Enoch Burke turns up to school again despite sacking - read OP before posting

Look Enoch Burke doesn't even think its about transgender. He has actually never formally argued that at any point. All Enoch wants the school to do as he says. Remember the school had a transgender person before and Enoch didn't have any issue. So he obviously doesn't have issues with transgender people per say.

If Burke really believed the transgender rubbish he comes out with he would have gone about via the appropriate legal avenues available to him. He would not be in jail and has been pointed out numerous times would have been far more successful in his case even if he would probably be unsuccessful in the end.

This case is all about Enoch Burke and his families attitude that the law doesn't apply to them and they do what they want. They are well spoken thugs. "Transgenderism" is just a trendy word to attach their wagon to. Another day/year it would have been something else as can be seen with the actions of his siblings.

Remember there have been a few occasions that the court may have even ruled in this favour had he just recognised the law of the land. They are just "Freemen of the land" types in different clothing. (Check out the megathread on the legal forum)

If Burke had genuinely had a problem with how he should address a transgender student, and he had gone to the Principal and calmly explained why he had a problem he might have made a useful contribution to the whole pronoun argument, and who should be responsible for remembering or even knowing who to address as what.

If the school had responded to his reasoned point of view by saying 'if you don't agree with us you are fired' he would have had a pretty solid case for unfair dismissal, which might well have made a substantial difference to the wider situation.

He did not do this though, he made a hysterical fuss and a holy show of himself which inevitably resulted in his suspension. Even then he could have gone to the Principal and apologised for verbally attacking her and disturbing the school peace and a mass, and argued his case. But he didn't, he continued to act like a petulant spoiled child until the country's legal system said he was out of order. They also said the argument was, at this stage, nothing to do with his religious rights or beliefs.

Even the Westboro Baptist Church said that he had done it all wrong and they did not support his argument.

We have been saying all this since the start of the thread and yet there are still people who would rather jump to uninformed conclusions than do the simplest bit of research. Kind of suggests a closed mind, don't you think?

And some people are severely under-educated to not understand the straightforward case.

I see it as the school providing him with legal notice that should he step inside the school grounds, as he has done regularly in defiance of court orders, he can be arrested, charged, prosecuted and presented with a judgement of behaving in a way different to the limitations placed on the high court over his declining to confirm that he will obey its orders. The same would apply to anyone like-minded to him. The family believe that he has been wronged by 17 judges, 14 high court and 3 appeal court.

Given his train of thought, it might incentivize him to trespass on school grounds on the basis of "I was merely doing what God/the bible instructed", like a red rag to a bull. Then again, it might have the desired effect the school wants of deterring him from entering the school grounds again after he is yet again released from prison.

Quite clear to anyone who read the link in my post.

How much has this family cost the state/taxpayer through their idiocy?

Try making, rather than asking people to call you Hotblack Desiato instead of John though, I think that was the point being made.

This is nub of the entire Burke argument ( notwithstanding their foolish behaviour and Enoch's contempt).

Was his principal correct (legally) to state that all staff refer to the student by their preferred pronouns, in line with the student's beliefs. This conflicts with Burke's beliefs. Who's beliefs come out on top, legally?

Realistically, most rational ppl would default to the students beliefs. But it would seem, in this instance, that the religious fervour clouds rational behaviour.

I know this is not the focus of the thread - and to iterate not the reason Enoch finds himself in the position he does/and mod warnings issued to that effect - but I would have loved to have seen that work through the school appeal system and to achieve some form of ruling, essentially to put it to bed one way or the other.or indeed open a huge can of worms.

If there’s a legal right to express yourself as female when born male, which there is, then I imagine use of pronouns would come under some form of school charter such as “respect for the individual” etc- so an investigation on anyone not using preferred pronouns would likely be instigated under the heading of a breach of school charter or similar, with a known sanction sliding scale at the disposal of the school investigating body .

Just a thought - and lord knows, there was likely the possibility of high court and beyond through appeals processes had he gone this route- it would have made for a fascinating legal case, a downright headache for the school but in the meantime, all Enoch had to do was keep his cool and carry on teaching- something he apparently finds very difficult to do.

It would have been interesting in fairness. Where in the Bible does it say one cannot identify as they so choose? And then which version of the bible is right? Also, we've made up a lot of nonsense and made cannon out of it. Confession was made up for example.

Straying outside the bounds of this debate about Enoch, the transgender pupil and the school, I would not be surprised at all if that was an actuality for an abused child to suffer.

Back to the debate, this isn't all about Enoch, after all, despite his insistence that is what the row is all about. He has suffered no loss of rights whatsoever, including his religious faith belief.

That's the best you can come up with? ffs what a load of rubbish

A clearer definition of the difference between the religious tenet mindset of [in this case] Enoch and that of a person who has a basic idea of what amounts to respect for another person and follows that understanding could not have be made. Thank you.

You really are opening the proverbial can of worms.

No disrespect intended.

That's a very controversial topic and you might be better researching the matter and making your own mind up.