• 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!

Hooters - should this teacher be suspended for this?

Was it correct to suspend this teacher for taking the students to "Hooters" restauran


  • Total voters
    81
I would first have to understand your reasoning behind such a requirement (parental consent). What is it about Hooters that minors should have to obtain consent?

Portraying women specifically as sex objects over the value of the food aspect...
 
so now you want to equate a topless facility with hooters
your weird, off-the-mark analogies, have no credibility
hooters is a public restaurant, open to all ages ... not so the topless facility you would want us to - unreasonably - compare it to
come back when you have something to offer which reasonable people would find convincing

It is a logical analogy... sorry that you don't understand it. *shrugs*

Not understanding my valid point in no way diminishes its value. Also, was bolding "anal" supposed to add to your credibility as capable of mature, intelligent discussion? :roll:

1. Show how my analogy was illogical.
2. Stop with the pathetic Logical Fallacies (i.e. Appeal to Popularity).
3. Explain why Hooters is incapable of being reclassified to a restaurant that should not allow minors. Logically. Good luck. :roll:
 
It is a logical analogy... sorry that you don't understand it. *shrugs*

Not understanding my valid point in no way diminishes its value. Also, was bolding "anal" supposed to add to your credibility as capable of mature, intelligent discussion? :roll:

1. Show how my analogy was illogical.
my pleasure:
Why it is not what?

Woman also get abortions when it is not needed since it is legal, does that make it right or positive?
not only illogical, but also quite weird ... the adjective i previously used
i will invite you to share the "logic" found within that "analogy

2. Stop with the pathetic Logical Fallacies (i.e. Appeal to Popularity).
translation: this is the defense used when accepted conventions are presented to buttress argumnents which undermine your own
i refuse to place reason and reality on the shelf simply because you do not like that they utterly destroy your weak assertions

3. Explain why Hooters is incapable of being reclassified to a restaurant that should not allow minors. Logically. Good luck. :roll:
easiest one of all. hooters is presently a public restaurant which is not subject to an age limit for its customers. because government is prepared to protect the public's interests and has not chosen to do so by imposing an age restriction, it is obvious to anyone who cares to see that hooters is simply a restaurant, no different from other restaurants other than its unique cachet. which uniqueness is needed to survive in a competitive environment, to distinguish it from its competitors and to offer something compelling to the public to elicit their patronage
 
my pleasure:

not only illogical, but also quite weird ... the adjective i previously used
i will invite you to share the "logic" found within that "analogy

Being weird to you does not make it illogical. Fail.

translation: this is the defense used when accepted conventions are presented to buttress argumnents which undermine your own
i refuse to place reason and reality on the shelf simply because you do not like that they utterly destroy your weak assertions

Incorrect. It is a logical fallacy because it is a logical fallacy. Does this mean that you are incorrect? Nope... but you have to prove why you are correct instead of falling into a fallacy that simply states that you are right because a majority agrees with you. You are still displaying that you don't understand logic, thus indicating that debating logic with you is illogical, and consequenly pointless...

Abortion is legal.
Hooters is legal for minors.
Abortion being legal does not mean that it is best for society or individuals.
Hooters being legal for minors does not mean that it is best for society or individuals.

easiest one of all. hooters is presently a public restaurant which is not subject to an age limit for its customers. because government is prepared to protect the public's interests and has not chosen to do so by imposing an age restriction, it is obvious to anyone who cares to see that hooters is simply a restaurant, no different from other restaurants other than its unique cachet. which uniqueness is needed to survive in a competitive environment, to distinguish it from its competitors and to offer something compelling to the public to elicit their patronage

It's uniqueness makes it different. If it is different, then it can fall into a different classification, such as a topless bar or as a take out only. You either get this or you dont.
 
what you don't get is what you want - hooters off limits to minors - is not the reality
deal with it. that reality devastates your lame, unsustainable argument

had the teacher taken the students to a place of business where minors were not legally able to be patrons, your position would have considerable traction. unfortunately for you and your wrong headed assertions, the students dined at a restaurant lawfully licensed to serve all ages. you, like that teacher's school administration, got this one wrong
 
well hooters isn't a bad or inappropriate place but come on there wasn't another restaurant in the area you could have gone to that would have been safer choice? Thats on the line and if she was smart she would have kept her self far from the line.
 
what you don't get is what you want - hooters off limits to minors - is not the reality
deal with it. that reality devastates your lame, unsustainable argument

Of course I get that this is the reality at this moment...
You are talking about basic math and I am trying to get you into particle physics.
Reality was, at one time, Prohibition was in place... people didn't like it, violence occured and the law was repealed.
That could happen here, probably won't, but that is were you fall into Logical fallacy as the entire construct of your argument. :roll:

What you call lame is apparently a concept that you are simply unable to understand. Deal with that. ;)

had the teacher taken the students to a place of business where minors were not legally able to be patrons, your position would have considerable traction. unfortunately for you and your wrong headed assertions, the students dined at a restaurant lawfully licensed to serve all ages. you, like that teacher's school administration, got this one wrong

You are one of those, "reality is what people tell me it is and nothing else" kinda people... huh? :lol:

Attack the person and not the argument. Pathetic. Weak. Predictable. Well, if that is your style then... see ya.
 
Of course I get that this is the reality at this moment...
You are talking about basic math and I am trying to get you into particle physics.
Reality was, at one time, Prohibition was in place... people didn't like it, violence occured and the law was repealed.
That could happen here, probably won't, but that is were you fall into Logical fallacy as the entire construct of your argument. :roll:

What you call lame is apparently a concept that you are simply unable to understand. Deal with that. ;)



You are one of those, "reality is what people tell me it is and nothing else" kinda people... huh? :lol:

Attack the person and not the argument. Pathetic. Weak. Predictable. Well, if that is your style then... see ya.

your unconditional surrender is hereby accepted
 
It's improper for any teacher to take any minor students to any emporium that dispenses alcoholic beverages without prior parental consent.
 
your unconditional surrender is hereby accepted

That is one of the most idiotic things that you could have done... what a waste of time you are. :rofl:2wave:
 
Last edited:
You mean they're not sex objects?

What are they good for, then?

They are good for a good many things... though women simply "are". Their status is ovjective and only as to how men view them.
 
A high school teacher took her male choir to "Hooters" restaurant after performing Christmas carols. As a result she was suspended.

What do you think? Should this teacher have been suspended for this?

Here is the article: Paradise Valley High School teacher who took students to Hooters in Phoenix is put on leave


Personally, I think it is ridiculous. "Hooters" is not a strip club. It is a restaurant, not reallly different from Chili's or TGI Fridays and I doubt the teacher would have been suspended for that.

The reality is....the parents of ONE boy complained.
Which raises a bigger question....should the parents of one child dictate what is "appropriate" for everyone else?

Being Phoenix I'm sure the class had never seen a micro mini, hot babe in a bikini, silicon breasticles pouring out of a t-shirt, soft porn on ABC, NBC, or CBS... or adults drinking alcohol.

I wouldn't have done it, but it's not exactly suspension material. Perhaps a talking to... Like... hey, see any Honey's, get any phone numbers? I mean Jeezuz Willard... don't use the class to pick up chicks...OK? Get a dog. Chicks like dogs.

.
 
Being Phoenix I'm sure the class had never seen a micro mini, hot babe in a bikini, silicon breasticles pouring out of a t-shirt, soft porn on ABC, NBC, or CBS... or adults drinking alcohol.

I wouldn't have done it, but it's not exactly suspension material. Perhaps a talking to... Like... hey, see any Honey's, get any phone numbers? I mean Jeezuz Willard... don't use the class to pick up chicks...OK? Get a dog. Chicks like dogs.

.

Agreed, not suspension material...
 
I assume the teacher wanted some tasty hot-wings.
When did people get so soft?
 
Back
Top Bottom