Christian Professor Must Use Student's Transgender Pronouns, Judge Rules

Significant Quote from the judge: “not protected by the First Amendment”.

but calling a student something they don’t want to be called is not “fighting the battle” it is being rude.

Is it not also rude to demand someone use certain words in referring to you which you know they do not want to use? Once again: The judge’s statement about the First Amendment is significant.

Is it OK for a judge to legally require someone to be polite? I’m concerned about where this is going.

if you can’t call a biological male who wants to be called a “her” out of biblical principle, do you honor an unbiblical divorcee who remarries another divorcee by calling the couple Mr and Mrs Jones?

I don’t judge unbelievers. They sin by nature.

[Mark_Smith]

if you can’t call a biological male who wants to be called a “her” out of biblical principle, do you honor an unbiblical divorcee who remarries another divorcee by calling the couple Mr and Mrs Jones?

I don’t judge unbelievers. They sin by nature.

Yes, because it is still a legitimate marriage, even if sinful. E.g. he very real obligations to care for his new wife The man, however, is still not a woman.

I have no problem calling him Hilda, if he likes. But I refuse to join him in the construction of his harmful fantasy by abusing our shared language to do so. And I will absolutely not be compelled.

If that is rude, so be it.

Perhaps this professor’s approach might be understood better in light of what tactics we ought to use to reach the “trans” student. If we understand—as has DSM for decades—that gender dysphoria is a mental condition (they don’t call it an illness anymore, I believe) with some severe consequences for the sufferer, including 35% use of mental health services and (I’ve read) something like 40% suicide attempts, how do we best reach out to those who suffer with it?

Do we outright refuse to acknowledge them as they want to be acknowledged, or do we see if they’ll trust us enough for us to ask “is this really going to solve your problem?”, or “are the doctors really verifying that there is no other solution to this?”?

Two other factors come in here. First of all, probably because surgery of any type was a death sentence and unthinkable back in Bible times, there isn’t a whole lot of Scripture that militates against “transitioning.” Didn’t need to be said, but for us today, that means we need to do a bit more work to prove our case, starting with 1 Cor. 7 and “God created them male and female.” (but not limited to that)

Second, free speech on campus is not precisely Constitutionally protected, as it’s really rather a limited freedom of speech conditioned on the school’s acceptance of certain federal funds. In practice, what it means is that the school allows just as much free speech as they think they need to to maintain federal funding and not get slapped too hard in the courts.

[Bert Perry]

Perhaps this professor’s approach might be understood better in light of what tactics we ought to use to reach the “trans” student. If we understand—as has DSM for decades—that gender dysphoria is a mental condition (they don’t call it an illness anymore, I believe) with some severe consequences for the sufferer, including 35% use of mental health services and (I’ve read) something like 40% suicide attempts, how do we best reach out to those who suffer with it?

Do we outright refuse to acknowledge them as they want to be acknowledged, or do we see if they’ll trust us enough for us to ask “is this really going to solve your problem?”, or “are the doctors really verifying that there is no other solution to this?”?

Two other factors come in here. First of all, probably because surgery of any type was a death sentence and unthinkable back in Bible times, there isn’t a whole lot of Scripture that militates against “transitioning.” Didn’t need to be said, but for us today, that means we need to do a bit more work to prove our case, starting with 1 Cor. 7 and “God created them male and female.” (but not limited to that)

Second, free speech on campus is not precisely Constitutionally protected, as it’s really rather a limited freedom of speech conditioned on the school’s acceptance of certain federal funds. In practice, what it means is that the school allows just as much fee speech as they think they need to to maintain federal funding and not get slapped too hard in the courts.

I understand that POV, and I’m not going to say someone is sinning or even simply in error for following that route.

I am saying that I must also be allowed to follow my own conscience on how to address this particular thorny issue without being told I’m rude and/or in sin.

It’s easy to see the short term harm before us in the face of a young student suffering from gender dysphoria (though I wonder how common these cases even are, verses young people who are simply confused or experiencing autogynephilia or somesuch).

It’s harder to see the long-term harm done when well meaning people constantly accommodate themselves to the current zeitgeist—whatever their motivations. But that doesn’t make the harm less real.

This issue is what sprang Jordan Petersen into the limelight, something for which he suffering greatly now physically.

you are not their counselor, or pastor, or guide, or father, or even brother. You are there to teach whatever you are paid to teach. If they come to you for advice, then you can give it. Otherwise, stay in your lane. This is no a first amendment issue.

as one at a secular university. I am sure plenty of you remember the positive influence of some prof at BJU. That’s not how it works out in state universities. It took 12 painful years for me to figure NOT ONE of my students, even the Christian ones, care what I think about anything in their lives. They aren’t looking to me for guidance, advice, or as an example. That’s a fact. A sad one, but true. I teach astronomy. That’s it. This is ESPECIALLY TRUE when you are teaching general education classes, those classes outside of your major you have to take to get a breadth of knowledge.

I disagree. This fundamentally is a First Amendment issue. Suppose a college or business required you to address students or employees in whatever manner a person requested. Suppose a college President wanted to be addressed as “Your Majesty”, or a student wanted to be addressed as a “bear” because he felt he had bear-like characteristics. Yet you do not want to do so and do not want to lose your job. Yet if this is not a First Amendment issue, then you must conform or find another job. There are limits to how much we should conform to the idiotic “self-identity” movement. Yes, we should try to help people understand the deeper issues. But we do not help them by conforming to their idiocy. The Gulag Archipelago is helpful: The innocent are jailed if socially harmful; the guilty are freed if socially friendly.

Mark: By the way, I love astronomy. I have a 5 inch reflector. My favorite is the moon. Fascinating.

OK. Let’s say you do this and win the right to do it. At a secular university the students would “revolt” in class and you’d get horrible evaluations and in a year or two at the longest you’d be fired. The students would ignore you… you’d be miserable. All over not calling a guy you don’t know who doesn’t care what you think something he doesn’t want to be called. Trust me, its not worth it. I’ve lived it. Have you?

Yes. And it wasn’t that bad.

Where and when and what subject?

My school has a Diversity and Inclusion statement that specifically mentions gender and sexual identity. Every faculty member has to sign that they will respect this diversity in the classroom.