U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-23-2011, 12:24 AM
 
1,337 posts, read 1,437,001 times
Reputation: 656

Advertisements

Missouri teacher sues state over

Missouri teacher sues state over ‘Facebook law,’ says she can’t contact her own child online

"A Missouri teacher has sued the state over a new law that prevents teachers from contacting their students over the Internet, arguing that it will make it illegal for her to chat with her own child over Facebook.

The law, which has been nicknamed the Facebook law, prohibits teachers from having exclusive communications with students over non-work Internet sites. Students are defined as anyone under 18 who attend or used to attend the school where the teacher works. In her suit, Christina Thomas alleges that the Ladue, Mo., school district where she works has told teachers that they cannot have "exclusive communications" with their own children on Facebook if their children meet the law's definition of former or current student.

Thomas says the law is violating her rights under the 1st and 14th amendments.

Charol Shakeshaft, a professor of educational leadership at Virginia Commonwealth University, told the Huffington Post that the bill is a good way to tackle sexual abuse in schools."


[snip] Click link for rest of article.

-----------------------------------------

Yet another policy predicated on utilitarian rationalizations, which as is so often the case with intellectually vacuous utilitarian rationalized laws or policies, takes the form of trying to justify preemptively enjoining a broad range of peaceful and legitimate conduct simply to deter a very limited class of nefarious conduct. Such policies punish all the innocent people for no more coherent reason than the mere possibility that people could do something wrong.

So instead of having a policy which simply punishes parties who are actually guilty of the nefarious conduct which they seek to enjoin (i.e. preventing contact for inappropriate relationships which cross some social boundary - particularly criminal boundary), they simply want to punish all parties, including the innocent ones whos conduct falls outside the intended purpose of instituting the policy.

Last edited by FreedomThroughAnarchism; 08-23-2011 at 01:13 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-23-2011, 05:52 AM
 
674 posts, read 668,146 times
Reputation: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedomThroughAnarchism View Post

Yet another policy predicated on utilitarian rationalizations, which as is so often the case with intellectually vacuous utilitarian rationalized laws or policies, takes the form of trying to justify preemptively enjoining a broad range of peaceful and legitimate conduct simply to deter a very limited class of nefarious conduct. Such policies punish all the innocent people for no more coherent reason than the mere possibility that people could do something wrong.

So instead of having a policy which simply punishes parties who are actually guilty of the nefarious conduct which they seek to enjoin (i.e. preventing contact for inappropriate relationships which cross some social boundary - particularly criminal boundary), they simply want to punish all parties, including the innocent ones whos conduct falls outside the intended purpose of instituting the policy.
This law is insane. The internet doesn't turn people into pedophiles. They allow their teachers to be in physical contact with students in the class but prevent electronic contact. Oh logic where art thou?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2011, 09:03 AM
 
Location: Chandler, AZ
5,801 posts, read 6,210,477 times
Reputation: 3141
That law is indeed idiotic; what the heck are they putting in the water in Missouri anyway?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2011, 09:15 AM
 
29,409 posts, read 21,104,709 times
Reputation: 5449
Yeah it's ok to send your kids to class with these folks all day long but no facebook!! What next is all I dare to ask.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2011, 10:12 AM
 
14,917 posts, read 12,561,700 times
Reputation: 4828
What a stupid law. She'll easily win this one in court.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2011, 10:53 AM
 
1,759 posts, read 1,940,331 times
Reputation: 949
It's a ridiculous law
but
...why can't she talk to her own kid on the phone or via text instead?
or, you know, the obvious,
IN THEIR HOUSE?

Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top