Calling out Hypocrites
- Thread starter bornaneer
- Start date
Sorry about that. Didn't get it to post right...
Let's say the teacher who made the George Floyd comment is Teacher A.
Right next door to her is Teacher B. Third grade class. She states that Derick Chauvin is typical of all white police officers and he deserves to die just like George Floyd did.
Upstairs, in a 6th grade classroom where they are studying WWII, a student asks, "Why didn't someone just kill Hitler"? The teacher (C) replies, "They tried. An assassination attempt was made on his life by one of his underlings. Unfortunately, it failed. I wished it didn't because a lot of lives might have been saved".
You're the superintendent. Which teacher(s) should be fired? Each teacher made comments about wishing someone dead.
If you fire only one, lets say A, then you've gotten yourself into a potential big-time mess. What about A and B? Better? Not really...
If one tries to apply a blanket policy regarding subject matter - wishing death upon someone - then they all have to go, right? Otherwise, you're being selective in your firing practices.
I know this then gets into a slippery slope, but then when does a teacher ever feel safe volunteering ANY opinion about any subject if someone can be offended by it? Doesn't that destroy a teacher's abilities to teach?
Let's say the teacher who made the George Floyd comment is Teacher A.
Right next door to her is Teacher B. Third grade class. She states that Derick Chauvin is typical of all white police officers and he deserves to die just like George Floyd did.
Upstairs, in a 6th grade classroom where they are studying WWII, a student asks, "Why didn't someone just kill Hitler"? The teacher (C) replies, "They tried. An assassination attempt was made on his life by one of his underlings. Unfortunately, it failed. I wished it didn't because a lot of lives might have been saved".
You're the superintendent. Which teacher(s) should be fired? Each teacher made comments about wishing someone dead.
If you fire only one, lets say A, then you've gotten yourself into a potential big-time mess. What about A and B? Better? Not really...
If one tries to apply a blanket policy regarding subject matter - wishing death upon someone - then they all have to go, right? Otherwise, you're being selective in your firing practices.
I know this then gets into a slippery slope, but then when does a teacher ever feel safe volunteering ANY opinion about any subject if someone can be offended by it? Doesn't that destroy a teacher's abilities to teach?
As for the police officer, (and the teacher, too) I would have to ask, "Has he already been warned/reprimanded about his postings? Also, have his views influenced the way he acts while performing his duties? That's important to know, too.
If so, then I agree. Send him packing.
But for one off-handed comment with no prior problems (which is what most are calling for)?
No way...
If so, then I agree. Send him packing.
But for one off-handed comment with no prior problems (which is what most are calling for)?
No way...
I'm sure he'll have to bunker down for a week or few. Wouldn't want him going out on the campaign trail looking and feeling weak. Especially now when all eyes are on the Republicans (and Trump) and there will be an easy comparison to make between the two.Get better soon you have a DHS Secretary and Secret Service Director to fire.
President Biden tests positive for COVID, taking him off campaign trail during critical time
President Joe Biden’s COVID diagnosis takes him off the campaign trail and punctuates a brutal stretch that began with a disastrous June 27 debate.www.usatoday.com
President Joe Biden has COVID-19 for a third time
He could fire those two tonight while eating chicken noodle soup. I let everyone else speculate why he won't.
That's an easy one. A and B are the same. Politically charged event focused on current themes of racism in America which our politicians and MSM use daily to divide us and too many suckers bite. Both racist comments are fire-able offenses in a public school without question.
C has nothing to do with racism, division or anything that is going to cause friction to the point it could interfere with the government's primary job, in this case, of educating. In short, A and B are making blatant racist comments which are inciteful. C is doing nothing of the kind.
A: Fire
B: Private reprimand only because she's white (just kidding), Fire
C: Stays
If a teacher doesn't understand the difference between A/B and C, they shouldn't be teaching in our public schools. That is also an easy one.
Doesn’t matter if it affects his work. He is a liability to the department. Has to go.
That’s like saying the person who knowingly gave his keys to a drunk did nothing wrong if the drunk made it home without incident.
Jupiter man arrested for threatening to kill presidential nominee and VP pick
A man is accused of threatening to kill the Republican presidential nominee and his vice president pick.
www.google.com
Jupiter man arrested for threatening to kill presidential nominee and VP pick
@sammyk
Go look out your window and tells us what you see. 0400 would be a good time to check.
www.google.com
Go look out your window and tells us what you see. 0400 would be a good time to check.
Florida man charged over alleged threats to kill Donald Trump and JD Vance
The arrest comes less than a week after the assassination attempt on Trump, which has led to scrutiny of the Secret Service and concerns about escalating political violence.
www.google.com
