University course and anti-gay Facebook post.

[sutty27]

I would say that being "anti-gay marriage" is a political view, I am anti-gay marriage, but in no way am I religious.

 

I would be interesting to know the full story.

 

I would have thought that most people that are anti-gay marriage would be religious. I can't think of a reason to oppose it on any other grounds other than religion.

 

---------- Post added 29-02-2016 at 20:19 ----------

 

STUDENT KICKED OFF SHEFFIELD UNIVERSITY COURSE FOR ANTI GAY FACEBOOK POST

 

A Christian social work student has been expelled from his course after voicing anti-gay marriage opinions on Facebook.

 

Felix Ngole, 38, was a second-year masters student at Sheffield University when he shared a Facebook post saying "I stand with Kim Davis" - the American county clerk who was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples.

He also commented on the link quoting a bible verse from Leviticus calling homosexuality an "abomination" in September 2015.

 

Two months later he said he received an email from the university asking him to attend a meeting to discuss the posts and the father of four was then referred to a fitness to practise committee, which decided he should be ejected from the course.

 

A letter revealing the committee's decision later told him his actions had "transgressed boundaries which are not deemed appropriate for someone entering the social work profession" and ordered him to hand in his student card.

 

The committee said its decision was not based on his views but the act of publicly posting them "may have caused offence to some individuals".

 

Mr Ngole said: "My beliefs about marriage and sexual ethics reflect mainstream, biblical understanding, shared by millions around the world.

 

"Simply expressing that understanding, in a personal capacity, on my Facebook page, cannot be allowed to become a bar to serving and helping others in a professional capacity as a social worker.

 

Mr Ngole is appealing against the decision, but if it is not overturned it may prevent him from becoming a social worker.

 

He believes the decision is an effective "bar to office for Christians" and that he may suffered discrimination.

 

He said: "I wonder whether the university would have taken any action if a Muslim student who believes in Sharia law, with its teaching about women and homosexuality, had made moderate comments on his Facebook page. I don't think so."

 

Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, which is supporting Mr Ngole, said: "Sadly, this is yet another case of Christians being 'neutered' in the public arena, and of censorship of views."

 

Not sure why you think reading it again would change anything I said.

 

He supports someone of faith that refused to do something because it was against his religious beliefs, not the end of the world in my book.

[ECCOnoob]

Well the university and/or social services commission are not going by your book.

 

They have a code of conduct and a set of regulations. This person breached them.

 

IMO, best for them to get rid now rather than in 5 years time when his "opinions" and "views" might cause some real problems.

[sutty27]

Well the university and/or social services commission are not going by your book.

 

They have a code of conduct and a set of regulations. This person breached them.

 

Which one of their regulation did he breach and do you have a link please?

[Eater Sundae]

Surely what matters is whether or not he will provide suitable care and support to the people he works with, and whether that service will be affected by the person's sexuality.

 

I don't know what the answer is in this case. But if the University have been able to determine that he is unsuitable, maybe they should have given him the opportunity to be retrained, (although for all we know he may have been, but was not prepared to).

 

At the end of the day, it shouldn't matter what he believes. What matters is how he behaves.

[andyofborg]

What business is it of the company what they post on social media in the own time. ?

 

if you has a proper job then you would realise that your behavour outside of work might affect the reputation of your employer. in such a case is it very much their business what you post on social media.

[sutty27]

Surely what matters is whether or not he will provide suitable care and support to the people he works with, and whether that service will be affected by the person's sexuality.

 

I don't know what the answer is in this case. But if the University have been able to determine that he is unsuitable, maybe they should have given him the opportunity to be retrained, (although for all we know he may have been, but was not prepared to).

 

At the end of the day, it shouldn't matter what he believes. What matters is how he behaves.

 

Christians are usually very good at supporting people they believe to be sinners.

 

---------- Post added 29-02-2016 at 20:31 ----------

 

if you has a proper job then you would realise that your behavour outside of work might affect the reputation of your employer. in such a case is it very much their business what you post on social media.

 

But surely they wouldn't sack you for telling the world you are a Christian or a Muslim.

[JFKvsNixon]

Why would his views make him unfit to practice ?

 

Do his views make him incapable of fulfilling his duties in that job ?

 

Do his views make him incapable of doing the work required ?

 

Or is it yet another example of the cancer that is political correctness that is embedded in the public sector ?

 

I think we all know the answer.

 

It's not my opinion, it's the opinion of his professional body, who has a very clear code of conduct.

[andyofborg]

But surely they wouldn't sack you for telling the world you are a Christian or a Muslim.

 

no, but they possibly would and perhaps should do so for posting bits of leviticus.

 

someone who takes leviticus that seriously is pretty much guaranteed to be incapable of dealing with a vulnerable homosexual person in a way which could be considered supportive or even minimally helpful.

[JFKvsNixon]

He didn't make an homophobic comment, he quoted a passage from the bible.

If the authorities determine that it is an homophobic book I wouldn't have an issue with them banning it, if you testify in a court and you will be asked to swear an oaths on that very book, that to me implies that its content isn't homophobic.

 

Did you read the link I put up earlier for the British Association of Social Workers code of conduct relating to social media? If so do you think he may have broke it?

[sutty27]

It's not my opinion, it's the opinion of his professional body, who has a very clear code of conduct.

 

The Code of Ethics for Social Work

1 Challenging discrimination Social workers have a responsibility to challenge discrimination on the basis of characteristics such as ability, age, culture, gender or sex, marital status, socio-economic status, political opinions, skin colour, racial or other physical characteristics, sexual orientation or spiritual beliefs

 

Looks to me like they broke their own code of ethics by discriminating against him because of his spiritual beliefs.

 

---------- Post added 29-02-2016 at 20:49 ----------

 

Did you read the link I put up earlier for the British Association of Social Workers code of conduct relating to social media? If so do you think he may have broke it?

 

I would say no he didn't breach those rules, which one of the rules do you think he broke?

Edited February 29, 2016 by sutty27