Wow, he’s got quite the public potty mouth! Nevertheless, I tend toward being a free speech absolutist, with the idea that one’s words, if vile, ignorant, self-serving, hate-filled, etc serve as their own indictment of who one is. This largely translates into the old adage of “sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me;” the chant of a child of yesteryear that contained lots of wisdom. Speech cannot break bones, but it can and even should, have consequences. In Trevor Anderson’s case, he is clearly unable to control his emotions and cannot bear any disagreement without reacting profanely and hatefully, but should he have been fired from his position as a teacher? To me the answer is a reluctant “Yes,” primarily for two reasons. First, his words were uttered knowingly and willingly in the public realm, hence no expectation of privacy (Can you walk around your house naked? Sure! Can you walk around Walmart naked? Probably not). Second, in his rage he admitted he was acting unethically and perhaps illegally in what he taught the middle-school students, according to his own words.

Our aforementioned neighbor in Alabama made a number of truly racist statements, including “back then n..g..rs knew their place” and “when the n..g..rs got uppity we chased them out of town.” Certainly in his day, when the cultural powers favored his version of hate and and bigotry, he was easily offended and outraged when non-compliant black people were involved. And certainly he felt justified in chasing “uppity n..g...er” out of their homes; our French teacher feels his brand of hate and intolerance is equally justified.

We are currently going through a seismic cultural shift that may prove to be fatal to basic civil liberties and rights. Being easily “offended” has become a virtue, almost an expectation, and not a sign of immaturity, ignorance,intolerance, and weakness that it is. Nevertheless, we are, in our cowardice, ceding power to the same weak, ignorant, and selfish people, and justifying our gutlessness with mindless slogans, such as “Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity.”

One of the first liberties lost as a society slips away into tyranny is the freedom of expression. In our rapidly evolving globalist and post-democracy world it is understood that speech must be contained and controlled in order to enhance and concentrate the power of the select...the elite among us. They fully understand that a compliant government and media, the organs best suited to instill fear in those with contrary ideas, is a very efficient means to achieve their goal. Likewise, an excellent strategy of controlling thought and expression is to use the false premise of “making people feel comfortable and welcome.” This is much like imposing strict limits on basic liberties under the pretense of public health, as we have seen so blatantly and cynically in recent times. After all, what kind of meany is against making people feel comfortable, and who could possibly be against “public health,” the coercive and corrosive argument goes.

The problem with our poor French teacher, Mr. Trevor Anderson, is that while his message is one the prevailing cultural powers were happy to hear, he expressed it without nuance and consideration of the traditional local culture, which still holds some sway, diminishing as it may be.

In a truly liberal, tolerant, and enlightened society, ideas and speech are allowed to succeed or fail on their own, with the assumption that people who disagree are welcome to tune out or make counter-arguments. This is in direct contrast to government decreed acceptable- or prohibited- speech. Sadly, once again the trajectory is away from liberalism, tolerance, and enlightenment, and returning to the darkness that has so often cycled throughout human history: there is certainly a place for ideas and words, but only those approved and allowed by those in charge; be very careful if you want to say something in opposition.

In fact, if you want to succeed in a noxious and intolerant culture, you better be able to repeat by rote the prevailing slogans and mantras, or act accordingly. Depending on the time in history: Jim Crow, anything involving the word n..g..er (or in the lingo of our French teacher, “jigaboo”); Italy and Germany in the 1930s, viva il Duce and Seig Heil; the French Revolution, sitting front and center and cheering during public decapitations; and “the Jews killed Jesus” during (too) much of the Christian era.

Traditionally, the louder one screams, the shouting down of others, and hair-trigger outrage suggests the screamer, the shouter, and the easily outraged have little confidence in what they are trying to espouse. Reason, civility, and listening to the thoughts of others was a mark of respect, compassion, and civility. But, declared just this week, we have learned from NPR that “...Civility Is Used As A Cudgel Against People Of Color,” and “Civility is a weapon wielded by the powerful.” The irony, of course, is that those who claim this are saying that “people of color” cannot act civilly, nor appreciate when they are treated in such a way. The alternative is very worrisome for all.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/middle-school-teacher-fired-anti-christian-rant-abortion-clinic-f-ing-idiots