The Virginia Supreme Court has reinstated a lawsuit filed by a teacher, Peter Vlaming, who was fired for refusing to use a student’s preferred pronouns due to his religious beliefs.
The court ruled that Vlaming’s free exercise rights were violated and that his lawsuit should proceed, emphasizing that the government cannot coerce citizens into expressing views that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs.
The ruling did not decide the case’s merits, but it acknowledged that Vlaming’s rights were infringed, allowing the lawsuit to be heard. (Trending: Ousted Democrat Who Filmed Explicit Tape Blames Homophobia)
Vlaming claimed that his refusal to use the student’s preferred pronouns was due to “sincerely held religious and philosophical” beliefs “that each person’s sex is biologically fixed and cannot be changed.”
Teacher Fired for Not Using Student’s Preferred Pronouns Wins Major Victory
In a gratifying win for religious freedom and free speech, the Virginia Supreme Court concluded Thursday that embattled Virginia high school teacher Peter Vlaming, who had been fired over his refusal to… pic.twitter.com/l2ql7WIIwb
— Citizen YC (@CitiznYC) December 16, 2023
West Point Schools Superintendent Laura Abel said. “Mr. Vlaming was recommended for termination due to his insubordination and repeated refusal to comply with directives made to him by multiple WPPS administrators.”
“That discrimination then leads to creating a hostile learning environment. And the student had expressed that,” she continued.
Adding, “The parent had expressed that. They felt disrespected.”
“The issue here is not whether the School Board’s policies forbidding discrimination and harassment of students applied (as the School Board asserts) or did not apply (as Vlaming asserts) to the compelled-speech situation alleged in the complaint,” ruled the judge.
“The issue is whether Vlaming’s sincerely held religious beliefs caused him to commit overt acts that ‘invariably posed some substantial threat to public safety, peace or order,’ and if so, whether the government’s compelling state interest in protecting the public from that threat, when examined under the rigors of strict scrutiny, could be satisfied by ‘less restrictive means,’” explained the ruling.
“When religious liberty merges with free-speech protections, as it does in this case, mere ‘objectionable’ and ‘hurtful’ religious speech or, as in this case, nonspeech, is not enough to meet this standard,” it conituned.
The judge wrote that Virginia’s constitution “seeks to protect diversity of thought, diversity of speech, diversity of religion, and diversity of opinion.”
Adding, “Absent a truly compelling reason for doing so, no government committed to these principles can lawfully coerce its citizens into pledging verbal allegiance to ideological views that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs.”
The ruling did not decide the merits of the case, only that Vlaming had “sufficiently alleged” that his free exercise rights were violated, requiring that his lawsuit be heard.
Vlaming was represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), who responded to the ruling in a statement on their website.
“Peter wasn’t fired for something he said; he was fired for something he couldn’t say. The Virginia Supreme Court rightly agreed that Peter’s case against the school board for violating his rights under the Virginia Constitution and state law should proceed,” wrote ADF Senior Counsel Chris Schandevel.
“As a teacher, Peter was passionate about the subject he taught, was well-liked by his students, and did his best to accommodate their needs and requests,” continued the attorney.
“But he couldn’t in good conscience speak messages that he doesn’t believe to be true, and no school board or government official can punish someone for that reason,” added Schandevel.
Most Popular:
Joe Biden Impeachment Formalized As Republicans Unite
Democrat Excludes White People From Holiday Party In Controversial Email
Kid Rock Rages Against ‘Woke’ Target
