The Personal Website of Mark W. Dawson

Free Speech and Public Service

How much free speech does a (government) public servant have in the performance of their public service? Public servants are ubiquitous in today’s society, and while most of them serve behind the scenes, some of them interact with the public. In their interactions with the public, we have certain expectations and standards for their conduct with the public. As such, they have no unrestricted free speech rights when dealing with the public, and if they violate these expectations and standards, then they can be disciplined and even fired for excessive violations. This is a limitation of their free speech rights as a condition of their government employment. Any public servant that interacts with the public must meet these expectations and standards or face the consequences. An appeal to their free speech rights has no basis for violating these expectations and standards in their conduct with the public.

In the arena of Public Service, there are expectations and standards in public servants' conduct when they interact with the public, and public servants' Free Speech Rights are tempered by these expectations and standards. There is, however, no restriction on the Free Speech Rights of the public when dealing with public servants. Public Servants are expected to conduct themselves with polite and respectful speech, impartiality, and unbiased actions, while not making any political or social statements while they are serving the public. It is also imperative that public servants remember that Public Service means that the people who provide this public service are to serve the public and that they are the servants of the public and not their masters.

K-12 Public Education Administrators and Teachers are public servants, and we have more expectations and standards for them as we entrust the care and education of our children to them. My new Article, “Free Speech and Parental Rights”, examines the conflicts between the free speech rights of administrators and teachers and the Parental Right to raise their children in shaping their morals, ethics, and character. This conflict has come to a head in the perversion of education into indoctrination, as I have written in my article "Indoctrination versus Education", and most especially in American history, racism in America, and the sexual education of children.

A fictitious reductio ad absurdum scenario of this conflict between Free Speech and Public Service in K-12 Public Education is in the sexual identity educational instruction of students. If we suppose that a K-12 Public Education teacher wished to educate their students on sexual identity under the unrestricted free speech rights of the teacher, they could do the following:

• A teacher who would flaunt and exhibit their own heterosexuality or LGBTQIA+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, intersex, asexual, and more) sexual preferences in front of their students.
• A teacher who encourages or instructs boys and girls to exchange clothing and pretend to be the other sex to experience life as the opposite sex.
• A teacher who encourages or instructs boys and girls to strip naked in front of each other to examine their sexual differences.
• A teacher who encourages or instructs boys and girls to strip naked in front of each other and fondle each other to examine their sexual responses.
• A teacher who encourages or instructs boys and girls to strip naked and fondle each other, and when the boy has an erection, the girl should spread her legs and insert his penis into her vagina, so they both experience sexual orgasm.
• A teacher who encourages or instructs boys to strip naked in front of other boys and girls in front of other girls, then fondle each other to examine their sexual responses.
• A teacher who encourages or instructs boys and girls that have a sexual response to the same sex while fondling each other to consider that they are homosexual or bisexual.

Under the Parental Rights doctrine, none of the above would be acceptable. If you accept that a K-12 Public Education teacher should be forbidden to do the above, then you believe that Parental Rights trump the Free Speech Rights of the teacher. While the above list is a blatant absurdity, there are more subtle ways that a K-12 Public Education teacher can achieve the same sexual identity education of their students. Whether this sexual identity is blatant or subtle such sexual identity instruction is a violation of Parental Rights.

A list such as this could be compiled on the K-12 Public Education on racism, religion, morality, ethics, ethnic biases, historical biases, and other topics, and none of this would be acceptable under the Parental Rights doctrine. The public service of a teacher is to impart skills and knowledge and how to utilize these skills and knowledge to be analytical, rational, and reasonable in exercising these skills and interpreting this knowledge. There is a case that the older (9-12 grades) in K-12 Public Education need to be knowledgeable on controversial topics, but this instruction needs to be done in an unbiased and analytical manner in which the topics are examined from multiple viewpoints. The education of controversial topics needs to be unbiased, and the teacher should not blatantly nor subtly inject their viewpoints and opinions when providing this instruction (i.e., leave your opinions and viewpoints to yourself while you are teaching).

Many of these expectations and standards are also applicable to business persons when dealing with their customers and clients and their interaction with their co-workers. Consequently, Free Speech Rights are tempered whenever you are performing your duties and responsibilities in your work environment. Therefore, unrestricted Free Speech is only applicable in your non-employment life.