Christian Student Fights For Her Beliefs (versus, murder, Army, family)
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.
As a Program Manager (IT), count my profession as another. Doctors have to abide by certain code of ethics as well, as do judges, juries...
Tell me again, you won't have an issue if a judge blatantly preached biased personal opinions, that are complete opposite of your beliefs, before taking the office?
What recourse would I have if a biased judge did take office? I could vote him out the next time he was elected or vote out the people that appointed him.
I am well aware of codes of ethics but that is the job of the ACA and not the university. The ACA doesnt list "interpersonal skills" as a requirement. The university does. That is what I have issue with. Not the ACA and their ethics. Let the ACA deal with her and not the university. If the ACA doesnt like what the university puts out then the university should screen students for their views ahead of time before putting them into a program that damages the university. It is unfair to let a student take all these classes and spend thousands of dollars to disqualify them for something that could have easily been found out long before she got accepted to the program.
Let her apply to those schools and see how far she gets with her views. If she gets a job and damages a kid, she will be branded for life with it and likely be sued. The employer should hire the right person anyways. Universities need to take the training wheels off and let students learn the hard way. Let employers do their job and let them pay if their new hire makes a mistake. It will teach others to be careful and learn from her stupidity.
The school, because it conferred a degree on her, would be associated with any damage she inflicts on a kid. They, and actually all of us, have an interest in preventing such damage. Again, counselors are authority figures, and have to take special care to maintain objectivity, because doing otherwise is really a form of predation. We don't want predators working as school counselors, whether their objective is to sexualize counseling sessions, or to proselytize during counseling sessions. The counselor isn't there to stroke their egos, they are there to help students deal with difficult challenges.
What recourse would I have if a biased judge did take office? I could vote him out the next time he was elected or vote out the people that appointed him.
I am well aware of codes of ethics but that is the job of the ACA and not the university. The ACA doesnt list "interpersonal skills" as a requirement. The university does. That is what I have issue with. Not the ACA and their ethics. Let the ACA deal with her and not the university. If the ACA doesnt like what the university puts out then the university should screen students for their views ahead of time before putting them into a program that damages the university. It is unfair to let a student take all these classes and spend thousands of dollars to disqualify them for something that could have easily been found out long before she got accepted to the program.
She can transfer the credits for those classes to another school. The credits aren't disqualified. The thousands of dollars aren't wasted. She can pursue her degree and career elsewhere. Why is she choosing to try to force this school to confer a degree upon her, rather than get a degree from another school? What else is at play here?
No one is revoking a degree here. And no one is saying that someone who was this girl's opposite should be treated differently. The school isn't saying that Ms Keeton should refrain from implementing her anti-homosexual values in a counseling setting, but that Ms Noteek is free to implement her anti-heterosexual values in a counseling setting. The school is saying that both Ms Keeton and Ms Noteek need to leave their values outside, and be value-neutral when counseling students. No anti-homosexual values, no anti-heterosexual values. And this a professional standard that is upheld by most counseling professional organizations, with the notable exception of some religiously-oriented counseling organizations. And that is why, since there are schools and organizations that do have a religious orientation, that Ms Keeton's rights are not being abridged. She can apply to those schools and organizations, get a degree, get a license. This school does not want to be associated via Ms Keeton or anyone else with religiously-oriented counseling methods. And legally they have an interest in maintaining the kind of reputation they desire. Ms Keeton's interests, given that she has alternatives available to her, do not outweigh the school's interests, because the school doesn't just represent itself, it represents the thousands of alumni and current and future students who have an interest in the reputation of the school.
Are the things she did they dont like listed clearly in their requirements instead of a vague "interpersonal" skills statement that can interpreted in any number of ways? Where does it say her views are disqualifying clearly in any of their requirements? That is the point I am making. Why make a standard that isnt clearly defined? Standards like this can change. This is a public university so their standards need to be more objective and less subjective because they are not a private institution that can make up whatever laws they want. They receive lots of taxpayer funding and the have a duty to make things fair and clear to all the people that subsidize the program through their taxes.
The school, because it conferred a degree on her, would be associated with any damage she inflicts on a kid. They, and actually all of us, have an interest in preventing such damage. Again, counselors are authority figures, and have to take special care to maintain objectivity, because doing otherwise is really a form of predation. We don't want predators working as school counselors, whether their objective is to sexualize counseling sessions, or to proselytize during counseling sessions. The counselor isn't there to stroke their egos, they are there to help students deal with difficult challenges.
Then the university should screen the students to find those they think would make the best name for the university and make a list of things that applies to the program with a clear list of what is acceptable. If religion was a problem this would have been easily discovered before hand unless she is a recent convert. If the requirement was clearly listed, she could have been asked to leave the program if she did convert and change viewpoints that dont correspond to the universities code. If safety is at stake then a university would be as irresponsible to let her into the program then to graduate her since they could have stopped her before she got to the degree. These issues need to be sorted out early instead of last minute. This what happens when standards are dropped and then raised arbitrarily.
What recourse would I have if a biased judge did take office? I could vote him out the next time he was elected or vote out the people that appointed him.
I am well aware of codes of ethics but that is the job of the ACA and not the university. The ACA doesnt list "interpersonal skills" as a requirement. The university does. That is what I have issue with. Not the ACA and their ethics. Let the ACA deal with her and not the university. If the ACA doesnt like what the university puts out then the university should screen students for their views ahead of time before putting them into a program that damages the university. It is unfair to let a student take all these classes and spend thousands of dollars to disqualify them for something that could have easily been found out long before she got accepted to the program.
RE: the judge. You could build a case to have the judge impeached. Since so much of the judge's rulings are public record, if a judge is biased, either explicitly in his or her rulings and statements, or implicitly, by tracking how a judge rules and what his biases are, you can take the case to the press, you can complain to the state's attorney general, you can file a complaint with the the judicial body in the state that oversees judiciary ethics. There are multiple avenues to deal with a biased judge.
What recourse would I have if a biased judge did take office? I could vote him out the next time he was elected or vote out the people that appointed him.
I am well aware of codes of ethics but that is the job of the ACA and not the university. The ACA doesnt list "interpersonal skills" as a requirement. The university does. That is what I have issue with. Not the ACA and their ethics. Let the ACA deal with her and not the university. If the ACA doesnt like what the university puts out then the university should screen students for their views ahead of time before putting them into a program that damages the university. It is unfair to let a student take all these classes and spend thousands of dollars to disqualify them for something that could have easily been found out long before she got accepted to the program.
The university has its responsibilities. The student can choose to leave and go to another that agrees with her rhetoric. I can't blame the university for disciplinary actions against a student who intends to use a certificate issued by the university for professional advancement.
BTW, you would wait for the judge to take office before voicing your opposition? Why would you do that? But, more importantly, does blatant bias itself warrant disqualification or not?
Then let the university should screen before the students to find those they think would make the best name for the university even applies to the program with a clear list of what is acceptable. If religion was a problem this would have been easily discovered before hand unless she is a recent convert. If the requirement was clearly listed, she could have been asked to leave the program if she did convert and change viewpoints that dont correspond to the universities code. If safety is at stake then a university would be as irresponsible to let her into the program then to graduate her since they could have stopped her before she got to the degree. These issues need to be sorted out early instead of last minute. This what happens when standards are dropped and then raised arbitrarily.
Screen, how? As someone who was interested in pursuing a counseling career at one time, I can tell you that even as an undergraduate, there is a great deal of stress placed on the ability to maintain objectivity when counseling clients. It's not just for the safety of the clients, but it's about the counselors, too. And it's a theme that runs through most programs. That Ms Keeton didn't get that indicates a lot about Ms Keeton's ability to be balanced and perceptive.
The university has its responsibilities. The student can choose to leave and go to another that agrees with her rhetoric. I can't blame the university for disciplinary actions against a student who intends to use a certificate issued by the university for professional advancement.
BTW, you would wait for the judge to take office before voicing your opposition? Why would you do that? But, more importantly, does blatant bias itself warrant disqualification or not?
Why wasnt this standard clearly listed in their requirements for graduation? It seems the current requirement is very subjective and not objective. Right now, she feels the pain but in the future others will. If the university really feared her viewpoints would effect the schools reputation they wouldnt have taken her money and let her into the program. If they thought that even one student would damage this program's reputation that seriously or put a child at serious risk based on this kind of viewpont they would screen for it during the application process. The university wanted her money for graduate school and later told her she wasnt qualified for their program based on a vague interpretation of a rule with no clearly defined boundaries for breaking that rule.
What could I do if a judge was voted in or appointed that I didnt like? I can shout all I want but it wont likely take the judge out of office. Unless I had big money or big support behind me, it would be pointless. The judge being disqualified is not a matter for me. That is up to the bar association and the professional groups his belongs to decide.
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.
