Christian teacher fired for refusing to use transitional students’ pronouns

A Christian teacher has been fired for refusing to use a transgender student’s pronouns.

Peter Vlaming lost his job at West Point High School in West Point, Virginia, after insisting that referring to a biologically female student by male pronouns violated his religious beliefs.

Now the school board has agreed to pay out $575,000 (£433,000) in damages and legal costs after the Virginia Supreme Court ruled last year that the school had violated Mr Vlaming’s freedom of expression.

After the ruling, Mr Vlaming said he hoped his victory would “help protect the fundamental rights of all other teachers and professors”.

“I was wrongfully fired from my teaching job because my religious beliefs put me on a collision course with school administrators who demanded that teachers assign only one perspective on gender identity: their preferred view,” Mr. Vlaming said.

“I loved teaching French and tried to gracefully accommodate every student in my class, but I couldn’t say something that directly violated my conscience.”

Mr. Vlaming had taught French at West Point High for six years when, near the end of the 2017-2018 school year, he learned that one of his students, who was biologically female, was planning to transition to male. told.

During the autumn term, Mr Vlaming claimed that he had become aware that the child wanted to be referred to by male pronouns: a request that conflicted with his Christian beliefs. His faith taught Mr. Vlaming that “sex is fixed in every person and cannot be changed.”

According to the complaint, “Mr. Vlaming’s conscience and religious practice prohibit him from intentionally lying, and he honestly believes that referring to a woman as a man by using an objective masculine pronoun tells a lie.”

Out of respect for his student’s preferences, the French teacher used the child’s new preferred name but avoided using the third-person pronoun.

In October 2018, Mr. Vlaming met with the student to explain his practice of not using pronouns in class, and he felt the meeting went well. However, in a telephone conversation with the child’s parents later that day, he was told to “leave his principles and beliefs out of this.”

In the following days, Mr Vlaming met with assistant principal Suzanne Aunspach to discuss his treatment of the child and was told “he needed to know the law”, he claimed.

Right of address

He was referred to documents prepared by the National Center for Transgender Equality, which asserted that transgender students have a legal “right to be addressed by the names and pronouns they use.”

The court heard he was also told that “personal religious beliefs end at the school door” and that he had to “use male pronouns or his job could be in jeopardy”, he claimed.

After another incident which Mr Vlaming claimed was an accident, he was suspended and given a final warning.

When Mr Vlaming refused to comply with a written directive ordering him to use male pronouns to refer to the student, the school board dismissed him, the court heard.

Mr. Vlaming later sued the school on the grounds that his First Amendment rights had been violated, but a court ruled against him.

However, the state Supreme Court ruled in December that it would resume the lawsuit against the school, saying Mr. Vlaming’s rights had been violated.

Now, in addition to the payout, the school has changed its policies to comply with Virginia’s new education policy, which respects basic freedom of speech and parental rights.

In its ruling, the court said: “No government can lawfully compel its citizens to pledge verbal allegiance to ideological views that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs.”

Chris Schandevel, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which argued on behalf of Mr Vlaming, said: “Peter was not dismissed because of anything he said; he was fired for something he couldn’t say.

“As a teacher, Peter was passionate about the subject he taught, was deeply loved by his students and went out of his way to meet their needs and requests.

“But he could not in good conscience issue messages that he believes are untrue, and no school board or government official can punish anyone for that reason.”