Not sure they’re right about this.
Here’s a little backstory before we say why:
A California appeals court upheld the firing of a San Diego teacher who posted an ad on Craigslist with naked pictures of himself in the site’s “men seeking men” section.
Okay. So. Not only was it part of a website that has age verification in place, but the teacher did not list his name or the name of the school, and he was looking for consensual sex.
We’d understand if he was going after a minor, or student, or prostitute, but this is going a little too far.
While we don’t support the methods he took, they were his personal business, and we can’t say he should lose his job over it.
Unfortunately the appeals court doesn’t agree with us, and is calling it “immoral conduct.” So far, it looks like he’ll be losing his job.
Do U agree with the court??