I wonder how this will work out for him
Threadbanned Posters:
Hamsterchops
take everything
road_high
FixdePitchmark
gk5000
In sperate posts, you've written:
it is factually incorrect to say no one’s religious beliefs were infringed, his were.
and
Why would you assume that I have any insight into his religious beliefs?
Either you know what his beliefs are or you do not - which is it? If you do, then tell me what beliefs was infringed and how?
Only if you don’t recognise the distinction between a word and a policy.
You do understand that it is Enoch Burkes, and EVs religious beliefs which are being discussed, not anyone else’s. I know what his beliefs on transgenderism are, we all do, he has told the school, the media, the Courts often enough. Am I a religious scholar who is all knowing about religious beliefs? Of course not, but that doesn’t change the fact that Enoch Burke has repeatedly stated that he objects to transgenderism based on his religious beliefs.
People having abortions etc don’t impact his religious beliefs per se. He’s not being asked to actively participate in an abortion such as a doctor might be .
However he was asked to recognise a transgender child or a child transitioning gender by using their preferred pronoun.
The question I find myself asking is- how might this request, be any different to asking him to address a teacher colleague as Ms Madison after she divorced from Mr. Pigeon and has now reverted to her maiden name.
If he is anti-divorce, Shirley it could also be argued that being asked to address Ms Madison by her preferred name, is impacting his religious beliefs by forcing him to recognise that Ms Madison is now a divorcee.
In other words, an extremely trivial point - I do hope the Supreme Court (because let’s face it, Burke isn’t going to stop till he at least tries to get there) will throw out this case deeming it very trivial and not in anyway impacting on what Burke believes.
Burkes Religious beliefs are not undermined by having to address someone by their preferred pro-noun - it’s a false premise to begin with -just as they’re not impacted in any way by being asked to call Ms Madison by her maiden name post divorce.
Burke has no qualifications to determine what pro noun - male female or neutral etc a person should be called- I could have been raised male all my life but have a complete set of female organs- would my insistence on being called female now, impact Burkes religious beliefs? Not a chance.
What discrimination?
Could someone explain this irish language joke for those that have not been in a classroom for nearly 35 years?
This is the nub of the issue and why we may suspect, the case will not rest here. The 'lynch mob' here would have us believe that this is all about words, loud discussions and injunctions. If we accept that religious ethos and beliefs are part and parcel of our education system (as majority of parents seems happy to go along with), then we have to accept there will be alignments and conflicts between religious doctrine and school policies.
Delighted the pupils sent him a letter. Shows the support their fellow student. That would mean a lot and be a very Christian thing to do.
There are stories online about lads in his class holding hands with each other to wind him up...ha ha
He didn’t have an excuse when he was suspended either; yet he showed up.
We’ll find out soon enough i guess.
"Lynch mob" go away out of that. He's a proven despicable character and his family are odious to the extreme. They are receiving everything they have asked for.
It's just a dumb "both sides" argument. best ignored.
The discrimination he will no doubt ask the Courts to rule on.
if you don’t understand at this stage the importance of religious beliefs in this story and that religion is one of the grounds protected in discrimination legislation, I cannot help you.
Whether he will be successful if the Courts is a different matter, but I don’t think any of us believe that this situation has run its course, or that there won’t be a WRC case down the line.
Beidh aonach amárach is a traditional Irish song, meaning "There will be a fair tomorrow" - aonach meaning fair (as in a gathering of people buying and selling goods).
The first line in the song is "Beidh aonach amárach i gContae an Chláir" - "There will be a fair tomorrow in County Clare"
Substitute aonach with the very similarly sounding Enoch...
for those that have not been in a classroom for nearly 35 years
That'll be Enoch in 2058! 😁
Or the scenario I thought of where a same sex married couple have the same surname.
I was thinking that too but there is a difference in scale between a suspended employee in dispute with the employer showing up, and a dismissed former employee showing up.
The first is as we saw injunctions and contempt of court, the second, as someone said above, is senior hurling, potentially a conviction and jail sentence. This would be harder for them to turn into a circus and would block him from many things.
A lot of fog around this morning.
I think religious belief is of importance to Enoch Burke, that is clearly obvious, but it is only tangential to this story which is about a teacher being fired for gross misconduct.
The thing I find hardest about Enoch Burke is that how somebody who can believe in transubstantiation can struggle with the concept of transgenderism.
So your argument boils down to that because his extreme and fundamentalist religious belief says he can and should discriminate against someone else, but by stopping him from discriminating against a person, who in this case happened to be a child, he is therefore being discriminated against?
Absolutely brilliant.
Well at least he won't have to worry about that anymore 🤣
Does he believe in it? transubstantiation is a catholic thing and Burke isn't a catholic.
You and I believe that, but do you think Enoch Bourke will not claim he was discriminated against on religious grounds?
Now that may explain it.
Presume then he is one of those who believes the earth was created 4,000 years ago and God took a bone from Adam to create Eve?
I would not be at all surprised if he was a bible literalist.
There are two entirely different issues at play here in all of this.
The 1st is whether or not Enoch Burke has any legal standing to object to the directive from his employers on the grounds of Religious beliefs etc.
This topic never got to be reviewed/discussed because Enoch Burke decided to shout and roar at his employer in a public forum rather than raise the issue through the existing and clearly laid out complaint procedures for Teachers.
That brings us to the 2nd issue , which is what all of this has actually been about , which is Enochs initial suspension pending a disciplinary hearing for his actions at the aforementioned public school event.
Nothing about any of the hearings both in the school and in the courts over the last ~4 months or so have had anything to do with the 1st issue, they have been entirely related to the 2nd issue.
Legally speaking, I don't think that Enoch really has any possibility to bring up the 1st issue in any appeal he might try to bring as it has absolutely nothing to do with why he was suspended and ultimately dismissed.
Had he been able to behave like an adult and simply followed the documented process he could have been appealing this all the way to the European Courts with all the profile (and support from outside parties aligned to his agenda) that a case like that would bring.
Instead he's just a guy that got fired for shouting at his boss and chasing them around a room - Nothing more , nothing less.
It doesn't matter what people believe, lot of people in employment situations believe that they were discriminated against, but the rate of success is extremely low for such cases, as it is normal for people who are in those situations to blame other factors than their own behaviour.
I have no argument in this, I’m simply stating what he has claimed. I don’t think there can be any dispute that Evangelical Christians hold extreme on homosexuality and transgenderism, based on their religious beliefs.
If you are asking to I agree with or support him? Of course not, but that doesn’t alter the fact that he claims that school policy went against his religious beliefs in this matter.
Again. That is for a court to decide.
Did you read the ammi employment case ? They’re disruptive, you want disruption In your workplace?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a46418388544fe9f8f6352b57fb2f921.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c998303aa0fcfcedb419267ab426bd5.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/1dfa17521f83716a5b701f1ba1121709.svg)