• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

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

justabubba said:
yes, that female veteran
someone who killed enemy combatants
is she exempt from teaching because she has killed others in the past
or is killing another acceptable whereas porn acting must be found intolerable
Click to expand...

You're really going to compare Service Members to a glorified hooker?
 
Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

MaggieD said:
If you fill out your job application the way you say you do, I am amazed you would even be hired. Employers are interested in your time line. Leaving out five years' experience because it's not relevant would get you thrown out of my office. That's the reference you don't want me to check...you know, the one where you stole out of other employees' lockers and were fired. Or, perhaps you laid around like a sloth for five years while your wife was supporting the household. Or, perhaps you were in jail. If that omission works for you? Fine. It doesn't work for 99% of employers in the world . . . unless you're driving a cab.
Click to expand...

I've filled out my applications like that and I still get jobs. And I am fully up front about gaps in that history when asked. And yes, there were 6 years in which I did not work and my wife did. I seem to recall you stating once that a stay at home dad was not a bad thing? Now its "sloth"? Hmm...And I also fill out that little section on every application that asks if you've been committed of any felony crime with a "Yes". I am more likely not to get the job because of that "Yes" than of my work history. And I've asked each and every employer that turned me down why they didn't hire me so I know this for a fact.

And most employers I know don't care about time line near as much as they care about experiance in the field you are applying for.
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

Dragonfly said:
When students (children/boys/adolescent males) know you've done what most would consider pretty hard core porn, it BECOMES relevant to your ability to do your job.

How can people not see this?

Go watch a little of her work. It's free to see some of it.

Then tell me that wouldn't be a problem in a middle school.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't after the first few kids got disciplined properly. Why are people insisting on punishing the victim of bullying and not the bullies themselves?
 
Re: Judgesporn past, must not return to cla

Henrin said:
I don't see how that makes any sense.
Click to expand...

Think about it. You're a smart guy and I'm sure it will come to you. (and I'm being serious and in no way facitious or anything else)
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

Dragonfly said:
When students (children/boys/adolescent males) know you've done what most would consider pretty hard core porn, it BECOMES relevant to your ability to do your job.

How can people not see this?

Go watch a little of her work. It's free to see some of it.

Then tell me that wouldn't be a problem in a middle school.
Click to expand...

Just saw it. It's not THAT hardcore. But regardless, middle school boys are going to watch porn. Watching porn of this lady in particular isn't going to ruin their education.

Even if I did think it did violate my morality, I don't go around trying to fire people for legal, non-violent things they did in the past.

MaggieD said:
If you fill out your job application the way you say you do, I am amazed you would even be hired. Employers are interested in your time line. Leaving out five years' experience because it's not relevant would get you thrown out of my office. That's the reference you don't want me to check...you know, the one where you stole out of other employees' lockers and were fired. Or, perhaps you laid around like a sloth for five years while your wife was supporting the household. Or, perhaps you were in jail. If that omission works for you? Fine. It doesn't work for 99% of employers in the world . . . unless you're driving a cab.
Click to expand...

Man, anyone who stays home for a few years is a sloth? You must think stay at home mothers are horrible pieces of ****, huh?

Surtr said:
You're really going to compare Service Members to a glorified hooker?
Click to expand...

The premise is identical. You're firing someone for not fitting your moral code.
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

MaggieD said:
There's probably a reason they don't ask porn stars to Career Day. But, hey, maybe in your family, a porn star is an acceptable role model. ??

Edit: If you took that as a slight insult? You made my point.
Click to expand...

No percieved insult here. Porn stars make more money than I do and I have no problem with it.

In anycase...I'm sure that they wouldn't ask a person that was in prison to career day either. Yet there are many individuals that take on literal jobs as role models.
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

RabidAlpaca said:
Fact is, we live in a secular republic. The law protects everyone equally (or is at least designed to), and the state doesn't represent a religion.
Click to expand...

You do live in a secular republic, but its social constructs govern living reality. If a teacher is constantly held to a higher social standard by a given society, it would make sense that the individual's cultural mores would have to be more or less strictly observed, unless granted explicit permission or protections, because it erodes the necessary authoritarian measures of teaching.

It's fascinating that you're still stuck on this portion of it.
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

RabidAlpaca said:
I see no problem with a former porn star teaching a class of 12 year olds.

Let's sum up the arguments that have been presented:

- It was disrupting class
*So if anything disrupts class, even at no fault of the teacher, the teacher should be fired? What if it was the teacher's twin? How would this change anything?
- It doesn't fit the parents' moral code
*So if anything disrupts the parents' morale code, even at no fault of the teacher, the teacher should be fired? What if the teacher was muslim and the parents hated that? How would this change anything?
Click to expand...
1. It is doing far more than "disrupting class". It renders the teacher completely incapable of achieving the level of respect from her students necessary to effectively teach them. By using your tactics, I guess I could now claim that you think pornography is a respectable career choice that our children should aspire to?

2. It doesn't fit the parents moral code because responsible parents recognize that exposing children to pornography is not a good thing and having their children taught by a porn star does just that. It exposes their kids to pornography in a way that would not have otherwise happened.

The muslim straw man wouldn't apply here because you are trying to equate the desire to shield children from pornography with bigotry. By this line of reasoning can I now determine that you think muslims and porn stars are one and the same?



RabidAlpaca said:
Yep, they're usually the ones attacking people for not fitting their moral code or jesus standards, even if they have nothing to do with the law. Fact is, we live in a secular republic. The law protects everyone equally (or is at least designed to), and the state doesn't represent a religion.
Click to expand...
I think it is worth pointing out that, in this case, it is you who is attacking them... unprovoked, I might add.
 
Re: Judgesporn past, must not return to cla

Kal'Stang said:
Think about it. You're a smart guy and I'm sure it will come to you. (and I'm being serious and in no way facitious or anything else)
Click to expand...

A second-class citizen is a person who is systematically discriminated against within a state or other political jurisdiction, despite their nominal status as a citizen or legal resident there. While not necessarily slaves, outlaws or criminals, second-class citizens have limited legal rights, civil rights and economic opportunities, and are often subject to mistreatment or neglect at the hands of their putative superiors.
Click to expand...

I don't get how that applies. What am I missing?
 
Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

tessaesque said:
I'm so torn on this. I fully believe people should be allowed to redeem themselves. There are civilized countries in which former porn stars served or currently serve as members of government. Sex is a natural biological process. Etc., etc., etc. And unless her videos included dangerous, illegal, or disturbing sexual acts, the only difference between her and her former colleagues is her profiting from her sexual activities.

That said, middle school students are profoundly immature in a broad sense. Her ability to educate them without distraction is severely damaged, and the quality of the education they received would likely decline. While I question the parental involvement of children who accessed pornography at the ages of 12-14, I realize the open nature of today's internet makes it significantly harder to block such exposure.

So in short, I don't know. If I were her boss and I found it impossible to overcome the situation I think I'd be inclined to do whatever was in my power to help her move on and into employment she could maintain long term. It doesn't seem to me that this woman deserves to be punished, or to suffer, simply because she participated legally in an industry that is heavily monitored and regulated in California.
Click to expand...

I should clarify: by "redeem herself" I meant in light of the charges that she was dishonest in her application, not because she was in porn.
 
Re: Judgesporn past, must not return to cla

I don't think she should have been fired, but understand her effectiveness as a teacher has been diminished.
I suspect she made several mistakes along the way, using her real name in the film would be first.
If she did not use her real name, she should have pulled a lance Armstrong, Deny, Deny, Deny.
She could have said her doppelganger is a tramp, and quite a bit more flexible.:mrgreen:
Moving forward, she can change her appearance, her name, and tweak her history.
If the matter comes up again, Deny, Deny. Deny..
This strategy may be less effective now that she has sued her employer.
 
Re: Judgesporn past, must not return to cla

longview said:
I don't think she should have been fired, but understand her effectiveness as a teacher has been diminished.
I suspect she made several mistakes along the way, using her real name in the film would be first.
If she did not use her real name, she should have pulled a lance Armstrong, Deny, Deny, Deny.
She could have said her doppelganger is a tramp, and quite a bit more flexible.:mrgreen:
Moving forward, she can change her appearance, her name, and tweak her history.
If the matter comes up again, Deny, Deny. Deny..
This strategy may be less effective now that she has sued her employer.
Click to expand...

Or - she could be completely forthcoming on her future job applications and let the chips fall where they may.

A highly progressive private school might hire her.

Who knows. Colleges and adult ed programs might hire her.

If you get a large swastika tattooed in the middle of your forehead - don't complain when you have trouble finding a "good" job.

Part of life is knowing that life is not always fair. Sometimes, the things you've done in the past can come back to haunt you.

Being a modern-era porn star AND wanting to teach adolescent boys in a classroom isn't going to be an easy road to travel.
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

RabidAlpaca said:
*sigh* We've tumbled down the rabbit hole so far that we've argued the definition of sexual harassment for pages now. You still haven't given any reason how a teacher who used to be a porn star would ruin someone's education.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, once you rent yourself out you can never be sexually harassed ... right?
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

Jack Fabulous said:
1. It is doing far more than "disrupting class". It renders the teacher completely incapable of achieving the level of respect from her students necessary to effectively teach them. By using your tactics, I guess I could now claim that you think pornography is a respectable career choice that our children should aspire to?
Click to expand...
If a teacher worked at McDonalds for a few months prior to becoming a teacher, should we fire her for not being a good role model? I think being a science teacher was a very respectable job, which she was competantly performing until she was fired.

Jack Fabulous said:
2. It doesn't fit the parents moral code because responsible parents recognize that exposing children to pornography is not a good thing and having their children taught by a porn star does just that. It exposes their kids to pornography in a way that would not have otherwise happened.
Click to expand...
She didn't expose the kids to pornography. They decided to look it up themselves. Parent failure.

Jack Fabulous said:
The muslim straw man wouldn't apply here because you are trying to equate the desire to shield children from pornography with bigotry. By this line of reasoning can I now determine that you think muslims and porn stars are one and the same?
Click to expand...
Yes, I think everybody is the same. That's the different between you and me, I don't file people into subclass citizen categories.


Jack Fabulous said:
I think it is worth pointing out that, in this case, it is you who is attacking them... unprovoked, I might add.
Click to expand...
When they try to manipulate our society to discriminate against those that don't practice their religion, I have no choice.

tessaesque said:
I should clarify: by "redeem herself" I meant in light of the charges that she was dishonest in her application, not because she was in porn.
Click to expand...

Omitting a job isn't being dishonest. I once mowed lawns all summer, I don't put that on my resumee.
 
Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

Surtr said:
You're really going to compare Service Members to a glorified hooker?
Click to expand...

i am comparing someone who killed others with someone who ****ed others on video in an attempt to assess whose actions should be found more problematic for a prospective teacher position
 
't shake porn past, must not return to cla

Kal'Stang said:
It wouldn't after the first few kids got disciplined properly. Why are people insisting on punishing the victim of bullying and not the bullies themselves?
Click to expand...

Lol, yes, when have children ever pushed an issue that negatively affected their piers?

Jesus christ, are some of you people hilarious
 
Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

justabubba said:
i am comparing someone who killed others with someone who ****ed others on video in an attempt to assess whose actions should be found more problematic for a prospective teacher position
Click to expand...

It's a terrible comparison, and you know it.
 
Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

Surtr said:
It's a terrible comparison, and you know it.
Click to expand...

it's a very apt comparison
someone who ****ed on video is not acceptable to teach
someone who killed people is acceptable

just strikes me as a weird perspective on values
 
Re: Juake porn past, must not return to cla

Kal'Stang said:
Then your parents should have punished you for being disrespectful to your betters.
Click to expand...

Are you hopelessly confused sweat pea? My post dealt with the general attitudes of kids at that age, not my behavior
 
Rke porn past, must not return to cla

TacticalEvilDan said:
Oh come on, once you rent yourself out you can never be sexually harassed ... right?
Click to expand...

Lol, the attempt to vilify the opposition are particularly hilarious here. Just not long ago I was accused of blaming rape victims~!!!

Would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad and baseless
 
Re:'t shake porn past, must not return to cla

RabidAlpaca said:
If a teacher worked at McDonalds for a few months prior to becoming a teacher, should we fire her for not being a good role model? I think being a science teacher was a very respectable job, which she was competantly performing until she was fired[\quote]

I'm not sure being employed to have some grease ball slapping his dick on your face can be described as respectable. Legal? Yes. Respectable? No
Click to expand...
 
Re: Ren't shake porn past, must not return to cla

Fiddytree said:
You do live in a secular republic, but its social constructs govern living reality. If a teacher is constantly held to a higher social standard by a given society, it would make sense that the individual's cultural mores would have to be more or less strictly observed, unless granted explicit permission or protections, because it erodes the necessary authoritarian measures of teaching.

It's fascinating that you're still stuck on this portion of it.
Click to expand...

Firing someone for arbitrary morality is a pandora's box. In certain liberal areas of the bay area, your views would make you just as much a pariah as the women in question. Its easy to make such a claim when its your morality that is being pushed on others, but inevitably you will find yourself on the chopping block. Decisions regarding employment should be based on job performance, not subjective opinions.
 
Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

Dr. Chuckles said:
I'm not sure being employed to have some grease ball slapping his dick on your face can be described as respectable. Legal? Yes. Respectable? No
Click to expand...

An advertising exec at McDonalds trys to manipulate people in buying unhealthy food. A hollywood accountant screws people out of their pay by cooking the books to make a profitable film appear unprofitable. A High frequency trader skims money out of the market will providing no tangible value. A telemarketer annoys people by calling at the dinner hour.

Its pretty sad that people consider occupations that cause demonstrable harm to be more "respectable" than some people having harmless sex on camera.
 
Re: 't shake porn past, must not return to cla

rathi said:
An advertising exec at McDonalds trys to manipulate people in buying unhealthy food. A hollywood accountant screws people out of their pay by cooking the books to make a profitable film appear unprofitable. A High frequency trader skims money out of the market will providing no tangible value. A telemarketer annoys people by calling at the dinner hour.

Its pretty sad that people consider occupations that cause demonstrable harm to be more "respectable" than some people having harmless sex on camera.
Click to expand...

1) I'm not sure you can really fault me for comparisons and judgements that I never made (nowhere do I claim an exec cooking the books is respectable)

2) you cite incidents of blatant fraud and mix it with people performing their jobs, which don't involve someone slapping a dick on their face.

3) As far as I'm aware, past charges of fraud would likely have an impact on anyone's employment prospects.

4) what I define as "respectable" really has no relation to my argument, which concerned what would be the obvious response of MS children
 
Last edited:
Re: Judges say Calif. middle school teacher can't shake porn past, must not return to

justabubba said:
it's a very apt comparison
someone who ****ed on video is not acceptable to teach
someone who killed people is acceptable

just strikes me as a weird perspective on values
Click to expand...

It's a classic strawman. You clearly picked a veteran because of the emotional value of veteran status, but just to indulge your little game, yes, I would pick a veteran over a pornstar. Killing people is hardly the only thing uniformed service members do. They have to endure tests to ensure physical and mental strength, they have to learn how to lead, they have to learn how to adapt and overcome many obstacles, they gain invaluable experience in many aspects of life, and as a service member ranks up, they have to learn how to teach and pass down their knowledge to others in a way that they can understand and actually learn.

What skills does a pornstar bring to the table? What does this glorified prostitute do that puts her above a "killer" as you call us? Lay on her back? Suck dick? Take cocks in multiple orifices at a time? Take a money shot to the face without flinching? Whoopty doo. Her past career only demonstrates moral turpitude, and parents don't want that around their children.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom