Professor Disciplined For Rejecting Preferred
Pronouns Wins Huge Settlement

"Perhaps the only disappointing aspect of this situation is that Dr. Meriwether had to use his faith as the premise for taking his stand. Ultimately, we should be pleased with the outcome and should be happy to take victories whenever and wherever we can win them. But in a sane society, one would only need to use reality and science as justification. In the meantime, we’ll have to wait for sanity to return." I agree with the above except I reject any notion of any required justification or explanation except simply "I do not (of did not) want to use any such pronouns." Hopefully someday the U.S. Supreme Court will issue a clear and concise decision that no one can be compelled to use any of these "preferred pronoun(s)" and that each individual's decision not to use any such pronoun(s) need not be explained, defended or justified based upon any religion, church, communion, denomination, sect, doctrine, dogma and/or theology; and therefore these rights of refusal, based upon the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, apply equally to everyone, including atheists and agnostics.

FTA - Meriwether refused, citing his Christian beliefs. I totally agree with #1. While I heartily applaud Dr. Meriwether for fighting back I believe it is perfectly appropriate, logical and sound minded to tell such people to "f"-off with this ridiculous notion that everyone is obligated to submit to their incoherent gender-supremacy. I know that gravity holds me to the surface of the earth. I don't need to be a Christian to believe this. I'd be considered a fool if I rejected the idea. I also would like to know what the school is going to tell the student body now that no one is legally bound to put up with this.

This could have been settled in court in a matter of seconds if the judge would have ordered the sissy-student to ''Drop your drawers.'' ''You're obviously a male, MISTER. Therefore, I find for Mr. Meriwether. Now, get out of my sight!''

For those who identify as something other than their biological gender, I suggest "it." It is neutral when it comes to gender. It is a perfect response to anybody who pitches a hissy fit to be identified as something it is not.

Kudos! To poster #3

#1 suggests: "...and therefore these rights of refusal, based upon the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, apply equally to everyone..." The Supreme Court is unlikely ever to make such a broad pronouncement because the First Amendment restricts only the power of GOVERNMENT to constrain speech, not the power of private persons or entities. The Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The amendment reads as if it should be applied only to explicit laws of Congress, but has been construed to extend to any acts of government, from the federal government to state and local governments. Because "state" universities (like Shawnee State University) are branches of the state government, the First Amendment prevents those universities from violating the amendment by constraining the speech of an individual. Thus, for example, a private college having no nexus with government and receiving no funding from government, would be beyond the reach of the First Amendment, as would a private employer who required employees to use "preferred pronouns" on penalty of formal disciplinary action. No one should expect from this ruling that they could go to work for a gay-owned private employer and that employer could not fire an employee for refusing to follow its requirements concerning use of "preferred pronouns," however obnoxious those requirements might be.

Punished for refusing to participate in the mass delusion of transgenderism. We should not be cruel to people who suffer from delusions, but it is also cruel to feed those delusion. If you got a Y, you're a guy. There are lots of delusions. Some folks paste feathers on their head, sit on a fence, and crow at the sunrise, but that does not make them a chicken. And a certain actress can cut her hair short, put on a man's suit, and talk in a deep husky voice on the Oscars stage, but that doesn't make her a man. She's just a woman with feathers pasted on her head.

I'll refer to you woke clowns with your pronouns as soon as you refer to ME as Adjectives of my choice...Handsome and Brilliant are the first two of thousands. If you get it wrong for my choice of the day, you won't get your pronouns. Happy Now?

Good for him!!...it proves that WE must fight the good fight of faith...justice...and the American way!!

Good for you, Prof. Meriwether. You know you are right when you can still sleep at night. I hope if I ever get pressed like you were, I can stand as you did--rock solid and refuse to help some poor student lie.

#6 what if an institution receives government funding and is monetarilly compelled to follow guidelines, directed or inferred, by those agencies allocating the funding? Government funding and the consequences of not following government rules and regulations is pervasive in our education system.