Skynetmain wrote:
Finally reading the article, they didn't go as in depth as Countdown's blurb on it earlier this week. They left out the part where he does other art with other parts of his anatomy that shall remain nameless.
I have to agree that he should not have been suspended. 1st Amendment should cover artistic expression under freedom of speech. I think his wacky art should have worked in his favor. The students liked him for it and made him a more desired teacher. What happens outside of his job should stay outside of his job.
Perfectly put. :]