University course and anti-gay Facebook post.

[Halibut 12]

2 minutes ago, woodview said:

 

What other jobs would you bar him from, specifically? 

Teaching. Childcare.

[woodview 10]

Just now, Halibut said:

Teaching. Childcare.

Why not just send him to a re-education camp, to correct his opinions?

 

[JFKvsNixon 11]

3 minutes ago, woodview said:

What if your views become those that are deemed not acceptable for freely expressing?

There's no two ways about it, limiting peoples right of expression is wrong. Talking about 'consequences' is equally disturbing. do you actually believe in liberty at all???

What other jobs would you bar him from, specifically? Since a high proportion of the population is LGBT, maybe he shouldn't carry out any work where he comes into contact with the public?

At the risk of repeating myself, the person in question wasn't barred because he had his views, it was the act of expressing those views on social media that got him barred.

 

Lot's of professional bodies, employers and other organisations are very strict on what should be shared on social media and what shouldn't, when you are posting views that can be traced to you, and ultimately them. For me, the guidance is that I should not post anything that I would not say if I was interviewed on TV. I think that that is probably the best way to manage it going forward.

 

Does this mean that I feel that I am stopped from expressing any particular point of view privately? Of course not, I'd say things to friends that I'd never post under my own identity on social media. I just recognise the importance of having a professional public face and a private life.

[woodview 10]

7 minutes ago, JFKvsNixon said:

At the risk of repeating myself, the person in question wasn't barred because he had his views, it was the act of expressing those views on social media that got him barred.

 

Lot's of professional bodies, employers and other organisations are very strict on what should be shared on social media and what shouldn't, when you are posting views that can be traced to you, and ultimately them. For me, the guidance is that I should not post anything that I would not say if I was interviewed on TV. I think that that is probably the best way to manage it going forward.

 

Does this mean that I feel that I am stopped from expressing any particular point of view privately? Of course not, I'd say things to friends that I'd never post under my own identity on social media. I just recognise the importance of having a professional public face and a private life.

Well that's part way to the repression that some people want.

It depends what your job is and your public face is supposed to be. I don't want or expect you to say.

Social media is how lots of people communicate. So speaking about these unspeakable things is now confined to the hushed surroundings of a dark, quiet corner in the pub?

Not really a free and open and tolerant society is it?

[Mister M 1,624]

7 minutes ago, woodview said:

Well that's part way to the repression that some people want.

It depends what your job is and your public face is supposed to be. I don't want or expect you to say.

Social media is how lots of people communicate. So speaking about these unspeakable things is now confined to the hushed surroundings of a dark, quiet corner in the pub?

Not really a free and open and tolerant society is it?

It is, but if you're a social worker, first and foremost you're a professional. That professionalism doesn't finish at the end of a working day, and whilst in training, as this man was, it should've been self evident from his level 1 studies about care values and equality, what he posted was in direct contravention to these.

IIRC correctly many professional organisations, like those for medicine have strict guidelines regarding the behaviour of its members.

Edited March 15, 2019 by Mister M

[woodview 10]

3 minutes ago, Mister M said:

It is, but if you're a social worker, first and foremost you're a professional. That professionalism doesn't finish at the end of a working day, and whilst in training, as this man was, it should've been self evident from his level 1 studies about care values and equality, what he posted was in direct contravention to these.

IIRC correctly many professional organisations, like those for medicine have strict guidelines regarding the behaviour of its members.

Perhaps we should also prescribe what political beliefs people should be able to hold too, in these professions?

We wouldn't want labour party members being teachers, indoctrinating our kids would we? Where should it stop??

If you look back 50 years and look at the struggle people went through to speak up for gay rights, and pushed for freedom of expression of their views and their sexuality, that now is being tipped on its head, by people who should know better.

[tinfoilhat 11]

2 minutes ago, woodview said:

Perhaps we should also prescribe what political beliefs people should be able to hold too, in these professions?

We wouldn't want labour party members being teachers, indoctrinating our kids would we? Where should it stop??

If you look back 50 years and look at the struggle people went through to speak up for gay rights, and pushed for freedom of expression of their views and their sexuality, that now is being tipped on its head, by people who should know better.

Would you like an antisemitic teacher teaching your kids? Would you be happy if your kids were taught be a BNP member at, say, primary school? They've got them all day, every day.

[Mister M 1,624]

1 minute ago, woodview said:

Perhaps we should also prescribe what political beliefs people should be able to hold too, in these professions?

We wouldn't want labour party members being teachers, indoctrinating our kids would we? Where should it stop??

If you look back 50 years and look at the struggle people went through to speak up for gay rights, and pushed for freedom of expression of their views and their sexuality, that now is being tipped on its head, by people who should know better.

It's not about prescribing political beliefs, first and foremost it's about being professional. People in all sorts of professions have a range of  political views, but don't slart them all over social media.

And you can't equate the situation with this man and the struggle for gay rights. Well you could, but you'd be wrong.

[woodview 10]

Just now, Mister M said:

It's not about prescribing political beliefs, first and foremost it's about being professional. People in all sorts of professions have a range of  political views, but don't slart them all over social media.

And you can't equate the situation with this man and the struggle for gay rights. Well you could, but you'd be wrong.

I can equate peoples rights to freedom of expression very easily.

Many years ago, people wouldn't accept a gay doctor, or a gay teacher. Luckily, people have the right to express their sexuality more freely now. That freedom of expression should exist in all aspects, regardless of the particular belief being expressed. For me, that is sacrosanct.

 

[Mister M 1,624]

1 minute ago, woodview said:

I can equate peoples rights to freedom of expression very easily.

Many years ago, people wouldn't accept a gay doctor, or a gay teacher. Luckily, people have the right to express their sexuality more freely now. That freedom of expression should exist in all aspects, regardless of the particular belief being expressed. For me, that is sacrosanct.

 

Irrespective of the damage it may cause to a client, the standing and respect of the profession of social workers, and the lack of trust that may be engendered?

3 minutes ago, woodview said:

I can equate peoples rights to freedom of expression very easily.

Many years ago, people wouldn't accept a gay doctor, or a gay teacher. Luckily, people have the right to express their sexuality more freely now. That freedom of expression should exist in all aspects, regardless of the particular belief being expressed. For me, that is sacrosanct.

 

Can you not see the difference between perhaps a social worker occasionally taking the decision to come out to a client who is struggling with their sexuality (and perhaps that too is against BASW guidelines); and someone religious expressing prejudicial views about gay people to a client struggling with their sexuality?

[woodview 10]

8 minutes ago, Mister M said:

Irrespective of the damage it may cause to a client, the standing and respect of the profession of social workers, and the lack of trust that may be engendered?

Can you not see the difference between perhaps a social worker occasionally taking the decision to come out to a client who is struggling with their sexuality (and perhaps that too is against BASW guidelines); and someone religious expressing prejudicial views about gay people to a client struggling with their sexuality?

The religious person coming down on homosexuality to a  homosexual client is wrong, as it is contrary to the help he is supposed to be giving.

Is the client on the social workers Facebook group? I don't think so.

Yes, peoples views can be difficult for other people. But some things are more important than others. And freedom of expression is very high on the list. Much less so for some people, and actually the contrary in many cases.

At the moment, someone taking offence seems to trump everything else.

Plus, this feels like the tip of the iceberg. It really isn't just about a potential social worker. As has been said 'professionals' can't do that sort of thing. So, is expressing such views just limited to manual workers?

 

[ricgem2002 11]

do we know if he got another job ?