Prejudice vs. free speech

A vice president at the University of Toledo was placed on paid leave after this guest column appeared in the local paper, denouncing the protection of gay people under civil rights policies. She argues that homosexuality is a conscious decision, not a genetic trait, and that homosexuals therefore should not be entitled to the same protections as other minorities:

As a Black woman who happens to be an alumnus of the University of Toledo's Graduate School, an employee and business owner, I take great umbrage at the notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are "civil rights victims." Here's why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman. I am genetically and biologically a Black woman and very pleased to be so as my Creator intended. Daily, thousands of homosexuals make a life decision to leave the gay lifestyle evidenced by the growing population of PFOX (Parents and Friends of Ex Gays) and Exodus International just to name a few.

She goes on to say that homosexuals do not face discrimination (or at least I think that's the implication) -- a point she backs up with this:

Economic data is irrefutable: The normative statistics for a homosexual in the USA include a Bachelor's degree: For gay men, the median household income is $83,000/yr. (Gay singles $62,000; gay couples living together $130,000), almost 80% above the median U.S. household income of $46,326, per census data. For lesbians, the median household income is $80,000/yr. (Lesbian singles $52,000; Lesbian couples living together $96,000); 36% of lesbians reported household incomes in excess of $100,000/yr. Compare that to the median income of the non-college educated Black male of $30,539. The data speaks for itself.

So. This woman is obviously deeply, deeply confused and needs to read a science journal or two... or maybe get a lobotomy. But that's not the point.

The woman, Crystal Dixon, is the associate vice president of human resources at the University of Toledo, making her the school's top HR official. She wrote this guest column for the local paper as an individual (she identifies herself as a graduate of the school -- not an employee), and the tagline says nothing about her position with the university. So what are her rights under the First Amendment? If she had expressed this opinion in a more casual setting, she probably wouldn't be in danger of losing her job. (the paid leave is pending possible further action, according to Inside Higher Ed)

Gay rights groups are calling for her firing, and they have a Very Good Point -- obviously, the fact that she is an HR person makes her stances dangerous. One law professor at the university questions that point in an EdgeBoston story, saying "she cannot do her job effectively."

I guess the story is relatively new (the student paper reported it Saturday, but it just started making national news today), but I haven't seen anyone broach the free speech side of the issue. It's obviously a complex issue -- there's a lot of overlap between free speech advocates and gay rights advocates. So which right wins out here? Or is that not the point? Maybe the point is that she disclosed a bias she should have disclosed in her job interview anyway, and it'd be sort of like writing a column about lying on your resume -- firing would be imminent and free speech wouldn't be an issue.

Any thoughts?