There has been a steady and growing chorus from Democrats and the Left that a rising right-wing cancel culture is threatening their free speech rights.
In the wake of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, numerous individuals who evidently thought it acceptable rushed to social media to express their disgusting glee over his murder. This has resulted in numerous reports of people finding themselves suddenly fired. Individuals, from medical professionals to firemen to college professors, have been handed their walking papers in light of the grotesque nature of their comments. And deservedly so.
Yet Leftmedia outlets have been screaming foul, claiming this is a crisis of free speech infringement. For example, in a recent article, Politico writes, “Universities in red states have fired or suspended employees regarding social media posts about Charlie Kirk’s death that school leadership found inappropriate, underscoring how fraught freedom of speech on college campuses is becoming.”
Framing these social media posts as “inappropriate” is certainly a benign way of presenting the actual nature of their content and why administrations have correctly objected. A more truthful framing of these social media posts is that they were either celebrating, justifying, or endorsing the murder of Kirk. In other words, they promoted the notion that political violence is acceptable and even a laudable form of countering opinions and views with which they disagree.
The Politico article primarily focused on a number of teachers and school staff who have been fired, although it did not specify what these individuals had posted. The article frames this as a concerning infringement on freedom of speech.
In Texas alone, over 100 teachers have been suspended for “reprehensible and inappropriate” social media posts related to Kirk’s death. This has been in response to numerous complaints with Texas Education Agency (TEA) Commissioner Mike Morath sending a letter to school superintendents across the state explaining, “While the exercise of free speech is a fundamental right we are all blessed to share, it does not give carte blanche authority to celebrate or sow violence against those that share differing beliefs and perspectives.”
There is such a thing as code of conduct policies, and especially so when it comes to school teachers who have been entrusted with educating children, which includes modeling appropriate and expected behavioral norms.
When an educator violates those behavioral expectations or a code of conduct, repercussions should not only be expected, but are in fact demanded.
Furthermore, the argument that what they post on their own time on their social media accounts outside the classroom is irrelevant, as social media is considered a public square.
Finally, teachers losing their jobs because they have expressed opinions that violate a school’s code of conduct is not an infringement on their freedom of speech. They are allowed to voice their opinions, no matter how vile, without fear of government reprisal, but that does not insulate them from repercussions from their employers. When someone works for a company or a school, they represent more than just themselves, and therefore, their actions and speech can and will have ramifications for the company or school that employs them.
It’s a good thing these teachers were exposed, as their instinct to support political violence should not be promoted to students under their care as a legitimate response to viewpoint disagreements.
