First Amendment: University officer fired for criticizing homosexual politics files lawsuit
71 Comments Published by clay December 2nd, 2008 in U.S. Politics.University OfficerA university administrator fired from the University of Toledo for her published remarks criticizing homosexuality and expressing her Christian views has filed a lawsuit against the school. The suit alleges the violations of her constitutional rights to free speech and equal protection of the law. Do you think her 1st and 14th amendment rights were violated? Why or why not? What is the 1st Amendment? What is the 14th Amendment?
Yes her first amendment was violated, not saying i agree with her but it was. Then on the other hand i was reading on another website that when she was hired with the university she signed an oath that said she had to follow different rules than the professors and it took away her freedom of speech about certain things.
No her 14th amendment was not violated. she wasn’t fired because she was black. she was fired because she was hired to protect the rights of the students on campus and then she turned around and wrote hateful things about the gay community in a newspaper. I don’t know why she even pulled the race card because we all have civil rights no matter what or skin color. She is just a closed minded person that will only see the world through the bible, and wont take others peoples rights in to consideration.
p.s. being gay is not a choice.
I believe that her 1st amendment was not violated.
She has the right to say what she believes. I think the trouble comes when she starts to criticize a group of people and I think thats when the University decided to fire her. She has the right to say anything she believes. Its a totally different thing though when she starts to say rude things.
I think her 14th amendment was not violated. Again, its the same problem. She was fired for being offensive. I dont know what being black has anything to do with this and I really dont know why she brought it up. PLus, she didnt get fired for “being a Christian”. She was fired for saying mean things. Being a Christian has nothing to do with it. If she was part of another religion, she would say the same. “Fired for being a satanist” or “fired for being muslim” “fired for being hindu”.
I do feel that her first amendment right might have been violated but I don’t think she should have done the things that she had did. She shouldn’t be talking so badly of homosexuals and gays but I know she takes her religion seriously but some things are better left unsaid. I know that the bible talks about being against gays and that homosexuality is an abomination but to go out and publish those things she said was going a bit far. She should be considerate of other peoples feelings. Gays get discriminated a lot in this society and they have to be putting up with it. They get picked on so much from other people because of what their sexual orientation is and because of what people’s religion and beliefs are so sure I understand that but she should just chill. I don’t believe she was being discriminated against for her color though. She is just getting a bit out of hand about everything. I don’t feel they were doing all of that because of her skin color. She is just looking for a way now to get them in trouble and to get them on her side. I think she is trying to twist the story in a way that they will take her side and believe her so that her lawsuit can go through. She should tell the truth and how things really happened because she could get screwed over in the future by her own crap. I don’t know about this whole thing, but I guess her first amendment right was violated but I don’t think her 14th was but that does not mean that I am taking her side on this because I am not. She just needs to chill and not take everything so seriously and keep her comments to herself.
Her being fired for what she stands for is violatiing her right to the 1st ammendment.
Hello! That was one the reasons why we left England, so we could have the right to choose our own religion, and the freedom of speech. Even though I do not agree with with her views, her right was violated.
She wasn’t fired because she was black or Christian, she was fired because she broke her promise as a university administrator. She was there to protect the right of students. Even though she did get fired for writing something about how its wrong to be gay, was her right as an american citizen.
I believe that Crystal Dixon did have her right to the 1st amendment violated. However, part of it is the schools fault, because before things are published, they usually go through an editor who reviews them. If her views did not “accord with the values of the University of Toledo”, why did they print them? I don’t agree with her beliefs, but at the same time shes entitled to think and believe whatever she wants to. And at the same time, she could have been a little nicer to homosexual people. She says that gay people “wreak havoc in their psychological and physical lives” and that there “are consequences for our choices.” I’m sure gay people haven’t done anything to her, and if she thinks that they’re destroying their lives with their choices, then thats their problem, not hers. I thought the bible taught people to love their neighbors, not bash them.
Her right to the 14th amendment, however, was not violated. Her skin color never really came into play here, and i think she just twisted the story around to victimize herself. She was fired because she was a university administrator, someone the students are supposed to be able to feel comfortable with, and she very openly and maybe even a little harshly expressed her dislike of gay people, and i’m sure that there are a few attending that university. This could make the gay students feel like a target, and the relationship between her and those students is no longer something anyone can work with.
Hmmmm…. seems tricky since she was a public employee at a public Ohio State University. So, violate her 1st amendment? No way! 1st Amendment protects your right to say whatever whacked out thing you want to say, it however does not protect you from facing the consequences of what you said. 14th Amendment, nope, not that one either since she wasn’t fired for being of a certain race, she was fired for comments that her employee disagreed with.
Now, should she been fired for what she wrote? Probably not and will most likely win a large financial settlement.
Read her original statement here http://www.toledofreepress.com/2008/04/18/gay-rights-and-wrongs-another-perspective/
Yes, I think that the 1st Amendment was violated. Just because she was speaking up for what she believed in does not mean that she should have been fired. She had an opinion and she voiced it. Even though people might have gotten angry with that, she has a right to free speech and she used it. Nobdy should be punished for saying what they believe. She also “did not identify herself as a university employee” which means that she was just expressing her opinion as a citizen of the United States, not as a University of Toledo representative. If she had said that all of the university agrees with her and homosexuals were not allowed to go on the campus anymore because they are terrible people, then yes, I would think that she would be fired.
I do not think that the 14th Amendment was violated. Her being fired had nothing whatsoever to do with her skin color. Yes, she wrote that she was a black woman, but there was nothing in the article stating, or even hinting, that she was fired because of her race. I don’t even think that was right of her to bring that up.
I also do not believe that she was fired because she was a Christian. She was fired because “radical homosexuals have an inordinate amount of influence over the University President. He openly brags about being friendly to ‘lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning individuals.” Its not that difficult to figure out, the President does not want any of his friends [if you want to call them that] to be insulted, he probably was not thinking about her religion.
If you want to get all technical i guess this lady’s right t freedom of speech or press was violated. For me, it could go either way. This is just one of those cases that the person who has the better lawyer is going to win. It is very easy to have strong arguments on both sides of this topic. On one end you have a lady who was innocently expressing not only her views, but her christian views. On the other end we have a person who is trying to prevent discrimination against gays, bis, and transexuals. I mean what side would you be on? Either way you would have a very good argument aka case. I do not think that lady deserves any money or something special, she should just get her job back. Although she makes herself sound all innocent because she is just a christian black girl, I don’t buy that whole story. She should not make it a big story by saying her rights were violated. Like I said, at most, she should just get her job back and the school should get a warning. Wether people like it or not, everyone discriminates. So agree to disagree and move on.
The first Amendment is basically stating the freedom of speech, freedom of press, free exercise of religion, and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. So was Crystal Dixon’s 1 Amendment violated, yes because of the fact she was being denied the right to free exercise of religion and freedom of speech. She was terminated because of the she was talking about homosexuality in regards to her religion. I don’t think it was right that she got fired for the remarks that she made because she was just stating her opinion as an American citizen, not as a “university employee” because she didn’t identify herself as one. Therefore she shouldn’t have been fired for her remarks to homosexuality.
I really dont think her 14th Amendment right was violated at all. She wasn fired because of the color of her skin, she was fired because of the content that “came out of her mouth”. I think she just wanted to add that to the law suite to give more way to her case. To try to turn it to make it seem as thought she was being totally dicriminated. All with her race and her religion; she wanted to gain pitty that all it was.
Crystal Dixon was fired not because of her skin color, religion or cause she wasn’t a member of the president of the universities family, it was because she made some opinions public. But what i don’t understand is why she was completely terminated? Why wasn’t she just suspended and given warning or something? It wasn’t like she was say a gays must die or that she thought they shouldn’t be allowed to attend school or that they should be thrown in jail for what they’re doing is a crime;NO. She oh so nicely said the view of her religion on the matter of gays. Yes it is true that she said, “that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are ‘civil rights victims.’.” But she also said,”God “loves the sinner but hates the sin” and that Jesus is “radically transforming the lives of both straight and gay folks and bringing them into a life of wholeness,” and this show that she is not tying to say they will go to hell, but that they are still loved no matter the life style they so choose. Dixon gave reenforcement of good intension in her press release.
The first amendment is probably the most famous, or recognized, of all amendments. It gives the three basic liberties of a citizen of the United States: the freedom to choose the religion we want to belong to, the freedom to speak or voice out all of our opinions, and the freedom to assemble and petition. I think that out of all of these freedoms Crystal Dixon’s freedom to choose her religion and her freedom to voice out her opinions were both violated. She was fired from her job as a university administrator because she voiced out her opinion, based on her Christian values, about homosexuals.
I do not believe however that her fourteenth amendment was violated. The fourteenth amendment states that every citizen of the United States must be treated equal and that there shall be no discrimination based on the color or gender of the citizen. I do not believe that any of her fourteenth amendment rights were violated. She was not fired because of her color or her gender, but rather because of her remarks against homosexuals.
I think that the amendment one she didn’t violate. Sometimes people especially teachers have to be careful on what their opinion is especiall in religion. This lady has her own belief and that is respectable but she had to be more careful on how she directed it because like she has her christian beliefs other people have their own religion beliefs. This amendment is to respect the religion and i do think this lady was respecting the religion in general but she was focusing more on her and that makes sense.
Amendment 14 was also not violated. This amendment is for all citizens to be treated equally and she was. It didn’t seem that she got fired because of any racial reason but because of comments that she did. She did unnecessary comments about homosexuality and this is something you just don’t do because if gives them a right to fire her.
Yes her 1st amendment was violated. She does have the right to say anything she wants as long as it does not advocate “law less action”. She was not trying to start a jihad on homosexuality was she? No she was not she was just expressing her opinion based on what her religion says. I agree that if she was smart she would have just kept this to herself because she brought this whole mess upon herself but it is her exercising freedom of speech so i guess its okay in some way for her to say what she believes in.
And no her 14th amendment was not violated becasue she was not fired off of her ethnicity but rather from these remarks she was saying.
Hmm well maybe she was fired becasue she was expressing religion during school hours?? Idk but i do know that that is not allowed to happen except when school hours are over so maybe she was fired for this reason?? Maybe this could be the university’s defence?
PSH! Well freaking of course this article is going to sound like it violated her first amendment. Do you see where your source is coming from?! DO YOU?!
CATHOLICnewsagency.com
To be honest, I don’t really think either of her rights were violated entirely. Our system of government was made so that both sides of the case can be fought fairly and after doing some of my own research, (because I didn’t really care for the stance of article that was posted) I found this:
http://www.toledofreepress.com/2008/12/05/crystal-dixon-sues-ut-for-rights-violations/
and then I read through some of the posts and found that Daly posted something as well and I skimmed it but realized I didn’t understand it because it was a response to something I hadn’t read yet at which point I went and found the original post to which the Dixon woman’s comments were:
http://www.toledofreepress.com/2008/04/04/gay-rights-and-wrongs/
And I decided that I liked his article in compareison to Crystal Dixon’s because instead of simply name dropping several organizations and quoting the Bible, Michael Miller gave more substantial examples to prove his case.
So I skimmed both and I think they’re both entitled to have their opinions. A part of me thinks that the university over-reacted by firing her but I suppose its understandable. Although, sure, you may be able to say whatever the hell you want because you’re in America, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re going to get away with saying whatever the hell you want.
I mean, come on now, she’s supposed to be a teacher. She has an obligation to her students to help mold their ways of thinking. And I would have to think that as a mind-molder, she would be more… y’know, considerate? Accepting? Responsible. At least, that’s how I think teachers should be.
I don’t understand why she’s suing for the 14th at all.
It just… doesn’t… make sense…
EH! Goodnight.
so i think her first amendment was totally violated. It’s not like she punched homosexuals or religious people in the face or anything. she just wrote a paper. She wrote her opinion. nobody was forced to read it. Some jobs do require a level of, i guess the word is, respect. But the paper was written in anonymously. If nobody knew it was her, why fire her? She wrote her thoughts and nobody would ever know it was her
But her pulling the 14th amendment card is just a lame argument. No, she wasn’t fired for being Christian. She was fired for voicing her opinion.
So Crystal Dixon, you should just sue for the violation of the first amendment, not the 14th.
I think that Dixon’s 1st Amendment was violated. She got fired for expressing her point of views. That is against the law. She expressed her opinions to the public and she got in trouble. The reason that we have the 1st amendment is so that we could say whatever we think. Freedom of expression is one the things that this country is best known for.As for the 14th amendment, I don’t think that was violated. She was not fired because of her race or her sex, she was fired because she spoke up and said some things that offended some people.
I believe the first amendment was violated. Freedom of speech means you are free to say or comment everything you have in your mind whether it’s good or bad. That’s what is great about America, freedom of speech, of whatever religion you want to be. Her right has definitely been violated.
For the 14th amendment, like everyone else, it was not violated. She was fired because of what she had said or commented. It was not because of she being a black women.
Is it right for firing someone who express views??? Well Ms.Dixon 1st amendment was violated but she was fire for expressing her view but i learned in my govt class that only the “wealth and the privilege” are allow to use that amendment properly. What she did could be seen as disturbing the peace??? But she should of been able to express her opinion freely.
I dont think her 14th amendment was violated, because isn’t the 14th amendment suppose to deal with discrimination of race??? well I dont she got fired based on her race. so yea….
Note to Clay: Mr.HEDMAN says that for the Summumâs question that your just show off your vocabulary.
The first Amendment was most definitely violated. She has the right to say whatever she wants. What is true though, is that there are consequences for everything. She went about it the wrong way.
What was not violated was the 14th Amenment. She got fired for what she said, not because of her race, color, background, etc.
After reading this article I believe that her 1st and 14th Amendment were not violated against her at all.
The first Amendment is basically all about freedom. Freedom of religion, exercise of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of press. Mrs. Dixon publicly gave her opinions and beliefs on homosexuality. The first Amendment gave her the right to publicly say what she wanted to say but it does not protect her from the consequences that may follow it. In Mrs. Dixons case her consequence was termination from her job. Which is understandable because she was working in a public institute which is not allowed to discriminate against any person. And by being an employee she should have known better then to write that article that the whole school would be able to read.
I also believe that defiantly her 14th Amendment was not violated. No where in the article did it state she got fired because she was black. That was not the case at all. She was terminated because she wrote an article about her opinions on homosexuality which she should have never done. She crossed the line in working for public education and now has to pay the price.
I do not think the 14th amendment was violated however i do think that Mrs. Dixion could have went about her expression a different way. If she would have responded Differently i do not think that she would have been fired. I think that the main reason that she was fired is because when you work for a public place you have to make sure that you keep your opinion mutual. You don’t go into a place full of diverse people and make it known that you do not like homosexual people.
Mrs. Dixion should have been fired for her actions. I think that she was at fault because she was too opinionated with the way she came across he feeling towards homosexuals. As far as the amendments i do not think that the 14th amendment was violated. It wasn’t directed only towards her. She was at fault and deserved he penalty.
After reading the article, I don’t think Ms. Dixon’s first amendment is not violated. The first amendment is the freedom of speech, religion, press, and petition. But it never really states the consequences. We are free to say whatever we want, but there isn’t a law or amendment that protects us from what we say. Even though we can say whatever we want, but it doesn’t mean there is no consequences. I don’t think Ms. Dixon expressed her opinions on homosexuality, and got fired has anything to do with the first amendment.
Her fourteenth amendment is also not violated. She got fired because of the consequences of what she said, not because she is black or Christian.
I also believe that the 1st amendment was violated because its not against the law to stand up for what you believe in. Dixon just spoke out on behalf of her religious believes which I recall is an opinion and a person has the right to say what he/she feels like which explains in the 1st amendment, freedom of speech and religion. Now I know where this has it’s twists and turns because that is known as discriminating but still having to say an opinion is not against the law. Which comes to my next point , just because she said a debatable remark doesn’t mean she should be fired for that. I mean come on what is she going do to turn down students that are gay? Even though she has different opinions on homosexuals she still knows that in life there are rules that have to be followed and I’m pretty sure she would not risk that for her job.
I DEFINITELY do not believe that the 14th amendment was violated. Being fired because she was black? I’m pretty sure they just threw that in their just to make the case look even more critical than it already is.
Alright so after reading this article and carefully reading the constitution, I have come to the conclusion that neither right was violated. Sure she had a right to speak how she wanted to, and she did. The 1st amendment says that a person can say what they want and no one can stop them. However, the 1st amendment says nothing about a person not being able to face consequences afterwards for their action. She said what she wanted to say, and that is her own opinion. She could not be silenced, but she could still face other peoples opinions on her actions. In addition to all this, never was it said that she was fired due to race, so the 14th amendment has not legs to stand on in this scenario.
Crystal Dixon was just standing up for what she believed in and stating her opinion, and that does not violate the first amendment. The 1st amendment clearly says that we have the right and the freedom to say whatever we want to say. I do admit that her choice of words were a bit harsh, but none the less, we still have the right to say what’s on our mind. So, no her 1st amendment was not violated.
I do not think that her 14th amendment was violated either. She was fired because of her actions. She had a poor choice of words, said what she thought very bluntly, and published it for all to see. This had nothing to do with her skin color or her religion. Any other person with a different religion or different skin color may have been fired for doing the exact same thing.
I do not think the 1st or 14th amendment was violated
I was like the 13th blog poster.
What happened to my post.
I think that Crystal Dixon’s 1st amendment rights were not violated, because the whole basis of the 1st amendment is the protection of the free speech of citizans of the United States, but those rights were not violated, because she was able to say what she wanted she wanted to say, without any censorship of any kind. The whole basis of her lawsuit is frivolous because the basis of her lawsuit is that her 1st and 14th amendment rights were violated when in reality, her lawsuit should have been about her abrupt and unecessary termination. But what was the worst thing about her was that she was the associate vice president of human resources at the University of Toledo, she was in charge of handleing grievences of workers and she also has the responsibility of hiring new people. But one of the things that makes no sense is the fact that she claims that her right of due process was violated, which makes no sense. Because the idea of due process was not violated by the University, let alone the government, because none of her rights were infringed upon, and the rules of firing personnel were not violated. And as for her case of her violation of the 14th amendment, that is a ridiculous claim because she just wanted to waste the court’s time and taxpayer’s money, because nothing was violated, she’s making it up because she’s bitter about being fired, so she thinks that making up false claims, and wasting time and money is going to get her job back, when in reality she is just bitter.
In my opinion Crystal Dixon first amendment rights were not violated! The first amendment is about freedom of speech and as we can see she wrote and spoke her opinion and how she felt. Dixon stated in the article “there are consequences for our choices” So therefore she knows that everything you do or say there is some sort of consequence for it rather it be good or bad. So she said what she wanted to say and now she’s paying the price. Also if she’s working in education and she prints an article like this where the school can read it she should of already known that she would be fired! It should of came as no surprise! And it has nothing to do with her Christian view, I’m sure she wasn’t the only one who felt like she does in her same field but they aren’t posting it, because they know better.
I feel the same for the fourteenth amendment that was not violated either! No wear in the article it said she was fired for being black or anything racial she was the only one referring to herself as a black women no one else.
First amendment is basically allowing people to have freedom of speech and religion. The fourteenth amendent is intended to secure the rights of former slaves. And with myself still knowing both, I still think she should’ve gotten fired. I personally don’t think any African American even has the right to speak harsh about any sex. With all the crap the African American had to go through to become free and equal, how would they even have the right to be against another kind that is trying to be free and equal? Doesn’t make sense now does it? Anyway, although she did not violate any of the rules, she still in my opinion should’ve been fired. If I was her manager, I would not want anyone working for me that puts out a extreme diverse opinion out in the public. I think she would have kept it to herself. But then again, that is a personal opinion.
Since Crystal Dixon was fired for basically saying what she thought and how she felt, she shouldn’t have had such bad consequences as she did because of her freedom of speech. Although in the article it said “Attorneys who filed the suit charged that the administrator was fired “for being a Christian.” So the charges show she was charged because she was Christian so i kinda do thing her 1st amend. was violated because according to them she didnt have much freedom of religion. But i kinda have a feeling they are holding that against her because its really about the homosexual remarks she had stated, but since she had an agreement with the university the rules were violated and she ended up getting charged and fired. I also don’t think her 14th amend. wasn’t violated because her being African American has nothing to do with the situation of her published remarks. She said what she felt and skin color doesn’t really affect how people think its the person themselves. So i think since Crystal is African American it doesn’t how the university reacted or how she came about with her thoughts.
I think that Crystal Dixon’s 14th amendment definitely was not broken because she was not fired due to her being black. I do think that her 1st amendment was broken because she wrote the article as a private citizen rather than as an employee of University of Toledo. I also know that as an employee of a public university she was taking a risk writing her point of view but the Editor-in-Chief also wrote his point of view and nothing happened to him. He was not fired even though he did hold a position in a public office. I do not think that what she did was worthy of being fired for.
Since she was just saying what she believed in, as was talking about her views on the whole thing. Since the first amendment is freedom of speech, that one was pretty much violated.
As for the fourteenth amendment i dont think it was violated. She was not fired because of her race. She was fired for insulting her students and expressing opinions to exploit them not protec them.
After reading about Crystal Dixon’s case, and the other articles that were posted, I really agree with Hannah, Daly, and Moges. I do not feel like her first or fourteenth amendment rights were violated.
I know the first amendment ensures freedom of speech and religion among other things, but it doesn’t guarantee protection from the consequences of sharing exactly how you feel. I think the first amendment serves as a way to protect us from fearing what the government thinks of our opinions and how the government does not have the power to tell us what to believe in. I think the bottom line is she shared her beliefs, which is her right, and then was given consequences for it.
I really don’t think her fourteenth amendment rights were violated because the reason she got fired had nothing to do with because she was black. I agree with Kye’s reasoning, she wrote as a citizen and not for the University. I feel like she was fired because of the position she put her boss in, as far as how her opinion was seen as the opinion of the entire University. That had nothing to do with her skin color.
I’m not sure if she had her first amendment was violated. She got to say what she felt, it wasn’t turned down in the newspaper, and she didn’t go to jail. All the amendment says is that it doesn’t allow the government to create laws against freedom of belief, speech, etc. There isn’t a law that stops of from saying what we want. But getting fired for her belief, is different, because why would she be talking about the people she is suppose to defend. Thats like an oxymoron. I’m pretty sure the school is strict on protecting others, especially if she’s the vice president of the human resources. Why is she going out and saying stuff she is suppose to protect other people from. Makes no sense to me.
And, no her 14 amendment wasn’t broken. They didn’t fire her for her color, just for saying something that she suppose to protect other people from.
Well, it’s kinda tricky. Because the 1st amendment does protect your right of freedom of speech, but it that’s just it. It’s just protecting your right of speaking your mind. It doesn’t mean people are going to like what you have to say. It doesn’t protect your place in work. She should not have said these things though, especially in a school environment. It’s very offensive. She’s just paying the consequences for her poor judgment.
As for the 14th amendment, no not at all. That have to deal with skin color, race, etc. This had nothing to do with that.
I believe her 1st amendment right was violated, she has the right to say what she want’s. It is up to people to say if they do not want to listen to it or not. A person can say, or write about what ever they want to an extent. If all you are doing is expressing how you feel about a certain subject then, and if people do not agree with your opinion of what you are saying then they have the right to state there opinion too. Plain and simple, however there are somewhat of a restriction to the 1st amendment, if she where to write, or say how she feels like we should kill Bush or any other government official or for any person then that would be a different story. But all she did was state her opinion about something, which is not wrong in my book.
As for her 14th amendment blowing show argument, and suing because her 14th amendment right was violated. That part I do not get, her 14th amendment right was not violated main reason is plain and simple; she was fired due to the fact of her remarks she was stating about. Even though she is really just saying what she feels, but I do not get why she is suing for 14 amendment one. I can see her winning against the 1st amendment being violated, but not the 14th amendment one.
I dont think her 1st ammendment rights have been violated because the 1st ammendment allows you freedom of speech but when you take a job at a public university you have to be aware that what you say can potentially turn around and bite you in the butt but thats only if you’ve sighned lets say a contract before u got hired saying you will not impose your ideologies and simply just teach the curiculum set before you then no her 1st ammendment rights were not violted because by sighing that contract you gave up your 1st ammendment rights. For the 14th ammendment was not violated like before she was NOT fired based on her race.
I don’t think the 14th amendment was violated, nothing in the articles would suggest she was fired based on her race. As for the 1st amendment, thats different. The 1st amendment states that “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.” That means that no law can deny us of our freedom of speech.
Even if there exists a law that lets employers fire someone on any basis deemed “adequate”. If there doesn’t exist such a law then why should the University be allowed to fire Ms. Dixon for speaking what she believes? Nowhere in her article did she say that she hates, or dislikes gays or lesbians.The closest she gets, and still she is far, is stating that they are “civil rights victims”. She gives facts about income and she gives statements from the bible. The 1st amendment does not state that our speeches or writings have to be non-biased, in fact it was created for that specific reason.
I admit i don’t have enough resources to look up all the laws in our government but if there does exist a law that lets business fire someone for their own reasons, then it would have to exclude nay-saying as a reason because that would in turn violate the 1st amendment. I don’t agree with Dixon, but I agree with the fact that they should not fire her just because she wants to say something about gays. Would the cast not have been the same if she spoke out against straight people? And as an added side note, her article was written as an opposing view to Miller’s. Why was Miller not fired? And if the Toledo Free Press is called such because it lets anyone write what they want in it, and she did get her article published, why should she get fired for it?
So yes, her 1st amendment rights were violated, if not directly by her being fired, then through a line of laws that allowed her employers to fire her based on what she says. For the same reason we don’t put people in jail for talking crap about our president, is the same reason we don’t fire people for giving their opinion on a sexual preference.
I don’t think that this violated the first amendment, which gives her the right to speak her mind. But she may still be punished for doing so, without amendment one being violated because the first amendment doesn’t say you could say what you like…and get away with it. She should have known, when she taken the job at a public university, her beliefs are going to be different with other peoples. She just shouldn’t have put herself into the situation in the first place.
14th amendment, not violated either.
I don’t think that either the 1st and 14th amendments where violated. She expressed her religion, but to criticize others. She was wrong to have done this, other people could have easily criticized something about her. The school did not violate any of her rights, they simply followed the rules to protect others, you could say the school was following amendment 14, which is to protect and assure that all are treated equally. She claims that her rights where violated only because of her skin color, that would have been a good claim a while ago, but now not so much, I mean, we have a black president, I don’t think that skin color will be a reason for her to get fired. Either way, neither of her amendments where violated, I think that she should have been given a fine or a small punishment, but not get fired. If she does win her lawsuit, she should be given her job back, I don’t think she deserves any money. This is just one of those situations where anyone could win, its just about who talks better.
I dont think iehter oneof the amendments were violated. The frist amendment allows you to speak your mind but in return you do have to be ready for any consequences or responds to what you have said. They gave her the right to say whatever she wanted they published what she wanted to say so they didnt deny her any right. And for the 14th amendment what does her race have anything to do with it? they never mentioned that was a problem as far as i know the article said she was fired for violating the rules..those are consequences to speaking the way she did..so yup =] no violation.
P.S Im sure she didnt think she was gonna get away with it without any consequences =]
Her 1st and 14th Ammendment Rights were not violated at all. She was able to say what she beleived. She was able to publish here remarks which her religious stanpoins. So congress nor anyone else prohibited her from being to say what she wanted to say. She had the right and was equally protected under the law to say what she wanted to.
It was her fault for not using some sort of discretion when she voiced her opnion. So too bad she has to face the consequences. We live in a world when you have to take constant care of what we say out loud, because you will always offend someone who does not share your believes and views. Also why would she think it prudent to make a statment in such a sensitive time. She should have used some sort of tact.
The fact that her 1st amendment right was violated is really obvious in this case. She stated what she believed in by having an article published in the so called “free press”. That she was fired for stating what she believed in is unconstitutional.
The 1st amendment clearly states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…”
so therefore there can be no law saying that you can fire someone for using her freedom of speech. This woman unlike many others did not even abuse her freedom by saying cruel things about homosexuals, all she said was what she thought was right and why she thought that they were not civil rights victims.
Article one of the 14th amendment states “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” I think if you look at the “equal protection of laws” part then her 14th amendment right was also violated. The editor who wrote an article before her was not fired for stating what he thought, nor were several people before her. That is simply not fair, if they fired her then why not him too.
I do not think that any of her rights were violated. The 1st amendement is about freedom of speech and she did have her freddom of speech. she just decided to take action and write a paper on it. and there were obviously going to be consiquences to the papers she wrote. and as for amendemt 14 is was also NOT violated. Mrs dixon had the right to talk about her religion and to say what she wanted. but not the right to criticize other people. that was the mistake that put her to and end and got her fired. As the 14th amendement states to provide equal protection under the law to all persons and she did not comply with these laws.
Dixons 1st amendment rights were definitely violated in this situation because her freedom of speech was taken away from her. In the article it states that she wrote a column in the paper about her views on what Michael S. Miller had said. Dixon merely replied to these things about what she thought and she didn’t specify in the article that she was from the University of Toledo. Therefore Dixon was fired because of her personal beliefs and what she thought. I think that it’s wrong to be fired for just stating your opinions about something when there was no harm meant to be done. Dixon should win the lawsuit in this first part, but not about the 14th amendment. She wasn’t fired because she wasn’t equally protected. She was fired because the University where she worked at didn’t like her personal views and therefore fired her because of that, not because of her back round.
Her 1st and 14th amendment rights were not violated. Of course the 1st amendment is all about freedom of speech. Talking smack about homosexuals was in her own opinion meaning her own free will. That part was her 1st amendment rights. She had the right to talk in her own opinion. Now with the 14th amendment which is about citizenship and equal rights to all persons, I wouldn’t think that this amendment was violated in anyway. All people have the right to talk about whatever they want and unfortunately for her, she was criticizing homosexuals with this happening, she had to pay the price for criticizing them by getting fired.
I dont think either of her rights were violated. i mean sure you can say anything you want but you can be punished for it to. for example, a guy says something and offends a female co-worker she can sue him and the company for sexual harrassment. then the man who insulted the woman can get laid off and/or fired.
same case with crystal dixon its only right she gets the same treatment as everyone else.
I honestly don’t think either of her rights were violated. Yes, she does have freedom of speech and all that, but like jesse said, it doesn’t mean she can’t get punished for it. Talking crap about homosexuals is very offensive obviously, so she should have thought of that before. And her 14th amendment right was DEFINETLY not violated. I mean c’mon, because you’re black?
Well, well, well.
i believe that the first amendment was violated here, you should be able to speak your mind without being feared of being fired, punished etc. Not saying i agree with the woman. The stuff she said was a big bucket of BS but those are her veiws as a christian. whatever. I do not think they should have fired her because of that, because she was just giving her opinion. If you do not like it dont listen to it.
Although i do think that as a professor she should have kept her veiws private to prevent people from being offended and avoid all this mess.
And no she was not fired cuz she is black or christian. C’mon. it was because she was not descrete about her veiws and it made people and employers uncomfortable.
I really don’t think that her amendments where not violated. Because what she did was wrong. She might have expressed her religion but at the same time she was criticize somebody else. The school had every right to fire her because she basically said that gay people weren’t what god created. It could have been okay if she just said but she went ahead and published an article. In my opinion she looked for it. And I think that important people like her should watch what they say.
I believe her rights according to the first amendment were violated. She has the right to express herself and freedom of the press. This means that she can publish a newspaper article with he personal beliefs and not get fired for it. Everyone has the right to believe what they want. It does however speak of religion in the newspaper. Anyone who works at a school is required to sign an oath stating that they will not try to influence their religion upon any individual or group of students. This might be different in universities or colleges. So in a way if she was fired for expressing herself it is a violation of the first amendment but in a way i see the other side in which she might have violated a school rule.
I have no idea how this has anything to do with her religion. They did not fre her for being a black woman. I dont think they even mentioned she was a black woman. I dont think this issue had anything to do with race. It seems like she tried to get something extra on the school like oh…”im a black woman as well” so that people see it as a racist act.
Well I think Crystal Dixon’s rights weren’t violated because her first amendment wasn’t violated at all. She had the right to write and express herself on behalf of her religion. No one denied her the freedom of speech and express her views on the homosexuals. At the same time Crystal was discriminating the homosexual. Crystal must have been fired from her job because if she had a homosexual person she might have not helped that person out.
The first amendment states that there cannot be a law made which violate a persons freedom of speech, the freedom of religion or the practice of it. I did not find in the article any indication of a law that prevented her from expressing her views. She obviously used her freedom of speech to show her dislike of the homosexual community. There wasn’t a law that prevented her from doing it, so her 1st amendment right was not violated.
As for her 14th amendment right, it declares all persons should be treated equally. I believe any person in her situation would have been fired, and she only mentioned her ethnicity to gain sympathy.
Ok pretty what people say what they want to say. They believe what they believe
and often times most people will not agree with you and that is perfectly acceptable they don’t have to agree. The 1 st amendment freedom of speech. I believe that we do have freedom of speech but up to a certain point. Like you can say whatever you want to say when your out with family/friends. But if u go get pulled over and cuss out the officer you can get arrested but why? I thought there is freedom of speech. There is but to a limit. It counts for religion and sexual orientation. So, this lady expressed her feeling and got fired for it. Now her attorney said she got fired for being a Christian I do not believe she got fired for that. She published something that intervenes with the college she works at. So, something that she says can be interpreted as the school feels that way also. Most things we say can always have a second meaning to it whether its good or bad. So there you have it she got fired for stating out her beliefs yes but in what way or form did she do it? Think about it.
I don’t think that Crystal Dixon’s 1st amendment rights were violated. The whole basis of the 1st amendment is the protection of free speech. They were not violated in her case, because she was able to say what she wanted she wanted to say without being censored. Her lawsuit had no basis because as the associate vice president of human resources at the University of Toledo, her personal opinions should remain just that: personal. She is representing the university and the university should not show a bias in any manner. With the freedoms that we enjoy come the responsibility of expressing ourselves in a manner that is not offensive.
As far as the claim that her 14th amendment was violated, if the university claims that the only reason she was fired was because of her insensitivity to such a sensitive issue, the the 14th amendment did not apply because she would have been fired regardless of her race. It had nothing to do with her race, her lawyers were probably just trying to find a reason to sue.
I don’t think the 1st nor the 14th amendment were violated. She had the right to do and say what she wanted to and she did. She wrote a book, it got published and everyone got to read about it. I do believe that maybe they could have come up with a different consequence for her but, when someone dicides to become a teacher I’m quite sure they know what they are getting themselves into.
Almost everything is seen under a microscope. You have to be extra careful with what you do and say, especially around your students. Writing a book and publishing it I don’t think was a good idea though. I don’t think she really thought it through and thought about the consequences… but what is done is done and hopefully everything works out for the best.
Her first 1st amendment right was not violated. She was fired because she wrote a column as a representative of the university. Her statements are not what the university believed so they simply fired her. She did something wrong and the university didn’t like it so they fired her. Its not because they didn’t want her to express her opinions, it was because she stupidly associated herself with the university. She had every right to express her opinions and it would have been fine if she just didn’t mention the university. The links that Purther gave us don’t say that she did but if you research it a little bit more she says “If you need information about my occupation, etc., it is as follows: Associate Vice President for Human Resources, University of Toledo, Elder/Minister, End Time Christian Fellowship, Toledo, Ohio. Even though she says she wasn’t representing the university, you can still interpret it in a way that she was. It was a stupid mistake that she made and she paid the consequences for it. I personally would not have fired her, I simply would have told her not to do it again. Maybe they will give her her job back and she will learn a lesson about America.
As for her 14th amendment right, I dont think that was violated either.
Another thing, some people choose to be gay but there is still a large majority that has no choice on the issue.
I think her first amendment was violated she has the right to say what see wants. And I believe what see said wasn’t an attack but more of a viewpoint. She was expressing her views on the subject. She shouldn’t of been fired for her writing the column. I would understand the university being upset about her statements if they were hateful and offensive. But she was just expressing her views. And it is freedom of speech.
Her 14th amendment was not violated. She wasn’t fired because of her race or gender. She was fired because of what she said.
Personally, I don’t think that the 1st and 14th amendments were violated. She expressed herself, mainly her religion. But she criticized others. When she criticized others others could have done the same thing back, not a good feeling. That school didn’t not violate rights, all that was done was done so to keep others from harm. The school was acting under the 14th amendment, which was to keep safe and make sure that everyone are to be treated equally. She wouldn’t have been fired because of her skin color.
Dixon’s 1st amendment right was DEFINITLY VIOLATED.
She spoke an opinion about her religious views. It was:
A) Not a hate crime or an article filled with ill will
B) Not there to “convert” people
this was a violation to both the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.
her 14th amendment was not violated though.
And.. if people think that the 1st amendment only protects your ablitly to voice your opinions and not the consequences, think again. there are lots of governments in the world that allow you to voice your opinions, but then you just go missing in the middle of the night and are never seen again. there is no point to protecting your freedom of speech if you aren’t protected from what would cause harm.
its being retarded haha here it is again.
I don’t think that Crystal Dixon’s 1st amendment rights were violated. The whole basis of the 1st amendment is the protection of free speech. They were not violated in her case, because she was able to say what she wanted she wanted to say without being censored. Her lawsuit had no basis because as the associate vice president of human resources at the University of Toledo, her personal opinions should remain just that: personal. She is representing the university and the university should not show a bias in any manner. With the freedoms that we enjoy come the responsibility of expressing ourselves in a manner that is not offensive.
As far as the claim that her 14th amendment was violated, if the university claims that the only reason she was fired was because of her insensitivity to such a sensitive issue, the the 14th amendment did not apply because she would have been fired regardless of her race. It had nothing to do with her race, her lawyers were probably just trying to find a reason to sue.
Yes I think her first and fourteenth amendment rights were violated. She should be allowed to say whatever she wants. You can either agree or disagree with her. She was fired as a result and if she wanted to avoid this maybe she shouldn’t have said it. At the same time she shouldn’t be fired just because her boss doesn’t agree with what she has to say. Colleges are places of diversity and everyone should be allowed to think what they want.
This isn’t even a question.
The woman spoke her mind. Everyone is entitled to do so. Free speech is free speech no matter what you’re talking about. So yes, I believe her first amendment rights were broken.
As for her fourteenth, it’s just less than obvious how it applies. It makes it clear that the first amendment does apply to her as a citizen and makes it illegal for her to be fired on her race and/or beliefs. So I guess you could say her fourteenth was broken as well, depending on the university’s public statement as to why they fired her.
agh.
Yes the first amendment is being violated here. Anyone is allowed to speak their mind, whether they are a school teacher or not. I understand that teachers are not allowed to express their views to the class though; last year we asked Mr. Naveroli who he was going to vote for and he didn’t say because the school didn’t allow him to. So if she wasn’t telling all her students her views than I don’t believe she should have been fired for publishing her views. It’s the student’s decisions to go read them. Plus, according to the first amendment, she is allowed to say whatever she wants. As to the fourteenth amendment, I believe it wasn’t being violated. Fourteenth amendment is equal protection under the law, and there is no one to compare her case with so as far as I know, she is being treated as equal as another woman who was fired for the same reasons.
Yes, her first amendment right was violated. We have the right to say what we want as long as they do not constitute as fighting words, which is an exception to the first amendment. There are laws however that govern the work-force. And these are policies against harassment. But what Dixon did was not a violation of those laws because what she did was done outside of the working environment.
The first amendment states that all of us are entitled to freedom of speech but it doesn’t protect or guarantee us that there won’t be any consequences when we speak our minds.
I don’t think that her rights were being violated when it comes to the first amendment. She spoke her mind and no one stopped her, the proof is that she able to publish a book about her perceptions of religion and homosexuals. She stated her opinion and at the moment of doing so, no one stopped her so its not like if they were trying to take her rights away when it comes to freedom of speech. Her getting fired from her job was just a consequence of her actions. It’s not like if they are going into the past and stopping her from speaking and publishing her book, they are just trying to make her pay for the position that she put the university in.
I think that society has created a limit as to how much we can say about others even though that limit is constantly being violated by people like her. Its obvious that when we go to such a far extent to state our opinion, that it will be offensive to others. Especially when you work at a place that is so diverse like a university, it is obvious that people will get offended. There is no law or amendment thats says how far we can go when we speak our minds but, we ourselves have created that limit.
I also don’t think that her rights were being violated when it comes to the 14th amendment. Its pretty obvious that she wasn’t fired for being black, asian, white or what not; she was fired because of her actions. As an employee of a university you have to keep your personal opinion to yourself especially when it comes to such a delicate matter. Its similar to being a teacher, they aren’t allowed to share their opinions with students.
Well i do believe her rights to the first ammendment was violated. She had every right to say what she believes. I agree with the notion that in some instances, christians are the ones who are not being tolerated. At the same time, christians are by no means innocent in the matter of being “tolerant”. It is also the topic being discussed that so many must be carefull about. Homosexuality is a complex issue that include many factors based on the individual. this is the most common mistake of the Church. you cant just say hey stop that. many issues contibute to the issue of homosexuality. i find it also ironic that in her article she even defended the colleage that fired her. as for her 14th amendment being violated, i am have no solid reason to believe it was violated.
In my own opinion Dixon’s right to the frist amendment was somewhat violated and somewhat not. Yes in the United States everyone has a right to freedom of speech and freedom to express their religious beliefs in in the right Dixon was able to. What she stated was published and people got to read her beliefs and opinion. On the other hand the column she wrote was unfair toward people and other religions so what she said was also against the freedoms if other people so what she stated in her column was not fair to those who are gay, bisexual or otherwise and also to those who believe in other religions. =]
If were speaking politically yes we they did break both amendments if it is seen from an African American female point of view. Because the reason for getting laid off was because of the remarks, it didn’t have anything to do with race or religion. Now if im not mistaken the first amendment is to secure the rights to practice any religion but Ms.Dixon was not practicing her religion she was talking about certain someones gender. Now that was a good punishment if and only if she mentioned any names when she wrote her opinion, because she as an officer shouldn’t be talking about anyone anyways because it is her job to treat everyone equally. Now the homosexuals rights were also broken because every citizen has the right to a free discrimination environment. Now again the officers werent violated, on the other hand i think the homosexuals rights that were targeted were violated.