It is not clear from the stories what the professor did when the student refused and discussed. It is not clear whether the student was suspended for refusing a follow-up to stomp, or if it was retaliation for exposing the exercise and the school to public outcry.
...that’s the whole problem with this thread...a lot of speculation about who did what...if it can be shown that retaliation against the student was for bringing a gratuitous complaint against the instructor, that’s one thing...if the instructor, on the other hand, reacted to the student’s refusal by throwing him out, that’s quite another...
I don't think the complaint was gratuitous. The student was deeply offended by the instructor's choice of using the name of Jesus as the symbol to be desecrated.
I don't think that the lesson plan called for that specific word to be written; it was the instructor's choice to do so. He could have been more culturally sensitive in picking a symbol than using a religious hot-button that has been traditionally off-limits in the schools by Democrats for decades.
As I wrote earlier, the instructor could have chosen a copy of the American flag, which the Supreme Court has already ruled as being a legitimate form of speech to desecrate, to make his lesson point.
It was the professor's poor judgment that was being questioned by the student, and validly so.
-PJ