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.
Wow, talk about a reading comprehension issue on display for all to see. Are the words to complicated for you to grasp, did you see something between the lines that really is not there again, are you simply posting to see your own words on display? Explain what seems to be the issue on your end, could be that you are in Colorado?
Hmmm, maybe those you dislike so much do not have the same level of Hypocrisy so many on the right seem to display here. Either you support Free Speech for ALL, even those you disagree with and hate, or stop claiming you believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights because you don't. Freedom is harsh, ain't it, Tilt
Let's not pretend the left doesn't think Free Speech also means dealing with the consequences of that speech. For example, when a business owner says they support marriage between a woman and a man only and they are boycotted, etc, the left's answer to this is that Free Speech does not free you from the consequences of your speech. If conservatives agree with that and think this teacher should face consequences as well, does that mean they suddenly are not in favor of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Or does that mean the left's previous position is not in favor of the aforementioned? Perhaps you could explain that conundrum to me. Are they both wrong?
My personal feelings on it are that neither should 'face consequences' unless their employment contract requires them to moderate their speech in their private life. Then it becomes a matter of contractual law and nothing more. I think people have taken their outrage a bit too far when they hear something they do not like.
Let's not pretend the left doesn't think Free Speech also means dealing with the consequences of that speech. For example, when a business owner says they support marriage between a woman and a man only and they are boycotted, etc, the left's answer to this is that Free Speech does not free you from the consequences of your speech. If conservatives agree with that and think this teacher should face consequences as well, does that mean they suddenly are not in favor of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Or does that mean the left's previous position is not in favor of the aforementioned? Perhaps you could explain that conundrum to me. Are they both wrong?
My personal feelings on it are that neither should 'face consequences' unless their employment contract requires them to moderate their speech in their private life. Then it becomes a matter of contractual law and nothing more. I think people have taken their outrage a bit too far when they hear something they do not like.
I believe we should all have the freedom of speech, I never said I agreed or disagreed with what the teacher said, I only supported her right to say as I do even when people say things I disagree with. Should they be fired, not up to me to say, if it were up to me I would have to read everything they posted and then sit down and talk to them about the issue, then decide what I should or should not do, so what happens is up to their employer. Same holds true with those that say or do things that people protest or boycott a business over, they have the right to say what they will and others have the right to voice theirs in return. Maybe if you read back over those topics where I have posted I have rarely stated I was either for or against those boycotting a business. But as I defend one person or groups right to voice their opinion I also support the right of others to voice theirs in return or if a business to act in what they believe is in their own best interests. We cannot have a one way street, that way lies Anarchy and War.
Freedom can be painful at times, but one must embrace Freedom for All or scrap it and replace it with something else that requires less effort. I prefer expending the effort, let's hope the majority of Citizens continue to agree.
I believe we should all have the freedom of speech, I never said I agreed or disagreed with what the teacher said, I only supported her right to say as I do even when people say things I disagree with. Should they be fired, not up to me to say, if it were up to me I would have to read everything they posted and then sit down and talk to them about the issue, then decide what I should or should not do, so what happens is up to their employer. Same holds true with those that say or do things that people protest or boycott a business over, they have the right to say what they will and others have the right to voice theirs in return. Maybe if you read back over those topics where I have posted I have rarely stated I was either for or against those boycotting a business. But as I defend one person or groups right to voice their opinion I also support the right of others to voice theirs in return or if a business to act in what they believe is in their own best interests. We cannot have a one way street, that way lies Anarchy and War.
Freedom can be painful at times, but one must embrace Freedom for All or scrap it and replace it with something else that requires less effort. I prefer expending the effort, let's hope the majority of Citizens continue to agree.
Thanks for the clarification. I actually agree. I genuinely believe in the freedom of speech, even when it's something I hate to hear. I get more and more distressed as I see people in our country, both on the left and the right, trying to destroy someone simply for expressing their opinion. Disagree. Yes. Be out to destroy that person. No. I think we should protect unpopular speech with the same vigor that we protect popular speech. It's pretty much one of the things I consider distinctly American and I genuinely hope that our country does not lose that aspect of itself.
I see it the other way. She should indeed be taken aside and asked what the hell her problem is and that it will not be tolerated and that Burger King is hiring if she doesn't want to be a teacher but let's have a little common sense all around.
This is an example of the "pay attention to me", narcissistic attitude of many. It's crazy though the cries for "firing, expelling, arresting" people for things we once were able to easily take care of without all the fanfare.
There once was a time, not that long ago, comments like these may have been made in jest and limited to a teacher's lounge. Everyone would laugh and the conversation would move onto something else.
This " look at me" teacher displayed incredibly poor judgment.
From all reports, she is a very popular and skilled teacher who enjoys a great deal of support from her students. Most agree that the incident was blown way, way out of proportion to any risk to students. Instead of demanding punishment, maybe we ought to be demanding a little more tolerance of human foibles among the human race. What a bunch of judgmental a-holes we have become!
There once was a time, not that long ago, comments like these may have been made in jest and limited to a teacher's lounge. Everyone would laugh and the conversation would move onto something else.
This " look at me" teacher displayed incredibly poor judgment.
Yes she did. No doubt. I would never argue otherwise. Calling the police on some kid who wrote about killing his neighbor's dinosaur was an incredibly poor judgement call also.
We should be able to handle poor judgement calls like this without a rush to judgement "fire them, arrest them". Surely there are times students should be arrested and teachers fired. Neither of these cases were them though.
Yes she did. No doubt. I would never argue otherwise. Calling the police on some kid who wrote about killing his neighbor's dinosaur was an incredibly poor judgement call also.
We should be able to handle poor judgement calls like this without a rush to judgement "fire them, arrest them". Surely there are times students should be arrested and teachers fired. Neither of these cases were them though.
Well look at that, we actually agree, now don't go changing your words just because I said that.
My personal feelings on it are that neither should 'face consequences' unless their employment contract requires them to moderate their speech in their private life. Then it becomes a matter of contractual law and nothing more. I think people have taken their outrage a bit too far when they hear something they do not like.
I would agree if this were someone working at Arby's or Macy's or American Airlines. The employer in this case is the public, which makes it a bit different.
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.
