Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Political Issues (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=57)
-   -   Teachers Face Investigations for Anti-Obama Messages (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1453247)

DOC44 11-15-2012 03:22

Teachers Face Investigations for Anti-Obama Messages
 
Teachers Face Investigations for Anti-Obama Messages

Quote:

Two public school teachers are facing investigations for posting messages that some perceived as critical of President Obama on social networking sites.
Attack military leaders and muzzle teachers. Since when does a muzzle support freedom of speach?:dunno:


http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes...-messages.html

Doc44

JFrame 11-15-2012 06:28

If the statements were made in the course of some school-funded program, I could understand the concern. But from what I glean from that article, the statements were made on their personal accounts outside of school activities.

If they are now suffering repercussions for voicing opinions as private citizens, they should consider suing the school systems for infringement of their civil rights.

Now, the second teacher mentioned seemed to go a little overboard in the zeal of his expression -- but I still defend his right to say it.


.

Brucev 11-15-2012 06:44

Given the overwhelming support for right to work here at gt... why is this a problem? Why shouldn't these teachers be held responsible for what they say or don't say as private citizens? If rtw is so wonderful, why should the employer not be able to use that leverage to silence expression of opinion by a employee? After all, the 1st Amendment does not protect the private speech of employees... does it?

PocketProtector 11-15-2012 06:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev (Post 19633468)
Given the overwhelming support for right to work here at gt... why is this a problem? Why shouldn't these teachers be held responsible for what they say or don't say as private citizens? If rtw is so wonderful, why should the employer not be able to use that leverage to silence expression of opinion by a employee? After all, the 1st Amendment does not protect the private speech of employees... does it?

Because they are NOT muzzling those who teach them OMao love chants

Sam Spade 11-15-2012 06:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev (Post 19633468)
After all, the 1st Amendment does not protect the private speech of employees... does it?

Okay...we'll put you down as "unclear on the concept".

jeanderson 11-15-2012 06:53

Quote:

“Congrats to those dependent on government, homosexuals, potheads, JAY-Z fans, non-Christians, non-taxpayers, illegals, communists, Muslims, planned murder clinics, enemies of America, Satan You WON,” the unidentified teacher wrote.
My regard for teachers is much higher now. Just when I thought our education system was getting worse.

Skyhook 11-15-2012 07:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeanderson (Post 19633485)
My regard for teachers is much higher now. Just when I thought our education system was getting worse.


There have always been amazingly gifted, dedicated, and successful teachers... it's just that they are so rare, and obviously not well liked by the establishment.

This muzzling is going to be a problem... right up until the wannabe dictator appoints two or more NEW/LEFT supremes... then all will be solved. :puking:

Skyhook 11-15-2012 07:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketProtector (Post 19633471)
Because they are NOT muzzling those who teach them OMao love chants


Brucev is not one to quietly accept the idea of 'fair & balanced' so I doubt he/she will get any hint whatsoever about the injustice of choking off one group while encouraging another.

:shakehead: Nope.

"Yes we can, can, can..." blather, blather Propaganda.. remember?:steamed:

JFrame 11-15-2012 07:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Spade (Post 19633478)
Okay...we'll put you down as "unclear on the concept".


:rofl::rofl::rofl:


.

Fred Hansen 11-15-2012 07:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev (Post 19633468)
Given the overwhelming support for right to work here at gt... why is this a problem? Why shouldn't these teachers be held responsible for what they say or don't say as private citizens? If rtw is so wonderful, why should the employer not be able to use that leverage to silence expression of opinion by a employee? After all, the 1st Amendment does not protect the private speech of employees... does it?

Free speech isn't protected against the vagaries of whatever rules a private employer may wish to adopt/enforce. The private employer is the final arbiter of what can/cannot be said by their employee; at least when it pertains to the workplace.

Unfortunately for you, these are public indoctrination camp employees, and thus are not private employees. The 1st Amendment to COTUS specifically restricts federal law from stopping/thwarting/denying free speech (See: Prior Restraint) and both South Carolina's and Ohio's constitutions are quite plain in their preservation of the right to free speech vis-ŕ-vis governmental suppression/oppression. And Ohio in particular even has a clause in its constitution that specifically prohibits any one of its citizens from being compelled to religiously worship a deity.

I'd say that the Secular Humanist Marxist Messiah can be said to fit that criteria. Wouldn't you?

Having said that, I have no sympathy for anyone stupid enough to work for said public indoctrination camps. Immutable universal law has demonstrated time-and-again that stupid hurts. Too bad, so sad.

mj9mm 11-15-2012 07:41

my kids brought home stories of the liberal teachers(almost all teachers) trashing Bush every chance they got.:whistling:

certifiedfunds 11-15-2012 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev (Post 19633468)
Given the overwhelming support for right to work here at gt... why is this a problem? Why shouldn't these teachers be held responsible for what they say or don't say as private citizens? If rtw is so wonderful, why should the employer not be able to use that leverage to silence expression of opinion by a employee? After all, the 1st Amendment does not protect the private speech of employees... does it?

These teachers are public employees paid with taxpayer money, komrade. The speech occurred outside of their workplace.

cowboywannabe 11-15-2012 08:14

when you work for the Gesatpo you can not talk unfavorably about them anywhere......

Skyhook 11-15-2012 08:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by certifiedfunds (Post 19633666)
These teachers are public employees paid with taxpayer money, komrade. The speech occurred outside of their workplace.

It's not a big stretch to see next year's teachers all queuing up to place their hands on 'Dreams of My Father' as they swear undying allegiance to The Omnipotent, The Magnificent, The All-Knowing, All Merciful OBAMA.

:faint:

Sam Spade 11-15-2012 08:17

Fred, cert...

Any *discussion* must start with a certain level of understood concepts on both sides. In a discussion about the application of the First Amendment, part of the prerequisites is that the other guy knows what the First is.

When a poster, let's call him "B", wants to interject himself and doesn't have a freaking clue about the scope of things, you can't discuss. At best, you offer the charity of a lecture. This may earn you karma points somewhere, but the recipient will soon become dependent on your charity, won't do a damn thing to educate himself and will soon be interjecting in discussions about fusion and biochemistry as though his thoughts had value.

Just bless his heart and put him at the kids' table while the grownups talk.

DOC44 11-15-2012 08:19

Quote:

THE CARDINAL PRINCIPLES OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

The Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education were issued in 1918 by the Commission on the Reorganization of Secondary Education. The focus of this commission was to form objectives for secondary education. It was decided that segmented subjects and their subject matter were a way to achieve the decided goals but that they were not the one and only way. The commission was also instrumental in starting a standard of forming goals before reforming schools. Changes were needed because of increased enrollment in secondary schools. A new focus that would take into account individual differences, goals, attitudes, and abilities was adopted. The concept of democracy was decided on as the guide of education in America. Work on the Cardinal Principles was started in 1915 and finished in 1918. The seven Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education are as follows:

1. Health

A secondary school should encourage good health habits, give health instruction, and provide physical activities. Good health should be taken into account when schools and communities are planning activities for youth. The general public should be educated on the importance of good health. Teachers should be examples for good health and schools should furnish good equipment and safe buildings.

2. Command Of Fundamental Processes

Fundamental Processes are writing, reading, oral and written expression, and math. It was decided that these basics should be applied to newer material instead of using the older ways of doing things.

3. Worthy Home Membership

This principle "calls for the development of those qualities that make the individual a worthy member of a family, both contributing to and deriving benefit from that membership" (Raubinger, Rowe, Piper, West, 108). This principle should be taught through literature, music, social studies, and art. Co-ed schools should show good relationships between males and females. When trying to instill this principle in children the future as well as the present should be taken into account.

4. Vocation

The objective of this principle is that the student gets to know him or herself and a variety of careers so that the student can choose the most suitable career. The student should then develop an understanding of the relationship between the vocation and the community in which one lives and works. Those who are successful in a vocation should be the ones to teach the students in either the school or workplace.

5. Civic Education

The goal of civic education is to develop an awareness and concern for one's own community. A student should gain knowledge of social organizations and a commitment to civic morality. Diversity and cooperation should be paramount. Democratic organization of the school and classroom as well as group problem solving are the methods that this principle should be taught through.

6. Worthy Use Of Leisure

The idea behind this principle is that education should give the student the skills to enrich his/her body, mind, spirit and personality in his/her leisure. The school should also provide appropriate recreation. This principle should be taught in all subjects but primarily in music, art, literature, drama, social issues, and science.

7. Ethical Character

This principle involves instilling in the student the notion of personal responsibility and initiative. Appropriate teaching methods and school organization are the primary examples that should be used.

Naming these seven objectives does not "imply that the process of education can be divided into separated fields" (Raubinger, Rowe, Piper, West, 106). Therefore all of the seven principles are interrelated. In order for these principles to be successful the student must have a willingness to follow these and an ethical character that will allow this learning to take place.
http://www.nd.edu/~rbarger/www7/cardprin.html


Doc44

Brucev 11-15-2012 09:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketProtector (Post 19633471)
Because they are NOT muzzling those who teach them OMao love chants

So is the answer "equal time," or is the answer for no teacher/administrator to be allowed to use the classroom as a venue for the expression of their own political beliefs?

Brucev 11-15-2012 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Spade (Post 19633478)
Okay...we'll put you down as "unclear on the concept".

No. Not unclear. No support for any teacher/administrator being able to use the classroom as a venue for the expression of their own political beliefs.

JFrame 11-15-2012 09:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev (Post 19633907)
No. Not unclear. No support for any teacher/administrator being able to use the classroom as a venue for the expression of their own political beliefs.


As far as I can tell, it wasn't in the classroom -- it was on personal Facebook accounts.


.

Bren 11-15-2012 09:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev (Post 19633468)
Given the overwhelming support for right to work here at gt... why is this a problem? Why shouldn't these teachers be held responsible for what they say or don't say as private citizens? If rtw is so wonderful, why should the employer not be able to use that leverage to silence expression of opinion by a employee? After all, the 1st Amendment does not protect the private speech of employees... does it?

Yes, the first amendment does protect the free speech rights of employees, when those rights are being restricted by the government.

Your inability to grasp obvious things is sometimes surprising.

Are you left-wing or right-wing today?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brucev (Post 19633907)
No. Not unclear. No support for any teacher/administrator being able to use the classroom as a venue for the expression of their own political beliefs.

Which has nothing to do with this story.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:02.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.