Post by Quorthon on Feb 6, 2006 14:50:14 GMT -5
spacer said:
quorthon said:
There are limits to freedom, Spacer.
Here, I fully agree with you.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to have a pornographic website.
Yes, that's true but that's really a weak argument.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to be gay.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to be headbanger like you.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to be tattooed.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to be pierced, to get rings for an example in a nose.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to wear mini skirts.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to be black or non-white.
A lot of people may find it indecent for a school teacher to have sex at all.
The list is generally endless.
Freedom doesn't mean you can do whatever you want
Again, you are right. According to my ethics you cannot do anything that does harm other people. But that doesn't mean I have to comply always to the mainstream values and customs.
If it did, I'd go around blowing up the house of every registered sex offender who's harmed children. And I would kick every person in the crotch who based their vote for President on the words of idiot celebrities--who know nothing of politics.
Your arguments are flawed. What you did to these people would be obviously wrong because you would harmed them physically. Now think for a while:
In what way did she cause harm to children if she did only her job privately. Can't you imagine the situation that she might not have to be affected by her job. That you should base your judgement on what she actually does and how she behaves at school, Is she a good teacher or not. These are valid questions, and such matters should interest the parent not what she does in her free time. She does not harm anyone doing this, she does not kick anyone in the crotch. No one is forced to watch this stuff and if these parents are so saint how on Earth they always learn about it?
She can do what she wants with her free time, but I don't know if I'd be comfortable with my son having a teacher whose pastime is fucking on video.
It is surprising, though, that plenty people would more readily accept a serial killer as a teacher and would prefer such a person to gays or other “sexually indecent people”
Besides, many completely normal people do such things in private, it’s even advised by MAINSTREAM sex counselors to make sex more interesting and less dull
The big chances are you practicred it too ;D So you would be unconfortable with something you do in your free time too. Pretty weird isn't it?
Consequently, you cannot be a teacher, Pulp can't be a teacher, your wife can't be a teacher, Heineken can't be a teacher, IamtheSmitty, Bart can't be too. I’ve just mentioned some. Basically everybody here shouldn’t. There’s always something uncomfortable that can be found in a person.
I know I’ll be crucified by you for my free thinking but what the hell everybody lives only once ;D
You blew what little I said way out of proportion. A teacher wearing a mini-skirt or being black is hardly the same as one who is making money having sex on film.
Last night, Dateline (NBC) did it's 3rd excellent show on internet sex predators. (On the show, they worked with an organization that lures perverts into a trap wherein they think they are going to have sex with someone 13 years of age. The news crew was in a stake-out house waiting for these guys and confronted almost all of them. Some of the perverts ran away before an interview could develop. All 50+ men were arrested for various lude acts toward a minor.) One of them was a high school teacher. Now, even if he's a good teacher, should he still be around kids? I mean, in his free time, he tries to have sex with minors. By your logic, that's okay.
That really annoys me when people look at generalizations rather than specific incidents. Sure, there might be some people that have a problem with a teacher that wears a mini-skirt, but I can guarantee that a lot more people would have a lot more of a problem with a teacher who makes porn on the side. You've clumped these together. Well, by that logic, the teacher that illicites minors for sex is every bit the same as the teacher that's, oh, say black. I'd say one of those is a little bit worse. Not that I think it's really acceptable for a teacher to wear a mini-skirt in a classroom, either. Firstly, that's hardly professional, and secondly, no teacher should be advertising sexuality to children. If I was a full-blown Nazi in my free time (away from this board), would you still accept me, or would you suddenly have a problem with me? You know full well you'd think differently if I was a Nazi instead of a borderline White Nationalist. As is, I'm proud of my heritage, but tolerant and open-minded.
Blowing up child molestors hurts no one but child molestors. In essence, it would be a preventative measure preventing potential future victims from serious harm. As I see it, rapists and child molestors are far worse than murderers.
Kicking someone in the crotch for voting based on celebrity opinions would be more worthwhile than punching them in the head. Since, as they voted based on the request of a celebrity, said person obviously has nothing within the skull that could be harmed.
I would never want a serial killer to be a teacher. That's beyond fucking stupid.
Though mainstream sex counselors advise to be creative in the bedroom, I doubt they mean to videotape the event to be broadcast on the internet.
All in all, it sounds like it was not the goal of the teacher to broadcast herself having sex on the internet. And because I don't generalize the situation, she should be allowed to continue teaching--if she's actually a decent teacher.
It should be noted that gays are not "sexually indecent people."
