I wonder how this will work out for him
Threadbanned Posters:
Hamsterchops
take everything
road_high
FixdePitchmark
gk5000
And you are getting over excited. There is neither a hill, nor an insinuation. Merely a fact that I haven’t seen any videos on line, which is remarkable. If memory serves, our kids were required to leave mobiles in their lockers when in school, yet amazingly, sometimes didn’t, which led to a couple of detentions, and one video from their classroom of two parents getting into an altercation in the school car park. I hate to inform you, teenagers don’t always comply with rules, even the ones in posh schools.
You've tried to claim this before - whats your source for this? How do you know what policies were, or were not in place when Enoch took up employment at WHS?
Yes. And also, the Equal Status Acts would pre-date Enoch's employment start date anyway.
Not everyone is looking for likes. Just try imagine the situation when a teacher in your school kicks off and starts going after your principle...it would be shock more than anything.
If you want evidence of how this family act, there is a video you can enjoy from the meeting last week. The apple didn't fall too far it seems.
I have been following the thread and I can't recall you saying it didn't happen.
However would you concede that if it was captured on video that it is very unlikely that the video would not have surfaced by now ?
By trying to push the idea it's odd that there's no video of it you are quite obviously trying to create doubt around the entire event and infer it didn't happen how the witnesses have claimed.
Well if you have it then post it. At least my view that it coincides with him being asked to call a child 'they' has a timeframe. If i'm wrong then why didn't he protest earlier?
Did you see the videos of him and his family harassing the volunteer school board members at the hotel?
That's not a point that's an irrelevant observation.
Either you're trying to say it never happened without saying it never happened (I've asked you four times, ypu never definitively answered) or you're just wasting everybody's time.
Possibly both.
🤣
You made a claim. Not me. Theres no evidence to support whether your view is correct or not.
A double negative, are you saying that even if it did exist, it would not be posted?
Sincere religious convictions about gay people being paedophiles, and your response is “fair play”?
Ok so we've established that you find the fact that there are no videos around when no phones were around to record videos, that this is somehow "remarkable".
Apparently you find this so "remarkable", that you keep remarking on it for some reason.
You find it remarkable, we get it. Nobody else does
Can we move on now or are you going to keep telling us its "remarkable" because you can't accept the fact that there were no phones present to record a video
You claim to know for "a fact" something you only heard second hand.
"Apparently the parents who I'd guess hung out too much on Twitter decided that their son was female after playing with girls toys when young"
Again you know for a fact something"apparently" "you guess"
It's clear by your language about the parents that you have an agenda.
It's either a "my friends friends friend heard down the pub" story or nonsense you made up yourself.
And now that you’ve read the school policy about mobile phones, do you still think that it is remarkable?
That's a bit chicken.
I'm basing my judgement on the event that sparked off his protest which seems fairly obvious. The evidence is there ie he began his bad behaviour at that time, not before.
I was trying to be constructive in what I find to be an increasingly frustrating thread.
It just seems to me that for one reason or another there is no video of what happened that day.
I haven’t bothered reading the last few pages of the thread so apologies if this has been said already, but regarding the church service part and why there is no video evidence on Snapchat or TikTok etc it is entirely possible that the students were at the service with their parents and when Burke started having a go at the principal someone DID go to take their phone out only to have it snatched out of their hand by their parents.
Is time important on this thread?
And again, I have never said it didn’t happen, nor insinuated it didn’t happen. If you think I have, you are mistaken. I said it is remarkable a video doesn’t exist if either event, it is you and a few others that to think it means something else.
If you read the detail of the school clarifications, you will see that they are insignificant points of detail.
Read this
A lie is a lie especially when Enoch told the judge the school were lying in the affidavit. There are NO insignificant lies in a courtroom.
Yeah, it's the whole grift. 🤷♀️
Yes there are, not every court room is like Law and Order SVU for Christs sake...
Ah, I see you answered someone else that no, you have no evidence of your claim that was a new policy being pushed on Enoch.
Did it occur to you at all, that this student may be the first trans student to come out at WHS, hence why the policy was only now coming into play?
My point is that it was then that Enock began his protest over that very thing at the time he was told to call someone 'they'. Not before. That was his trigger.
Dav can you give this a rest please? You know what you’re doing and you know as well as the rest of us you’re trying to piss people off with your thinly veiled implications that no video = no event.
this would be I think the 3rd time in as many days you’ve gone down this same route of inquiry. You’re being deliberately obtuse and intentionally antagonistic. Now worse than that you’re gaslighting users by pretending you’re just asking an innocent question and everyone is just piling on.
If you don’t have anything better to contribute why don’t you go and live in your fantasy land somewhere else.
No. You claimed the school policies changed recently. You've no evidence of that claim. A request to refer to a student by their preferred name and pronoun isnt a policy.
My opening line was I know for a fact that something similar happened to another posters post which you also called out as lies, despite not knowing the slightest thing about what may happen in schools around the country. The facts were that a school closed one of their toilets to accommodate a trans child who reverted back to being male when he reached 3rd year. This is the main reason I made the post.
This was not a situation that happened in a friend of a friend type scenario which is often BS, but someone who I lived with for years who I have no reason to cast doubt on. This person has no history of making up stories in other aspects of life so I see no reason to doubt him in any way.
My use of the word "apparently" is indeed speculative and I thought would read that way to most people of average intelligence. I apologise to you if you didn't pick up on that one.
Taking personality and people out of this, This is a complicated matter spanning a number of rights for all incolved .
First, transgender and equal status
Then a school and its obligations to pupils,
Then, religion, and non-discrimination on religious belief (equal status) . Add in a workplace to further muddy things.
Forgetting about the incident with the principle for a moment, can an employer force an employee to do something that is contrary to their religious belief? My understanding is they cannot do so without ending up in the WRC to defend their actions.
Some hypothetical scenarios:
A food processing factory forcing a Muslim employee to taste a new pork range of ready meals, where previously they did not manufacture products containing pork meat
Or making an orthodox Jew work on a Saturday where previously it was a Monday to Friday only workplace
If the employee was sanctioned in either case they would have a legitimate grievance. Obviously they can't become abusive but some people may get quite animated over religion and beliefs.
That is where I see things are with Enoch. I do not agree with everything he has done, nor do I think the school has behaved impeccably either. This matter should never have went to the High Court, which only escalated it. Its my understanding it was the school that brought it there for what may be questionable grounds in the first place. I see it as a WRC matter. I am no expert.
BS.
This is not the first time you've tried to argue this was a completely new policy being brought in by the school, and forced on teachers, when you had no proof of that at all.
![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://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/08231869fd786c2459f2d35b207b4d26.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/925678a10b2fdb0546d802550390a10f.svg)
