The part you quoted doesn't elaborate on anything.
All it says is "this teacher is going to jail for defying the court".
I do concede that upon re-reading the top of the article a second time, there is some description of the events in the first 6-7 paragraphs now that I actually know the details of the story.
Burke's school, Wilson’s Hospital in Multyfarnham, Co Westmeath, was granted an injunction preventing Burke from attending or attempting to teach after he was suspended pending the outcome of a disciplinary process.
Burke told the court he could not comply with the order as it would be in violation of his conscience.
The court heard a disciplinary process was commenced after Burke publicly confronted the then principal to voice his opposition to a request to call a student a new name and use the 'they' pronoun.
But if I was going in cold again without the tipoff from the KIA2 link that this was about troons and pronouns, the article spends way more time repeating "injunction" and "breech of court order" without making it clear how he got there in the first place.
It does a short summary of the event and then it explains in details and while the Kia2 title is bait the article title is correct.
Is not clear at this time if the judge is tough on the teacher do to his believes and convictions or just follows the law. I tend to believe that judges in general are corrupt leftwing pawns but there is no way to prove as there is no mention of this in the article. I would have liked to know if the judge is more lenient in cases pertaining to left wing protected classes like troons or minorities before making any decision on this case. Without it the article as you pointed out is irrelevant that it involves pronouns. Is a defended willingly defying the court and being found in contempt.
You can make a case against the principles as she is clearly a leftwing activist that started all of this by blowing out of proportions the fact that the teacher would not want to deny reality in face of a mentally ill student. This should not have reached the courts to begin with. The fact that this is a serious case highlights how fucked up things have become. Acknowledging reality gets you to court.
So in a way the article does not focus on what I would have liked but still not a bad article.
The part you quoted doesn't elaborate on anything.
All it says is "this teacher is going to jail for defying the court".
I do concede that upon re-reading the top of the article a second time, there is some description of the events in the first 6-7 paragraphs now that I actually know the details of the story.
But if I was going in cold again without the tipoff from the KIA2 link that this was about troons and pronouns, the article spends way more time repeating "injunction" and "breech of court order" without making it clear how he got there in the first place.
It does a short summary of the event and then it explains in details and while the Kia2 title is bait the article title is correct.
Is not clear at this time if the judge is tough on the teacher do to his believes and convictions or just follows the law. I tend to believe that judges in general are corrupt leftwing pawns but there is no way to prove as there is no mention of this in the article. I would have liked to know if the judge is more lenient in cases pertaining to left wing protected classes like troons or minorities before making any decision on this case. Without it the article as you pointed out is irrelevant that it involves pronouns. Is a defended willingly defying the court and being found in contempt.
You can make a case against the principles as she is clearly a leftwing activist that started all of this by blowing out of proportions the fact that the teacher would not want to deny reality in face of a mentally ill student. This should not have reached the courts to begin with. The fact that this is a serious case highlights how fucked up things have become. Acknowledging reality gets you to court.
So in a way the article does not focus on what I would have liked but still not a bad article.