Freedom of speech for parents is dead in the BC public school system.

[blackbird]

According to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), Dixon filed a freedom of information request in Dec. 2024 to obtain district emails discussing her expulsion from the homestay program. She previously hosted a student in the 2023 school year.

“The results revealed internal emails in which District officials referenced her political activities as the reason for rejecting her participation,” read an Oct. 20 news release by the JCCF. The group has taken on her case. It is at the discretion of the ( severely backlogged ) BCHRT to accept the complaint or not.

The battle is not Dixon’s first run-in with the Nanaimo-Ladysmith Public Schools — and it is part of a wider pattern wherein B.C. schools are used by administrators to wage ideological warfare against the public or their employees.

The typical targets are persons who refuse — whether politely or not — to unquestioningly swallow far-left progressive politics. It is taboo for any parent or educator to ask questions about, or poke holes in, gender ideology, critical race theory or the province’s undying mass graves narrative.

Dixon learned that lesson thoroughly when she received a one-year ban from her child’s school grounds , under threat of police involvement, this September. Her “transgression” was a post she made to social media that included a blurry photo of a teacher, on the job, wearing a Progress Pride flag T-shirt. She linked the political symbol to a Minneapolis school shooting , committed by a transgender-identified male, over the summer.

The school district demanded she remove the post, told her she was inciting violence and ultimately banned her from school grounds. All under the guise of enforcing Section 177 of the province’s School Act , which is meant to prevent “disruption of schools and school functions.”

Dixon pulled her child from school. After obtaining assistance from the Free Speech Union of Canada, the district dropped its exclusion order.

If Nanaimo-Ladysmith Public Schools sounds particularly or exceptionally repressive, it is not. Districts around the province are functioning — if you can call it that — with a similar jackbooted zeal.

For instance, New Westminster Schools marked the beginning of the school year with a letter to parents explaining the district’s code of conduct . Parents are described as “members of the district learning community,” which reads as cute until you realize that it is ostensibly a power grab by the district to police both students’ and parents’ social media posts."

For the rest of the article:

Amy Hamm: Not even parents can escape the speech police at B.C. schools

This repressive agenda originates from the BC NDP government which is in charge of the public education system.

Just another reason why some are choosing to home school their children, a wise choice.

[Queenmandy85]

Schools have a duty of care. This includes protecting their students and stall from hate and bigotry. Hate is detrimental to learning and has no place a school environment. (Neither does it have any place in societ in general.) Also, unauthorised adults in a school yard jeapordizes student safety. 

If we lived in a state where the Government can tell you what you can wear, who you are allowed to fall in love with, or what your political views are, smack of actual communism.

You raise concern about freedom of speech, then you wrote, "Her “transgression” was a post she made to social media that included a blurry photo of a teacher, on the job, wearing a Progress Pride flag T-shirt." The teacher has the right of free speech. 

"Pence has “a problem with who I am, your problem is not with me – your quarrel, sir, is with my creator.”

Former Secretary Pete Buttigieg

 

Edited October 29, 2025 by Queenmandy85

[User]

13 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

wearing a Progress Pride flag T-shirt." The teacher has the right of free speech. 

Not sure how things work in Canada, but conceptually and even lawfully here in US, what you have said here is absurd.

Teachers have free speech outside of the classroom.

In the classroom they are paid professionals there to do a job. The classroom is not their personal soap box where they are free to say whatever they want. They are bound by curriculum and professional standards. 
 

Their speech 100% can be controlled and limited while in the course of their duties.

[User]

15 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Also, unauthorised adults in a school yard jeapordizes student safety. 

This isn’t even related to this story.

The person was just outright banned from school grounds initially and that was later rescinded.

 

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, User said:

The classroom is not their personal soap box where they are free to say whatever they want.

The duty of care is not a soap box topic. Teachers have a professional obligation to protect students from homophopia. Letting their students who happen to be part of the LGBTQ community know that the school supports their rights, promotes an enviroment that aids learning.

If this parent has an issue regarding the homosexuality, she should be directing her complaint to God. Your gender or sexual orientation was God's choice. 

[User]

2 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

The duty of care is not a soap box topic. Teachers have a professional obligation to protect students from homophopia. Letting their students who happen to be part of the LGBTQ community know that the school supports their rights, promotes an enviroment that aids learning.

If this parent has an issue regarding the homosexuality, she should be directing her complaint to God. Your gender or sexual orientation was God's choice. 

I was not speaking to duty of care. I literally quoted the comment of yours I was responding to, which was your position on their freedom of speech in the classroom.