University course and anti-gay Facebook post.

[Cyclone 10]

On 15/03/2019 at 15:52, woodview said:

He's against gay marriage. He is fully entitled to express that view with fear of 'consequences' .

I disagree with his view. But I disagree and fear the views of people who want to silence voices they don't like. That has never, ever ended well.

No he isn't.  There are and should be consequences to expressing those views.  For example, he might lose all his friends (more likely he won't, but he might).  He might be barred from his local gay bar.  He might be kicked off his university course which requires people not to harbour deep and harmful prejudices.

On 15/03/2019 at 16:56, 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.

You're trying very hard to trivialise the feelings he did express and draw equivalence with other feelings which aren't related to the career he was training for...

[Cyclone 10]

On 15/03/2019 at 18:14, woodview said:

I get what you said.

My point is the erosion of freedom of expression as a whole, not just this guy.

You yourself have qualified that, by stating 'professionals' shouldn't state such things on social media. That is stopping expression of  a huge chunk of society on one of it's main communication platforms.

And you're trying to claim that you lose the ability to speak freely because you don't feel like you can say something on bookface.

It's not true of course, self censoring on a particular platform to maintain a public image is not the loss of free speech.

On 15/03/2019 at 19:49, Mister M said:

I do wonder whether after viewing the initial post on social media, his course tutors and senior management at the University would've had a series of discussions with Mr Ngole, at which they would've re assessed his suitability to be a social worker. He may have expressed other views which were a cause for concern.

He was interviewed by the board responsible for maintaining ethical standards (Halibut posted the correct name for them some time back).

[MAC33 10]

I can see a time in the very near future if this nonsense / censorship is allowed to continue - that if you are a student and you question the Man Made Climate Change narrative on social media that Universities will have the 'right' to throw you off the course if they determine it conflicts with your current studies and future employment.

 

Orwell 1984 

[Annie Bynnol 612]

Are you using the name of "Orwell" now or do you think that your experience, knowledge and writing skills are in any way comparable to that of Orwell?

 

I wonder how Orwell would have reacted to the use of Conspiracy Theory  to counter Reason?

Edited March 18, 2019 by Annie Bynnol

[MAC33 10]

Dismissing the obvious as a conspiracy theory is a cop out for discussion.

 

Last resort perhaps when you don't have a leg to stand on in this thread?

 

Derogatory term designed to mock the messenger.

[Annie Bynnol 612]

2 hours ago, MAC33 said:

Dismissing the obvious as a conspiracy theory is a cop out for discussion.

 

Last resort perhaps when you don't have a leg to stand on in this thread?

 

Derogatory term designed to mock the messenger.

This discussion is about "University course and anti-gay Facebook post."

You introduced a favourite conspiracy theory of yours into this discussion in the form of "anti-vax" which has absolutely nothing to do with freedoms, morals, beliefs or ethics which rightly dominate this thread.

That is the only contribution I have made to this thread and so I am at a loss to what you mean by "obvious" or what leg I am supposed to be standing on. 

[MAC33 10]

Richard Palmer

hold on minute.
What have his private views got to do with his professional judgement?
The problem here is summed up in the last paragraph:

"But this is the glaring problem with AOP. It actively encourages social workers to challenge and attempt to change the beliefs and behaviours of those they encounter who do not adhere to the current moral orthodoxy. So, if a social worker’s own beliefs do not adhere to that orthodoxy, then he or she is in trouble. In turning attitudes and beliefs into a concern of social work, social workers themselves become more than social workers; they become missio…See more

Like · Reply · Mark as spam · 1h

 

Paul Duffin

Reminded me of Alf Garnett and his black social worker.

Like · Reply · Mark as spam · 6h

 

Richard Lea

A social worker does not necessarily expect to agree with the lifestyle of their clients or approve of everything they say or believe, and social work trainers do not expect their trainees to do so. From my experience in the profession many Christians make excellent SWs (believing as they do that we are all sinners) and are perfectly capable of working with their clients collaboratively and non-judgementally whatever their views on personal morality. What happened to this chap is not about maintaining professional standards, it's about curtailing freedom of expression. Another part of the mass project currently under way to try and impose enlightenment on the benighted masses. Ironic really.

 

 

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/03/20/social-work-no-place-for-christians/

Edited March 20, 2019 by MAC33

[alchresearch 215]

Christian wins appeal after being thrown off social work course

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/03/christian-wins-appeal-after-being-thrown-off-social-work-course

[Nightbird 0]

On ‎18‎/‎03‎/‎2019 at 07:28, Cyclone said:

No he isn't.  There are and should be consequences to expressing those views.  For example, he might lose all his friends (more likely he won't, but he might).  He might be barred from his local gay bar.  He might be kicked off his university course which requires people not to harbour deep and harmful prejudices.

You're trying very hard to trivialise the feelings he did express and draw equivalence with other feelings which aren't related to the career he was training for...

The government should step in and force neutrality in Universities.

[Cyclone 10]

What does neutrality mean?

[Halibut 12]

1 hour ago, Nightbird said:

The government should step in and force neutrality in Universities.

I suspect you mean tell Universities what they can and can't teach - it's a signature of fascist states.

[Nightbird 0]

6 minutes ago, Halibut said:

I suspect you mean tell Universities what they can and can't teach - it's a signature of fascist states.

Even as you were typing that out you must have known that isn't what I meant at all. How does neutrality mean "tell Universities what they can and can't teach"? I think you're just a troll.

 

Universities seem to be overrun with the far, far left at the moment, shutting down any one that doesn't subscribe to hivemind. Within the bounds of reason, all points of view should be aired in universities.

Edited July 3, 2019 by Nightbird