Rosa Parks, MLK, and Ghandi all did somethin that this woman did not: They accepted the consequences for their civil disobedience. They knew going in that they were likely to be arrested for what they did, and they accepted that. Nowadays protesters seem to think that they shoudl get to both break the law AND get off scott free. That’s not how it works. You raise awareness by breaking the law, fine, but you also take the consequences as part of the larger campaign of outrage to raise awareness and get laws changed.
The person he (and I) responded to said his issue was that the person did not have the good sense to be repentant for their crime and this, in that poster’s view, was why he does not want them teaching his kids.
We were noting a lot of people break crimes who are not repentant of them and this, in itself, does not make them unworthy of being a teacher.
Well yes, if you are caught, and if the state chooses to punish you. I think the punishment should also fit the crime as well. I don’t see this woman saying “I shouldn’t have been fined or imprisoned for being a hooker.” She’s not breaking a law now. The punishment is out of place. It would be the equivalent of Rosa Parks being punished not for sitting on the bus, but instead for giving a lecture 3 years later about how she sat at the front of the bus, and didn’t think it should be illegal for black folks to do that.
And, to be honest, I would have been in favor of MLK and Rosa Parks getting off scott free too.
I’d say more she believes in supporting people who are committing the same crime, rather than suggesting people go out and commit it.
I said “indulging” not “indulging in”
Of course, I am not comparing the campaign to legalize prostitution with the Civil Rights movement, or comparing her admission of past turnign of tricks with Rosa Parks’ refusal to sit at the back of the bus. But your suggestign that remorse and regret is necessary is a recipe for subservience to the state that I don’t want my children learning.
And yet that is precisely what you have done. I do not see where she staged a demonstration by openly picking up a John in the Courthouse Square. I’d probably feel differently about a planned act of public defiance.
This is a woman who liked to get laid and decided to make some money in the process. Please do not sully the name of Rosa Parks by comparing her act with this one. Rosa Parks knew she was risking her life when she did that. She knew that the men in white hoods could appear at her door any moment. She was a hero, not just some party girl looking for a few extra bucks.
No I really haven’t. I am not making this teacher out to be a hero of any kind. The comment you made was:
I (and others) simply pointed out that breaking the law without remorse or regret doesn’t make you not fit to be a teacher, then gave examples of people who broke the law and did not show remorse or regret but who were, IMHO, fit to teach. If they did not regret breaking the law, and are fit to teach, then your implication that someone who breaks the law without remorse is unfit to teach is fundamentally flawed.
That’s no comparison between this woman and the Civil Rights movement. If you think she is unfit to teach, it then cannot be because she broke the law and showed no remorse, unless you think others who broke the law without remorse are also unfit to teach. Therefore you need to find another reason. It could be she broke a law regarding prostitution and showed no remorse. But your original position falls if you think MLK and Rosa Parks were fit to teach.
Not surprised you chose to miss the point of villa’s post.
As to what I quoted you would feel differently then if Rosa Parks, instead of staging her defiance, was just some chick who one day had enough and decided not to sit in the back of the bus all on her own?
Fucking apocalypse I agree with Bricker. Again. For mostly the same reasons. Geez, the woman was honest in her private matters and they fired her.
I might want to add that I understand why they changed her job duties. People get all in an uproar about sex and kids and prostitution. I can understand the prejudices of not wanting her around their little flowers. But I suspect that if we were to have omniscient knowledge about the teachers kids are around that this former hooker would probably fall in the middle of shocking. What they are really complaining about is her indiscretion.
I don’t think they “changed her job duties.” My impression is that “reassignment to administrative duties” means the rubber room, where they make you sit and do nothing all day until you quit.
*“Of course, I am not comparing the campaign to legalize prostitution with the Civil Rights movement, or comparing her admission of past turnign of tricks with Rosa Parks’ refusal to sit at the back of the bus.”
*
I was explicit about the point being made in post #103:
“The person [villa] (and I) responded to said his issue was that the person did not have the good sense to be repentant for their crime and this, in that poster’s view, was why he does not want them teaching his kids.”
Villa was again explicit in post #106:
“That’s no comparison between this woman and the Civil Rights movement. If you think she is unfit to teach, it then cannot be because she broke the law and showed no remorse, unless you think others who broke the law without remorse are also unfit to teach. Therefore you need to find another reason.”
Yet you continue to create a strawman despite what people are saying.
Is Petro not accepting the consequences? I’m confused.
I’m honestly not even sure what that means. If the consequences were being arrested in the cases of Rosa Parks and MLK, or fired in the case of Petro, what choice did any of them have other than accepting it? What if Rosa Parks and MLK didn’t accept it? When MLK refused bail in Albany until given concessions by the city, wasn’t that fighting instead of accepting? Weren’t the Montgomery bus boycotts fighting rather than accepting the consequences?
I have a friend in Utah who is a middle school math teacher. He had dropped out of school when he was 16 and spent the next 7 years partying and singing in a “hair band” (imagine a local version of Poison)
When he met his current wife, he care enough to clean himslf up, get his GED and enroll in college. He graduated with a teaching degree and a 3.98 GPA. (It helped that he was a brainiack)
Now he is a great teacher beloved by almost all his students. Last I saw him he even had long hair and a beard, but 100% drug free for 20 years. Bad role model? Who else could teach kids the dangers of drugs and the fact that even if they get in deep, they can turn it around and get thier lives together.