Page 35 of 69 FirstFirst ... 25333435363745 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 682

Thread: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to cla

  1. #341
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    It doesn't have to be the case. The argument everyone here has used was that it was harming the impressionable young minds' education, which doesn't make any sense at all. Fact is they just didn't want her there and fired her.
    Well it IS the case here. Here's a good primer on the subject that will let you in on the reality on the ground right now. And here's the bit about California:

    CALIFORNIA: Permanent teachers may be dismissed for immoral or unprofessional conduct, dishonesty, incompetency, evident unfitness for service, a physical or mental condition unfitting for a teacher to instruct or associate with children, persistent violation of school laws or regulations, conviction of a FELONY or crime involving moral turpitude, or alcoholism or drug abuse rendering teacher unfit for service. Teacher's certificate may be revoked or suspended on the same grounds as those for dismissal or suspension.

  2. #342
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    It doesn't have to be the case. The argument everyone here has used was that it was harming the impressionable young minds' education, which doesn't make any sense at all. Fact is they just didn't want her there and fired her.
    Hey now, I pretty much admitted that.

  3. #343
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,554

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Well it IS the case here. Here's a good primer on the subject that will let you in on the reality on the ground right now. And here's the bit about California:
    She wasn't dishonest about anything, so I don't know why you bolded that. I've seen the exact same type of catch-all regulations in the army. "Conduct non-becoming of an NCO", which basically means they can punish you for absolutely anything they feel like, even if it's not against regulations, just because they want to.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  4. #344
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    She wasn't dishonest about anything, so I don't know why you bolded that. I've seen the exact same type of catch-all regulations in the army. "Conduct non-becoming of an NCO", which basically means they can punish you for absolutely anything they feel like, even if it's not against regulations, just because they want to.
    Regardless of your take on them, morals clauses do exist and they are applied in this field (read the link). And yes, she was dishonest, that much has been reported and linked to.

  5. #345
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Well it IS the case here. Here's a good primer on the subject that will let you in on the reality on the ground right now. And here's the bit about California:
    Sorry, but that is supposed to be used if the teacher is CURRENTLY a porn storn, not for former things in her past. Tell me, if you found out an 80 year old teacher was a prostitute when she was 18 would you dismiss the teacher then? NO.

  6. #346
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Bunch of prudes I swear.

  7. #347
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,554

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Regardless of your take on them, morals clauses do exist and they are applied in this field (read the link). And yes, she was dishonest, that much has been reported and linked to.
    Not listing it in her work experience isn't dishonest. I don't write that I mowed lawns one summer on my job resumee.

    Here's a list from your link:

    Immoral conduct or indecent behavior
    INCOMPETENCY
    Violations of ethical standards
    Unprofessional conduct
    Misrepresentation or FRAUD
    Willful neglect of duty

    None of which she did as a teacher, at all.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  8. #348
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    Not listing it in her work experience isn't dishonest. I don't write that I mowed lawns one summer on my job resumee.

    Here's a list from your link:

    Immoral conduct or indecent behavior
    INCOMPETENCY
    Violations of ethical standards
    Unprofessional conduct
    Misrepresentation or FRAUD
    Willful neglect of duty

    None of which she did as a teacher, at all.
    You of course leave out dishonesty, and yes leaving out MATERIAL facts from your application or resume IS considered dishonesty. There are lies of commission and omission, they both qualify as dishonesty. It's a far stretch to presume she omitted the info because she forgot about it. She omitted the info because she knew it would disqualify her from the job. That's dishonesty.

    Not to mention, as reported and linked, she was dishonest when asked about it.
    Last edited by clownboy; 01-17-13 at 05:53 PM.

  9. #349
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Sorry, but that is supposed to be used if the teacher is CURRENTLY a porn storn, not for former things in her past. Tell me, if you found out an 80 year old teacher was a prostitute when she was 18 would you dismiss the teacher then? NO.
    I personally wouldn't, but then I'm not in a position to write, ratify or enforce those contracts. And there is no mention at all that this is solely based on current behavior.

  10. #350
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,554

    Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    You of course leave out dishonesty, and yes leaving out MATERIAL facts from your application or resume IS considered dishonesty. There are lies of commission and omission, they both qualify as dishonesty. It's a far stretch to presume she omitted the info because she forgot about it. She omitted the info because she knew it would disqualify her from the job. That's dishonesty.

    Not to mention, as reported and linked, she was dishonest when asked about it.
    She wasn't asked about it until it came about, at which point she was going to be fired anyway.

    It is not illegal, nor dishonest to not list a job on a resumee. Please, tell me why by not listing my summer of mowing lawns I am a dishonest piece of **** who should be fired.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

Page 35 of 69 FirstFirst ... 25333435363745 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •