Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Can she favor these philosophers and their philosophy and still do her job? If so, then she stays. If not, then she should be dismissed. It is how it effects her job that she be the determinant of her employment status. Looked at another way, can an atheist work for a religious organization? Can an environmentalist work for an oil company? Can a person who has children in a public school work for a private school? Answers to all is yes.
Anyway, is she advocating Mao's philosophy? Does her beliefs affect her ability to do her job? What is the nexus between her beliefs and her ability to do the job?
Those are the bottom line questions.
Ironic that if she is fired or censured the very behaviors and beliefs the argument is against are brought to fruition.
Can she favor these philosophers and their philosophy and still do her job? If so, then she stays. If not, then she should be dismissed. It is how it effects her job that she be the determinant of her employment status. Looked at another way, can an atheist work for a religious organization? Can an environmentalist work for an oil company? Can a person who has children in a public school work for a private school? Answers to all is yes.
We don't need thought police.
As I understand it she was speaking to high school students. I think the venue makes a difference. And don't be disingenuous. You know darn well that the standard you posit would not be applied to a conservative. Finally do you recall when George Bush was campaigning for the nomination in 2000 in Iowa, I believe, and the candidates were asked to identify the philosopher who had the greatest impact on their thinking? Bush said 'Jesus.' And do you recall the uproar that caused among the media elites? So Mao is ok--not a peep from the elite media. But Jesus? Land amercy! Hide the children!
not a good career move for sure. when you are up on high you got lots of enemies looking for a target. but curious is american belief system--- that are so hateful of socialism unions and worker movements. i mean american labor is being ravaged by their own government---- 21 milllion illegals looking for work in a major recession, our government does not know how they got here or where they work.
The unions were all for legalizing the illegals in the last election. What's your point?
You know, she never said she supported Mao's actions. I agree, her message was poorly conveyed, but it seemed to me that she juxtaposed Mao and Mother Teresa together as polar opposites in their contributions to the world. Yet, each had similar philosophies regarding inner strength. One used this strength to commit atrocities toward humanity and the other to better the lives of thousands.
She make a point to say that you would not often hear these two prominent figures being discussed together, yet as completely different as they were, they shared a common philosophy that enabled them to greatly influence humanity. This is very true.
She should be given the opportunity to explain the point she was trying to make with greater clarity. To me it seemed clear, that she was talking strictly about philosophy.
Well she talked about the "political" philosophy of Mother Teresa. I doubt that Mother Teresa had a political philosophy. And if this woman thinks that there is moral equivalence between the way Mother Teresa influenced humanity and the way Mao influenced humanity then she suffers from a moral and spiritual bankruptcy that should automatically disqualify her from serving in any capacity in government--whether in the White House or dog catcher in Podunk.
Anyway, is she advocating Mao's philosophy? Does her beliefs affect her ability to do her job? What is the nexus between her beliefs and her ability to do the job?
Those are the bottom line questions.
Chairman Mao would have put all but the janitorial employees at Goldman Sachs on welfare with ankle chains.
I can easily see a large following in this country for that kind of financial remedy.
any of you nay-sayers ever read Mao? .. as a philosopher he was very good .. and interesting reading .. as a leader .. dear chairman sucked
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
