Toledo Free Press Article Gets University Employee Fired
By Warner Todd Huston Posted in Liberals — Comments (11) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Toledo Free Press Article Gets University Employee Fired
-By Warner Todd Huston
We are certainly used to seeing the MSM causing trouble for conservatives and this one is no different at least on that level. But the interesting thing here is that the trouble a social conservative discovered was as a result of what she wrote in the MSM as opposed to what was written about her by the MSM. It seems that the opinion editorial written by Crystal Dixon for the Toledo Free Press got her fired by the University of Toledo because... well, you know how universities are all about free expression and speech, right? Unfortunately for Dixon, though, hers wasn't the proper, politically correct sort of speech that is officially approved of by the thugs at the University of Toledo.
You see, Crystal Dixon made the mistake of believing that this whole silly idea of "freedom of religion" also applied to our institutions of higher learning. She foolishly asserted in her Toledo Free Press op ed that as far as her religious beliefs are concerned, homosexuality is a choice made by the individual instead of some genetic predisposition, that someone chooses to engage in homosexual activities instead of assuming that being gay is forced upon one by "nature."
Of course, Dixon based her entire op ed on her Christian religious beliefs. It was no hate filled rant and was quite civil, even tempered, and to the point. But the gay mafia inside the University of Toledo must be awfully powerful. Or, at the very least, fear of them was enough to stifle -- no, execute -- Mrs. Dixon over what the president of UoT must imagine is her wretched religious extremism.
President Dr. Lloyd Jacobs dashed off a letter summarily firing Mrs. Dixon from her $134,383 a year job as associate vice president for employee resources.
A letter to Ms. Dixon informing her of her termination, stated "The public position you have taken in the Toledo Free Press is in direct contradiction to university policies and procedures as well as the core values of the strategic plan which is mission critical."
It went on to say her position calls into question her ability to continue in her role as an administrator in charge of personnel actions and decisions and that "the result is a loss of confidence in you as an administrator."
Don't you DARE have any religious beliefs in an American university. Well... unless it is the church of Satan, or Islam, global warming, anti-Jewish or feminism you want to belong to. Those are perfectly fine religious opinions in the halls of our fetid universities it should be noted.
So, what sort of evil, no good, rotten thing did Mrs. Dixon say in her op ed for the Free Press? I mean, it HAD to be the most scurrilous thing on record, right?
She began with this:
I respectfully submit a different perspective for Miller and Toledo Free Press readers to consider.
SHOCKING! Wanting to be respectful of her opponents and to add to the debate? Say it ain't so! She is off to a bad start with this. We all know that no university wants any different perspectives, don't we? As soon as she finished her first words she should have known her job was lost.
First, human beings, regardless of their choices in life, are of ultimate value to God and should be viewed the same by others. At the same time, one's personal choices lead to outcomes either positive or negative.
OUTRAGE! Speaking of God dooms this woman to the educational purgatory reserved for conservatives and other nefarious inhuman cretins as far as the denizens of our universities are concerned.
I won't replay her entire op ed here, but it's filled with some great stuff. But I do have to reiterate one of her themes before I close this article of mine.
As a Black woman who happens to be an alumnus of the University of Toledo's Graduate School, an employee and business owner, I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are "civil rights victims." Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman.
You know, I have often wondered why the civil rights establishment has allowed homosexual extremists to co-opt the mantle of civil rights for their own twisted agenda? Dixon is exactly right. I can no more "decide" not to be white as she can "decide" not to be black. And, if people are to attack Mrs. Dixon because of the color of her skin, this is something so inherently wrong as to be axiomatic that a civil right would be violated by oppression based on that reality. But, it is possible to decide not to be gay. It is something eminently under the control of the individual to change. It is a behavior, not an unalterable fact.
But, all that aside, if Mrs. Dixon's religious beliefs dictate that homosexuality is a choice, then how is it the right of the university to fire her over that belief? Has it affected her job in the past? I don't see how it could have. After all, she has risen through the ranks of the university to a rather high position. If no one noticed her religious beliefs had affected her job by now, then it is safe to say that she was not acting in a discriminatory manner in the execution of her duties.
I hope Mrs. Dixon sues the University of Toledo and Dr. Lloyd Jacobs into oblivion. If you'd like to send this so-called educator a little note, try this email address: UTPresident@utoledo.edu. Or give him a call and set up a nice lunch with him at: (419) 530-2211. Then there is the ever popular yet slightly technologically backwards fax number: (419) 530-4984. I think the good doc would love to respectfully hear another perspective from all of us. He looks like just the sort of fella that enjoys a good chat, doesn't he?
(Photo credits, the Toledo Free Press for Mrs. Dixon and the University of Toledo for the prez)
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!
Several areas I would think open to a lawsuit
1) The biggest elephant which stands here would be the phrase "arbritrary and capricious". To fire an adminstrator over a op-ed written as a private citizen should require a written policy and some kind of due process examination as to whether this policy has been violated.
A summary firing letter of this sort that side-steps due process in the absence of a clear and present danger resulting from her continuing employment raises a red flag. Normally in these kinds of situations, the employee is placed on suspension or paid leave pending a duly constituted hearing process. To fire her under such circumstance is highly irregular and almost unhear of in all the cases I've read about. Even accused child molestors are almost always placed initially on leave pending an administrative hearing process, and certainly the magnitude of her possible offense doesn't come close to criminal behavior.
This chain of events also opens up the question of possible animus on the part of the college administrator(s) and possible civil action as well.
I'm not a lawyer, but I certainly see many elements in the story here that make this far from an open-and-shut case. And note that I haven't even touched upon any 1st Amendment religious freedom or free speech issue.
2) We also see a curious collision between identity group politics, in which we have a black fired for offending some elements of the gay rights coalition. It will be interesting to see whether racial discrimination accusations are raised, or whether she is viewed as outside the tent. It will also be interesting to see whether a civil rights investigation is opened.
but your comment on a "new pulpit for her views" is a curious statement.
Maybe I missed it, but her "pulpit" appears to have been the Toledo Free Press, not some university outlet. I read the article, but didn't see any suggestion to denying rights to homosexuals because of their lifestyle. I recommend the last paragraph in the article which points out that the discrepancies in health benefits were being addressed to make them more equitable, and that action is presented favorably.
As far as continuing to worship Baal, I'm not sure what the point is. I am not aware of any legal prohibition in the United States on Baal-worship, or even university prohibitions on Baal-worship. Except for the small problems of temple prostitution (both hetero and homo) and the occasional human sacrifice. Some of us might object. But, hey, since Baalites, like the University elite, don't like Christians, maybe they can get the University of Toledo to sponsor them. After all, what is an occasional human sacrifice when you get to destroy the cult of Yahweh, with its infernal insistence on the dignity of humanity and the importance of morality?
I find it curious that a job with a state college or university makes First Amendment rights null and void, whether you are talking about freedom of speech or freedom of religion. I am well aware that universities are become bastions of group-think, but I didn't realize outright suspension of the Constitution was allowed. But maybe I'm missing something. I'm looking forward to reading the "Achance" link so I can learn something.
Strike a blow for freedom and sue. Sue for big money. Make a huge stink.
but the gist of it is that speech in a public employee's official capacity is not individual speech protected by the 1st Am., but rather is the government's speech as the employee is an agent of the government and is not so protected. I was known for writing a letter to the editor from time to time even when I was an appointee, but I was always careful to put in a disclaimer that the opinion was my own and did not reflect the policy or opinion of my employer. That covers you and makes it individual, protected speech.
I'd have to know a lot more facts here to draw any firm conclusion however. Clearly, if she said this in her capacity as an officer of the university and it violated University policy, that is grounds for discipline, though perhaps not for dismissal. My thought here is that if she sticks to it, she gets a nice paid vacation out of this. The President satisfies his perceived constituency by dramatically firing her, she grieves or sues, and an arbitrator or judge puts her back to work with backpay and at most a slap on the wrist.
I've dealt with a few of these in my former life where somebody made some public statement and a governor or commissioner went off on them publicly and did a dramatic firing on TV or some such. You just let it simmer and settle down a bit and either settle the grievance and put them back to work or if the politics won't let you do that, you let it go on to arbitration or court where you say you put up the good fight for your principals and lose the case elegantly. Same result, but only some advocate and the trier of fact get blamed, not the officeholder. It's a dirty business.
In Vino Veritas
No way to know that from the article, from what I can tell. This sounds like a standard hysterical over-reaction from a skittish university official.
Which is to say - and moving from the comment to the main post - not like some sort of organized conspiracy of homosexuals. Speaking as a site moderator, I tend to look with jaundiced eyes on blog entries that suggest that sort of thing; so let's all be a little more careful about stuff like this in the future, 'kay?
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
If I'm reading her opinion piece correctly, she is calling for less rights for gays and lesbians - "there are consequences for denying God's divine order." Not to mention the whole "taking umbrage" with the audacity of gays and lesbians to demand "civil rights" protection. Because Mrs. Dixon should be the arbiter of who is entitled to civil rights, and the use of that term.
She also has a difficult grasp of reality if she thinks that thousands of gays and lesbians "convert" back to heterosexuality on a daily basis, or that sexuality is something that is subject to change on the basis of a really good argument. I doubt that Mrs. Dixon thinks of herself as just a really good heart-to-heart away from a same sex relationship.
All of that said, I still think that firing was rash and probably not warranted. I bet that there are plenty of people at the University of Toledo with other goofy ideas, and I bet some of those people voice those ideas. Short of advocating immediate violence, it's all part of the marketplace of ideas, and firing over that seems wrong.
As for suing for "big money," wouldn't that have an effect on taxpayer money? I wonder how you'd feel about footing the bill for a big judgment. How about reinstatement, a modest judgment and some training for those involved instead?
Well generally speaking I see nothing at all wrong with giving employers total discretion over hiring/firing decisions.
This is perhaps muddied up by the fact that it's a taxpayer funded university. As such it might be argued that the University must remain neutral as to religious views and therefore not base hiring/firing decisions on the religious beliefs of its (prospective) employees nor take a position as to the validity of any religious beliefs.
But if this were a private university or a private business, who they retain - any why - should be completely up to them.
What is the ACLU's position on this firing?
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
I am sure there will be NOTHING but silence from the great protectors of our rights.
----------
Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!
Probably, but it might be fun to see them drawn into this.
...a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right...
---Thomas Paine---
Actually, the ACLU is historically against silencing unpopular speech. Whether this is any legal basis to challenge the firing is another thing.
I agree that we fire people far too often for controversial statements. With few exceptions, more speech is more valuable than less speech.
But, this firing isn't that surprising under the current environment. Imagine the uproar if a school administrator argued against civil rights for non-Christians. I mean, you can wake up in the morning and decide to be Christian, and the Bible is pretty clear about what's going to happen if one continues to worship Baal.
At the end of the day, I think Achance has discussed the First Amendment rights of state college or university employees, and this seems to fall within that, so Mrs. Dixon will have to find a new pulpit for her views.