only back 2 weeks.
The problem is that religious bodies have a huge input while the taxpayer funds the education provided. Clearly in fee-paying schools there is more funding, used for a variety of purposes (better facilites probably being the most important), but the curricular education is funded by us all.
And yes, we should reorganise the state as a secular body, possibly with religious bodies having the right to have their own, privately-funded schools if they so wish.
Thanks, my mistake, thought it was just the one day.
Either way, regardless of any previous actions by his family, his reputation and livelihood is destroyed because of this situation alone. His face was plastered across media when the injunction was granted (i.e., before he breached it) to enforce the suspension. The "circumstances" of this suspension, for which he's had no hearing, have been in the media for a week. This is fundamentally wrong.
for a person who keeps getting the basics facts here utterly wrong (and always in favour of enoch burke) you sure seem to finish every post very sure of things
you seem to fundamentally misunderstand what suspension while under investigation means.
And all done by his own hand and exactly what he wanted.
Don't think this wasn't orchestrated.
I don't believe the school wanted the injunction or Burke imprisoned - more that Burkes actions left them with no choice.
What does suspension under investigation mean here? Do we know the terms of his employment? Is it permitted to punish an employee with a suspension as seems to have happened here?
I'm not in favour of Enoch Burke, I wouldn't like anybody to be locked away indefinitely and have their reputation/life ruined under such circumstances.
Yes it is wrong but he left them with no choice by his actions. He is in prison because of his actions. You appear to think he should be absolved of responsibility for his actions.
He could have stopped so many times and let the disciplinary process do it’s job.
He didn’t.
This is all his fault. Nobody else. When you listen to his martyrdom speeches in court, he’s loving the attention. So let’s not feel sorry for him here.
Maybe so, maybe not, I don't know
I agree that he's in prison because of his actions. I don't believe that they were left with no choice, at each stage. For example, the school could stand down the injunction. I believe also that these choices by the school failed the student too.
seriously this is very transparent stuff imo
you could google any template disciplinary process and answer every one of these burning questions for yourself but for some reason you really just seem to be determined to absolve enoch of any responsibility because the big bad school........followed the process
Why should the school have stood down the injunction after his behaviour?
If the school had stood down the injunction, he would have continued to disrupt the school and the classes at the start of a new school year. A substitute teacher was in place to teach his classes.
He should have stayed away and respected the process.
He was disrupting school activities and, from their poitn of view, there was every chance he'd go on another hate-filled rant in front of students. So standing down the injunction was pointless.
Their first priority is the students, not Burke. And that meant keeping Burke away from them. Burke made sure this was the only way - he pretty much told a judge he'd go back if he wasn't held in contempt of court.
because the big bad school........followed the process
We'll see, I suppose.
Their first priority is the students, not Burke.
The school has a duty of care both to its students and its employees. I think they failed both with their actions and handled the situation very poorly (if it happened as reported in media).
If the school stood down the injunction would that not give Burke the freedom to do as he wished? Disrupt classes, ride roughshod over the students, the other members of staff and the principal?
If the school stood down the injunction would that not give Burke the freedom to do as he wished?
Well how would a place of employment usually keep somebody out that shouldn't be there? I think there's likely a better approach than imprisonment + media circus
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6cf5dc758823be7b2ebdb601ec3d15b8.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f07ee44b0b39bbb635066da4046d9475.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1a8522b26abe4367117071263a70671.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d5a8197d7274f92eab37915a6d9f12a1.svg)
