Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

US teacher returns after anti-gay rant “did not violate code of conduct”

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. But if he has spewed his hateful bile at an interracial couple, or a mixed faith couple, he would have been canned. These people are no different from anti-semites and white supremacists, but the social environment in the US at the moment tells them that it is OK to denigrate GLBTQ people. And rulings like this simple re-inforce that belief.

    1. edwarddwoodjr 25 Aug 2011, 5:07pm

      I’m a US resident and couldn’t have said it better. GLBTQ people are fair game. And Florida… don’t get me started.

    2. Nawal Husnoo 25 Aug 2011, 5:11pm

      All in the name of “tolerance”, of course!

      [Gay Agenda, 2:5] (http://www.gayagendabook.com/gayagenda.html#2_5)

    3. The most disgusting thing about this story is he was having dinner while watching TV. Manners. Bon appetit. Have a pretzel.

  2. Keith Lynwood 25 Aug 2011, 12:34pm

    Are you surprised that the United States of Bigotry can see nothing wrong. Florida is Republican verging on the madness of the tea party.

    1. Exactly
      .
      Nothing new there then!!!

    2. Keith, you’re right. United States of Bigotry is an accurate description of this nation, especially in the southern states.

  3. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 12:53pm

    Someone filled with so much hate is not appropiate to be a teacher. Teachers are their to educate not influence with bad thoughts of themselves and others.

    They should be setting a example and think it is dangerous and damaging to allow his brand of ignorance, anyway in a place reaching youngsters.

    Typical though that he was cleared. Had this been about racism I doubt the outcome would have been quite so straight forward.

  4. Looks like there may be a bit more to this story:

    The Only Story About Mr. Buell’s Anti-Gay Teachings Just Disappeared From The Web.

    http://www.queerty.com/the-only-story-about-mr-buells-anti-gay-teachings-just-disappeared-from-the-web-20110824/

    1. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 1:12pm

      Very disturbing! Can’t believe that they actually would encourage teachers like this even though they must be aware of his blatant homophobia.

      Shameful.

    2. thanks for the link Dana…very informative. The man is a hate monger….

    3. Thanks Dana.. hopefully other students will come forward with similar accounts of anti-gay rants in the classroom..

  5. He isn’t fit to be a teacher. I pity any children in his classes. What damage has he already done?

  6. think it should be said as many people have been making the same mistake, the guy was not suspended but rather moved onto an admin role without contact with children, completely different from suspension, not entirely important but best to put it out there

  7. He’s a Christian; what can you expect? He can’t even follow his own babble. Love the kids he then happily condemns to a cesspool?

  8. From what I know of the first amendment of the American Constitution, freedom of speech is guaranteed, even hate speech, provided it doesn’t incite violence. As Voltaire once said, “I do not agree with what you say but I support your right to say it.”

    Valksy, I doubt if anyone would be canned. They might be chastised for saying hateful things, but wouldn’t face prosecution unless it resulted in violence.

    We too can say hateful things about homophobes with impunity, but I don’t think we should be prosecuted for having thoughts of a certain kind or uttering them. I draw the line at incitement to commit violence though that sometimes can arise as a result of this kind of speech. There is a limit in everything. I don’t like it one bit, but I wouldn’t support banning hate speech for the most part.

    1. Jock S. Trap 25 Aug 2011, 2:48pm

      But is it appropiate to teach children that negative damaging attitude?

      Yes, I can see it is ‘his right’ but what about the right of Children, esp confused ones, who need support not condemnation from such an early age which we already know results in the innocent taking their own lifes? Or is it a right to damage children while vunerable and impressionable?

      When it comes to children they are there to guide not discriminate whilst they have to teach Freedoms that also have to teach Respect for themselves and on another.

      There has to be a fine line between Freedom of Speech and knowing you have responsibility with Children, not to harm.

      Insulting Adults is one thing but insulting children is another and I defy any parent who would allow it to their own child.

      Freedom of Speech is for all but children need to understand what is being said, why it’s being said and most of all the consequences.

      If you are a teacher, you have responsibilty to your student in or out of school.

    2. Nawal Husnoo 25 Aug 2011, 5:15pm

      No, tolerance does not include putting up with intolerance. [Gay Agenda, 2:5] (http://www.gayagendabook.com/gayagenda.html#2_5)

      Women don’t have to put up with sexist remarks to be seen as tolerant – sexist remarks are punished by harrasment laws.

      Black people don’t have to put up with racist comments to be tolerant – racism is punished by law.

      When this intolerance is taught to children, this is nothing less than evil. Why should gay children be taught that they make him puke?

      1. @Nawal – exactly!

    3. edwarddwoodjr 25 Aug 2011, 5:31pm

      Well you may wish to read up on the First Amendment and subsequent laws throughout the nation. Have you ever uttered the word “bomb” in an airport?

      Section C has some good info: http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/freedom1.html#C

      Of course that’s just the tip of the iceberg. As usual, the variances across the states and among the cases that arise are vast. The first commenter here (Valksy) made the perfect point above.

      And then the bottom line is–should a teacher be allowed to do this sort of thing while in the employ of a public institution? Even a private institution? Or when minors are involved/exposed?

      I imagine your place of employment has rules and regulations. The First Amendment does not supersede these. These are agreed upon as a condition of employment; which is perfectly legal. My employer has a strict anti-discrimination policy which includes LGBT people. It’s very clear that I would face discipline or termination if violated. Should a school have anything less?

  9. Jock, of course not, but this didn’t happen in a class room. Even if it violateds the code of ethics as a teacher, what he says on Facebook is his business even if we strongly disagree with what he said or the people he reached. I have a problem when a person of authority such as a teacher would even invite any of his pupils to engage with him on Facebook, assuming that ever happened, even if such an exchange were about something as benign as homework. Where are the parents I wonder?

    1. Have you read Dana’s link above, Robert?

      1. edwarddwoodjr 25 Aug 2011, 5:34pm

        Exactly. There is an established pattern here.

        1. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 8:41am

          Indeed. Robert I encourage you to read Dana’s link, then maybe you’ll see where I’m coming from. This idiot isn’t just doing it on Facebook but it seems in the classroom too.

    2. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 8:39am

      Robert

      Do children not do Facebook? Do they only have to be to ‘engage’ with him to see his page? No

      Being a teacher means you have a code of ethics and thats whether inside or outside the classroom. It’s doesn’t mean people are not entitled to their opinion but it does mean that you have a duty to make sure your students are not ‘engaged’ with it.

      It’s one thing to be like that in private but not in a public arena/area where you know that chance of students seeing is high.

      Homophobia is not healthy and a teacher has no right to preach such hatred.

      Advice – if you don’t want the responsibility, don’t be a teacher. Otherwise treat people esp children with respect.

  10. Mr Buell may well have shot himself in the foot with his F/B rant.He may have the ‘protection’ of this particular school,but what will happen should he have to/choose to leave this establishment?! I don’t know the age-group of his students,but maybe he should present his views in person to an assembly of age-appropriate students so they can have the oportunity to debate his views in an open,sensible manner.Who knows,it may just have a positive outcome.Just a thought.

  11. Miguel Sanchez 25 Aug 2011, 5:22pm

    I hope the School Board gets wind of this because he is in violation of the seperation of church and state. He should be forced to remove those religious symbols. Better yet, he should be fired for breaking the law.

  12. Jonpool, no I didn’t but have just read it. Since this teacher has introduced his personal beliefs in the classroom of what I assume is a state school, then yes, he should be sacked. That said, he is still entitled to his views and to utter them but not to school children. It’s not his job to do so nor is it his business. I stand corrected.

    1. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 8:42am

      Ok wrote the encouragement to read before I saw this message.

  13. His views are despicable, but he has a Constitutional right to free speech and free expression. Curb his free speech and yours will be next. Now if there’s any evidence his bigotry has infected his teaching, that’s professional misconduct and can be nailed accordingly. So far there’s no evidence that he’s taught homophobic material in the classroom. His Facebook page is his own.

    1. According to the article Teachers have a responsibility to stick to the code even in their private lives – and so they bloody well should!

      How you think any gay students of his would feel seeing him spouting bitter vitriolic bollocks like that?

      1. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 8:44am

        Exactly Staircase.

        Teachers are supposed to abide by a code of ethics inside AND outside the classroom.

        Some people clearly think children don’t do Facebook, guess what they do and finding teachers is a skill they seem to know, as many teacher know and suspect.

  14. Art Pearson 25 Aug 2011, 7:41pm

    We still have a long way to go to protect our youngsters from this type of virulent homophobia and must continue to be ever vigilant.

    1. Agreed, bless ya

    2. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 8:46am

      We do, your so right and it’s these bigotted type of people that make event like Pride ever more important and necessary.

  15. This is just more of same BS that gay people in the US go through every day. It’s just fine to pick on us, but if he had said this about any other group he would have gotten canned.

    You are right, Valksy, since the rise of the fundies, GLBT people in the US are fair game. People are saying hateful things that until a year or so ago would have been heard only by creeps like Westboro Baptist.

    The whole thing is just disgusting.

  16. Oh Who Cares 25 Aug 2011, 8:32pm

    Florida is homophobic? What a shock. The same homophobes used to burn the black community. Now they vomit when they see gay marriage. I reckon the teacher might wear this outfit on his day off.

    http://www.unskkkk.com/

    1. You have a jaundiced view. Many people abhor racism yet also rightly abhor immorality, one aspect of immorality is perceived by many as homosexuality. The decline in morals is responsible for death and disease which kills even innocent babies.

      1. Another Hannah 25 Aug 2011, 9:40pm

        Thick Keith, very thick. Complete rubbish. Hows the money lender/bank manager Keith? How many adulterers have you condoned Keith? Vile liar, cheat, and immoral hypoctrite. Judge not ye lest ye be judged.

        1. I have condemned fornicators many times on this site. Who have I judged? I have condemned homosexuality which the bible says is bad. Futhermore the bible commands us to hate what is bad (Psalm 97:10) Do you condemn racism. If so, by your standards you are judging others!

          1. What on earth makes you think that condemning people is NOT judging them?

            You really are a twat…
            narrow-minded, self-absorbed, God hating twat!

          2. ps the Bible says lots of things are FAR worse than two men having sex yet I don’t hear you bleating on about them – why is that?

            Loads more written in Leviticus about shellfish, mixed fibre clothes and stopping disabled people coming up to receive sacramant or going near the altar….

            None of which any sane person would bleat on about – yet they occupy more inches in the Bible than the bit about gay men – so why is it you keep going on about that the whole time?

            Why is it you’re completely obsessed with gay sex?

            If you’re as straight as you like to pretend you are then you really wouldn’t have any reason to keep going on about it….unless there’s something there that you’re trying to suppress in yourself perhaps?…..

          3. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 8:52am

            PinkNews

            I can’t take this no more. You keep allowing this hateful figure without protecting your loyal readers. It’s sh!t that you continuously allow this person to hijack with his hatred. It shows you have little respect for LGBTQI community and your readers here. Why so we need it?

            Does anyone know of another Gay news site that while doesn’t damage Freedom of Speech does respect and actually want loyal LGBTQI readers?

          4. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 8:53am


            and isn’t afraid to step in when we get hatred, discriminating bigots…?

      2. Oh Who Cares 26 Aug 2011, 12:34am

        Replying to you would be like replying to someone who doesn’t have a brain, which I am doing. You brainless cretin. Christ would be ashamed that you use his name.

  17. made him “almost” throw up ehhhh? too bad he didn’t experience the full effect…
    the thought of having that kind of that kind of power over someone(bigot) is rather intriguing;-)

  18. Let the headteacher (Pam Chateauneuf) know what you think by emailing her Chateauneufp@lake.k12.fl.us.

  19. *He added: “I’ve had kids that I’ve known that have been homosexuals.They know that I don’t hate them. I love them.”

    Mr Buell had also written: “If they want to call it a union, go ahead. But don’t insult a man and woman’s marriage by throwing it in the same cesspool as same-sex whatever! God will not be mocked. When did this sin become acceptable???”*

    er…when we decided that it was no longer acceptable to discriminate against other people because of the way GOD MADE THEM!

    PS – which is it? ‘I love those gay kids’ or ‘they are a cesspit’…….?

    I can’t wait for him to be found with his trousers around his ankles! This is going to be worth the wait!

    1. How about don’t insult marriage by meeting people on Craigslist for sex?

      1. I pressed add comment a little prematurely there.

        I meant to add these hetrosexual bigots who are so concerned about the sanctity of marriage don’t seem to any spend time on campaigning against adultery and divorce.

        1. Staircase2 29 Aug 2011, 4:23am

          Agreed – which is equally weighted in Leviticus.
          Its called ‘hypocrisy’ and ‘vested interest’ ie theyve lost the battle on adultery and divorce but the battle is still ongoing about homosexuality – and theyre still (ridiculously) trying to win it….

          they wont – simply because their reasoning is fundamentally flawed and theyre so out of touch they cant see the wood for the trees…

  20. The school children and faculty and the aclu and human rights lgbt had better monitor this usa teacher, because they have already been noted for a hater and racist, if any children mistreated and frowned upon by this person, they had better be fired and the aclu had better sue the school for already knowing this person was a high risk with racism and bigotry, and they better tell this person the childfren will tell,

  21. Dr Robin Guthrie 26 Aug 2011, 9:49am

    Seems that this bigots ideas run deeper than just his private comments on Facebook.

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/education/os-jerry-buell-facebook-rally-20110825,0,307026.story

  22. @Staircase2
    “What on earth makes you think that condemning people is NOT judging them?
    You really are a twat…
    narrow-minded, self-absorbed, God hating twat!”

    As I have said I have not condemned any individual, I have condemned behaviour. Your inability to retort without abuse exposes you as an ill bred ignoramus. One of many on here.
    Furthermore by your own standards, if you condemn racism then you are judging others, making YOURSELF a judege and therefore a hypocrite!

    1. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 10:20am

      If you can only view all people by sex then that is your problem, your sickness but I don’t see why we should all suffer because you can’t get your head out of the sewer.

      Your homophobia and bigotry is documented no just FVCK OFF< PERV.
      -

      1. Ignore him, Jock. He needs help.

        1. Jock S. Trap 26 Aug 2011, 2:52pm

          Your right, sorry Iris, peeps. Not sure if I’m more annoyed with ‘The Perv’ or with PinkNews for failing to act.

          But you are right.

      2. He is an ex-gay. See the comments at the end of the “Bisexuality” thread.

        also, check out this site for info on ex-gay therapy:

        http://www.exgaywatch.com/wp/

    2. Dr Robin Guthrie 26 Aug 2011, 11:18am

      What does the Domestos Avatar represent?

      As if we can’t join the dots!

      1. Probably what he uses to punish himself after all the hours spent on a gay site. Or maybe it’s his drink of choice? It would explain a lot.

      2. Staircase2 29 Aug 2011, 4:32am

        @ Dr Robin – that he’s toxic if you swallow what he says….

    3. Staircase2 29 Aug 2011, 4:30am

      Nope – not at all – the difference between me condemning racism and you condemning homosexuality is simple:
      racism is about oppressing people – homosexuality is about who we choose to have consensual love & sex with – the two things aren’t the same at all….

      One is about negative behaviour towards other people and the other is about consensual behaviour between people.

      You’re clearly an idiot.

      The only ‘ignoramus’ here is you – ignorant because not only is your narrow minded negativity all about oppressing people but you don’t even know what the fvck you’re talking about as witnessed by your complete lack of any accurate information about HIV/AIDS for example.

      You’re a pompous arse who believes that you can use the name of God to somehow sanction your repressive and dictatorial bollocks: you can’t…

      1. Now you are changing your position from one that says not to judge people (“What on earth makes you think that condemning people is NOT judging them?”) to one that says it is ok to judge them on account of wrongdoing. Therefore, not only are you contardicting yourself, you are also imposing your values on others. Some persons may think that racism is acceptable and believe in the inherent superiority of certain races whilst they may hold that homosexuality is disgusting. many BNP members fir this description. On which reliable moral authority are you basing your judgements in order to say YOU are right and THEY are wrong

  23. I regret this teacher did not use more moderate language to express his beliefs but neither did I feel he was being vitriolic or hateful.

    He expressed an honest opinion based on his Christian beliefs.

    Practically everyone in these forums expresses an opinion and therefore makes judgements.

    Who is to say which judgements are right and what opinions should be expressed?

    Unless this guy has broken the law such as by inciting hatred, he should be reinstated.

    1. And if he’d said that interracial marriage made him want to vomit?

      1. point taken Iris: as you know, mine is an inter-racial marriage. While I would naturally disagree with folk who don’t think this is right, I wouldn’t oppose their right to express their views.

        What is disturbing about this guy is the way he makes his points which imho appear to be in an “unchristian” way. I am also mindful of (what I think is) your position: why does he not express the same “righteous indignation” against heterosexual divorcee and unmarried couples who cohabit? He may well believe that sex between couples of the same sex is contrary to God’s law but he should recognise that usually they, like the divorcee / unmarried hetero-couple, see what they do as perfectly ok.

      2. ps the reason why I changed my opinion concerning his attitude is because of something that was pointed out in a related thread and besides I am of the view that while we shouldn’t be afraid to speak the truth as we see it, we should do with grace. After all, Jesus was descibed as being “full of grace and truth”.

        1. Thanks for the reply, JohnB. Stating one’s opinion is one thing but, just like you, what disturbed me about this is that the man indulged in unnecessarily hateful speech. I would feel very uneasy with such a person’s neutrality in class as it seemed he was unable to control his feelings or express them in an acceptable way.

          I’m sorry to have used the race example, but I hoped it would make you catch your breath as it does me, my partner being of a different race. I used it to show that such a teacher might possibly harbour unpleasant attitudes towards children of such marriages and that that might make many parents and children very uneasy.

          He’s entitled to his view but with such strong ideas then he needs to show he can remain neutral in class and treat all children without prejudice. Reading about his alleged other comments, I’m not convinced that’s the case.

          1. Iris: I think I understand your concerns. What worries me is that he could use his position as a teacher to undermine / crush vulnerable young people and it appears there is evidence he did just that. Having said this, that could be said of any teacher putting forward an idea in a way that would put down anyone who are not in a position to challenge the authority figure.

            I have seen this happening when one’s religious beliefs are ridiculed. But then I am not sure if it is ever possible to be entirely neutral. In my experience, those that appear to come close to doing this often have relativist views and that is not a neutral position.

            I think what we should be wanting are teachers who respect the different beliefs of their students, encourage critical thinking and thorough examination of the evidence, while maintaining their own strong beliefs.

          2. Iris: it occurs to me you are a teacher. I can imagine you are a good one!? While I teach, I gave up school teaching some time ago (young and enthusiastic I was then, I was frustrated I could not realise my ideals). But I love teaching (even more) and still aspire to be an excellent teacher, realising its importance. Things I see as being important (not an exhaustive list) are:

            1. respect for students.

            2. knowledge of subject.

            3. knowledge of students.

            4. desire to find truth.

            5. prepared to explore all angles.

            6. able to enthuse students.

          3. Absolutely, JohnB. A teacher should respect ALL their students. One’s own religion/race/sexuality shoudn’t come into it. The aim is to help the children grow into confident, educated adults who are able to make informed choices not to try to mould them into the same shape as oneself.

            There is no place for the alleged language of this teacher in school. And, yes, I’d say the same if he ranted about Christians/Muslims/Jews etc etc. He seemed to be out of control and VERY unprofessional.

          4. And your list is spot on. :)

  24. douglas in canada 29 Aug 2011, 5:46pm

    There is another troubling aspect to this when Buell says:

    “But don’t insult a man and woman’s marriage by throwing it in the same cesspool as same-sex whatever! God will not be mocked.”

    The implication is that marriage came from god, or that in the US, it’s the property of the church. Well, kids, it ain’t.

    It is a legal contract and although the church can do all the blessing that it wants, it’s not a marriage until they sign the appropriate state-required legal documents.

    If they would just read their outdated fairytale book, they will read that Adam and Eve were created and had kids, but were never married. Oops… I guess god forgot about that one…. [Silly superstitious crap]

    1. douglas in canada 29 Aug 2011, 5:48pm

      I personally am tired of christians claiming morals and ethics and marriage and all the rest as their own, as if no one else could ever think of it or attain it. In that, they are arrogant fools, and their insistence on such lies is one of the things that truly makes them idiots in my eyes.

      1. You have a right to your Christianophobic views. How long have you been a Christianophobe. Are you inciting religious hatred?

        1. douglas in canada 29 Aug 2011, 9:08pm

          Sorry, keith, that you are unable to read. Please take a course. It will be helpful.

          I said i was tired of christians claiming things….. AS IF NO ONE ELSE could ever think or do these things. If they said they were simply sharing morals and ethics that the rest of humankind also holds to be worthy, I wouldn’t have a problem.

          It is their arrogance that I’m tired of, which is what I said. And it is your ignorance that many people on this site are tired of.

    2. True enough, Douglas…

      In Catholic churches, for example, the newlyweds are conducted to a table and chair, visible to all, where they finalize their marriage by signing a secular legal contract.

      Then the organ strikes up the Wedding March… and everyone throws confetti, an old Italian custom.

      1. douglas in canada 29 Aug 2011, 9:13pm

        Jonpol,
        Where I grew up, “the signing” was very clearly not part of the religious ceremony – it was not even allowed to take place in the church sanctuary, for fear of defiling the sacredness of the space. The documents were signed in an adjacent room.

        People forget their history way too fast, and assume that it’s always been done this way, or that “the way *I* remember it must be the right way.”

        But, fortunately, positive changes are happening. Marriage is once again being recognized as a legal contract governed by state or provincial law, not by church doctrine. Thanks to all those who make these positive changes happen!!

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all