Morals dont stop at the school house door. Teachers should be role models, like others in authority positions. We certainly dont always live up to that, but at least we should try. Excusing this type of behavior because it really doesnt mean anything just lowers the bar once again.
"Excusing this type of behavior because it really doesn't mean anything just lowers the bar once again."
The question is not your or my "moral" view of his role in the play. The question is legal and his legal rights.
Right now we have a school in Lexington Massachusetts that believes it has a legal obligation to teach 3rd graders the moral view that it is O.K. to be gay (using a book in which a young prince has a boyfriend not a princess). They use the same language you do, about their right to teach a "moral" view and, more than you, they reinforce that language with the fact that the actions of the young prince have been declared legal in Massachusetts, so in addition to teaching their own civic moral view they are defending what the law allows.
I think both you and they are wrong.
I think the school, as an academic institution and not a religious institution must be, most of the time, agnostic on civic moral issues. I oppose their view on the same basis I oppose yours.
While the activity is "legal", the fact that it is legal, that it is allowed, is only a statement that one has the legal right to that activity. The fact that it is permitted is not a statement that others cannot have the opinion that it is morally wrong. Smoking is legal, but most people oppose it morally. Adultery is rarely prosecuted as a crime in itself, but most people agree it is immoral. We have many things that our legal freedoms permit us to do, but we have separate, and diverse moral views about many of them.
When legal rights and standards include rights and freedoms for which the whole of society has strong differences of the moral view of those freedoms, the school must be agnostic on a moral view of them. If it is not then it must chose (and it will, just as the school in Lexington Mass did) whatever standard of "moral" that it wants, and it will thank you for granting it the right to do so.
I do not accept the statist idea that our public schools should be granted the role of the center of our child's moral and social universe. To do so replaces "the state" for what the founders saw as "the society", which included Church and family and other free associations beyond academia, and which respected the moral role of those institutions, outside of academia.
No, the school must be agnostic most of the time, if it is not a private or religious school. It is dangerous for all of our religions otherwise, because otherwise it will chose one or it will condemn them all for its own secular humanist view.