Teachers vs. Gender Ideology

Family policy matters and engaging and informative weekly radio show and podcast produced by the North Carolina family policy Council hi this is John Ralston presidency family and were grateful to have you with us for this week's program is our prayer that you will be informed, encouraged and inspired by what you hear on family policy matters and that you also better equipped to be a voice of persuasion for family values in your community, state and nation, and now here's our house to family policy matters. Tracy Devitt brings thanks for joining us this week for family policy matters nearly every week it seems we hear national headlines about situations where the wish for gender ideology clashes with individual or religious liberties and rights, especially in educational environments occluding athletics from elementary schools to universities affecting students, teachers, staff, and even parents as this situation increasingly raises legal questions.

Organizations like alliance defending freedom or ADF are stepping up. We are joined today by Matt Sharp, senior legal counsel with the ADF where he directs the Center for legislative advocacy that sharp, welcome back to family policy matters. Grabbing the first would you start by defining for us, what exactly is meant by gender ideology or ideology focuses on the side is a bit a person's outward expression of their gender male female or even non-binary or something of Harley is separate from their biological sex notebook.

There's some nugget of truth in there I think were all familiar with through some boys don't enjoy sports are those things in the world but when and we've always welcomed that an invoice that that girl don't necessarily have the same desires or activities involved in or things like that. But when were talking about this gender identity ideology will were going to something far beyond that which is that a child was born in the wrong body and so what we see this bleeding through his children being told that we need to first put your puberty blocker so that you don't go through natural puberty and then we need to start administering cross sex hormone that a boy begins to develop certain characteristics of female and lower your raising voices and developing certain anatomical features and then finally this coming foot surgery, which is permanently sterilizing one way we see this gender identity. I theology play out, but we also see it being forced on other people that we may have seen this in the context of being told, you must use preferred pronoun or you can't refer to someone by their biological sex. You must accept their new gender identity, and so at its core, it is sort of a a rejection of the idea that that I persons biological factors are the defining feature of who they are there gender and rather says no it's an internal sense and we as a society need to embrace that the person self chosen gender, whether that's male-female non-binary or something else entirely. Let's talk specifically about educators and staff members.

How is that affect affecting them and are there legitimate limits on what teachers can say or teach in regard to this in the school setting. Let's start with that first little background. The Supreme Court recognized that leaders, students nor teachers give up their First Amendment rights when they enter the schoolhouse gate the morning so when it comes to students.

We know that they got well-established right to talk about their beliefs talk about their faith talk around a variety of issues and even teachers don't give up all those rights. Obviously there a little more constrained a teacher that the math teacher can't bring again current hot topics or talk about other subject matters, but that person was hired to teach math but that being said, where the real conflict comes is when the school start telling teachers not just what objects they can teach, but what other ideas and things that they can express. So we see this in instances where you not teacher maybe wears a cross necklace and the school tries to say no you can't wear that that impermissibly expression your religious belief that false teachers can express themselves in that way, so teachers can absolutely continue to express their own beliefs and to do so. Sort of consistent with the curriculum and then school policy boat where their limits are. As is their ability to sort of go outside of their subject matter or to try and indoctrinate student that's where the teacher has to maintain that neutrality not favoring religion but not disfavoring religion as well. For example, this obviously comes up a lot in the gender identity context as well. When it comes to beliefs about gender identity, ideology, and what it means to be male and female. So tell us about the Tanner cross case in Virginia. ADF played a role in that give us a brief history of what happened in the current status of that if you want the great example showing the broader constitutional rights that teachers and school staff have outside the classroom so in Virginia for several months they've been contemplating policies that relate to gender identity. Specifically saying we want students to be referred to by their preferred pronoun that we want to ensure that student can play on sports teams consistent with the gender identity, meaning that a male implant female teens and other policies like that and so such a policy was being discussed in Loudoun County, Virginia at the school district there and Tanner crawl.

I teacher there in the school district. I think for about 15 years.

He decided in his capacity as a private citizen to go to one of the school board meetings were they were debating these policies and to express his own personal views not go to the school, but his own personal views about this until he spoke up at the meeting and shares those and next thing he knows he's called into the school office and spend it being punished because of his speech opposing these gender identity policies of his speech raising concerns about what this would mean and how it could infringe free speech and religious liberty, and so he found himself being punished as a result of his exercising his constitutional rights that were ADF. We stepped in and were representing him in a lawsuit challenging the school's policy. Thank you once teachers like Tanner step off campus for private citizens, and they have the same right to engage on the school board took to discuss these policies being debated by the school board the same right to do so is any other citizen. And so you're in the midst of that that process right now to the lawsuit. That's right in and we had a really great preliminary win so we filed what's called a request for a preliminary injunction, temporary injunction, basically saying while this court case goes on. Let Tanner have his job back.

I take them all for suspension and make sure that he's not facing ongoing punishment visited livelihood. This is his passion to teach kids and interact with them again.

This is the teacher that is a long history of serving students, working with students is very compassionate and caring towards them, but has concerns about some of the policies we had a great ruling from the court in favor of Tanner recognizing exactly what was been talking about that when Tanner showed up that meeting he was speaking out of the citizen on a matter of of importance to him to the board to the entire community and that teachers don't give up that right to speak out on these matters of public concern on these matters of public policy simply because they're employed by the school to the really great victory, reaffirming that long-standing principle that when you're off the clock. Teachers are private citizens that have the same right to engage in the political debate and dialogue as anyone else so there other educators that you representing and if so, tell us a little bit about those cases. Peter blaming the teacher also in Virginia that is based punishment because he declined to use a student Kirk pronoun and unfortunately he's not the only case we have another one of a college professor and southern Ohio. Dr. Nicholas Meriwether who are very similar circumstances is a philosophy professor and really like to engage with the student and had a student in class and he referred to the student by the students biologically accurate pronoun and I the student confronted Dr. Meriwether after class and how dare you, that's not my pronoun. You must refer to me as a opposite sexes is my preferred pronoun rather than what is accurate.

This elevated and and even the college went the forest. Dr. Meriwether even if he encountered the student outside of class in the community. Let's say the grocery store he would have to use the students preferred pronoun again. What were talking about is the government these colleges and schools. Being able to force a person to say something that violates their beliefs and that they don't believe is true to those are two of the cases that we've got going on right now on behalf of teachers of college professors that are being threatened with their livelihood. If they don't give into this gender ideology and affirm the students preferred pronouns and all these professors and father asking for it. Don't make us speak something we believe is inaccurate.

They're willing to find compromises. So for example they've offered to say about I just referred you by your first or last name and just avoid pronouns entirely.

That's not good enough and then the schools are telling these staff members. These teachers know you must use pronouns.

Your compromise is not sufficient and that just goes to show some of the harms of this gender identity ideology that was discussed in the beginning that it is being used to force people to speak things to say things that violate their deeply held religious belief and that should be something that all of us. The three the government should never have the power to do to force anyone to say something that they don't believe is true. Took a little bit about athletics what's happening with that. Are we making progress on that what you think the statuses of that argument yet. So our Connecticut case was actually recently dismissed because the two male athletes are no longer in school.

There, and so that the court would sing well.

Since there are no longer in school. There's really no risk if you're going to be forced to compete against male athletes that confirmed that because the policy is still in place. This is the policy that allowed it to happen in the first place battle or challenges posed by policy that Connecticut case is still ongoing but I think more optimistically is the number of state. In response to that Connecticut lawsuit that have passed legislation to protect women score for the start of last year with Idaho continued this year with now eight states passing legislation to protect fairness and a fair level playing field in women's sports. Most recently, Florida became the eighth state to do this and were now seeing more and more legislators take a strong interest in what can we do in our state to protect fairness women sports nothing that's been a great development in all of this is to see how I a powerful story like that out of Connecticut, a story of girls losing out on opportunities because of bad policies that allow males to compete at the Mills court served as a a motivation for these legislators to take up the cause to champion it and to get legislation passed to that that same story doesn't happen in their state gender identity ideology is reaching into housing as well.

Right.

I know there's an example of the college Ozarks that you all are dealing with the we we see how this could really reach to so many different areas. We talked a lot about sort of pronouns in speech and words and even sports. We forget this gender ideology even applies to dorm rooms so recently divided administration did a new rule from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and included in this is rules that would apply to religious schools and colleges goals that separate men and women when it comes to housing in dormitories. I got men's dorms may have women's dorm and they don't want biological males being able to stay in women's dormitories.

I don't think that asked for the women involved that nothing that's consistent with their religious beliefs about what it means to be male and female in God's role in creating that the two sexes and so College of the Ozarks find itself subject to this new rule. This new gender identity role from the Bible administration so alliance defending freedom is representing College of the Ozarks in a lawsuit challenging this thing.

You can't force us to violate our religious belief. You can't force us to do something that harms women that undermined the right to privacy, the right to safety and dignity when it comes to housing for this case is still very, very early in the process but just goes to show how this gender identity, ideology is seeping into so many ways, especially to religious schools and colleges while Matt Sharp where listeners go to follow the cases that we talked about today and to hear more about the good work that you all do over there at alliance defending freedom. Your listeners can visit our website.

It is a DF short-term alliance defending freedom ADF legal.org and there they can learn more about these cases and others that are going on as a relates to gender identity, religious freedom, life, marriage and family and parental right right, Matt Sharp, senior legal counsel with alliance defending freedom. Thank you so much for being with us today on family policy matters. You been listening to family policy matters. We hope you enjoyed the program and plenitude in again next week to listen to the show online insulin more about NC families work to inform, encourage and inspire families across from Carlotta website it NC family.award that's NC family.org. Thanks again for listening and may God bless you and your family