Andrew Tiebout: Not all speech considered protected speech in a public institution

To The Daily Sun,

I’d like to respond to Paulette Caruso who wrote in upset that her son’s school suspended him for posting a sign that read “No more LGBTQ!” She feels like the minority is tolerated while the majority is not, and that her son is unfairly ostracized for his pro-gun and religious apparel. Paulette has created a false equivalency between the two subjects. Sexual orientation is an immutable attribute, just like height or skin color. Political and religious orientation are beliefs which are attributes that may change as people learn and grow. Politics and religion are choices while sexual orientation is not. The sign her son posted is analogous to “No more Asians!” and I hope nobody reading this needs an explanation as to why that wouldn’t be considered protected speech in a public institution. So, yes, I do believe Paulette has misread the Constitution if in fact she has ever read it at all. Her letter does not indicate that the school has disallowed any of her son’s other viewpoints, only that his views do not make him especially popular with his peers. I see no hypocrisy from the school, only from Paulette who appears to want to use her free speech to silence others when they remind her that they exist. I feel it’s also worth pointing out that those who are intolerant of the LGBTQ+ community are not the majority, no matter how it may sound in their echo chambers. Gay marriage is legal in all 50 states. The fact that Paulette believes LGBTQ+ is a “fad of the time” is the exact reason Pride Month exists. Why is there no Straight Pride month? Nobody denies our existence.

Andrew Tiebout

Dover