2 of 2
2
Catholic Church once again shows its spinelessness
Posted: 15 June 2013 11:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
mid atlantic - 15 June 2013 11:09 PM
Lois - 15 June 2013 05:55 AM

So can you.

I’m not a teacher.

 


You obviously have no understanding of right and wrong.  That is the definition of amorality.

True enough, I am a moral nihilist

Then don’t get involved in discussions about morality.  You have proven that have nothing to say about morality, so stop talking about it.

You can be replaced in any position you are in if someone decides to stalk you. You don’t have to be a teacher to be threatened and for that threat to affect other people.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 02:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  623
Joined  2013-06-01

I feel sorry for the teacher, and do not think it is fair.

I do not blame the church. If the ex-husband even came on to the school grounds and verbally scared the children the parents would sue and the school close down. I do not think the school had a choice. If this had happened in other states I think the school would have done something. But this was in California. The one to blame is the Trial Lawyers Association who runs the state.

The thinking that the school should hire guards or pay the teacher to stay a home, well that is government thinking. Private schools do not have the luxury of spending an endless amount of taxpayers’ money. 

Why did she not get a restraining order or sue her ex-husband?

I was told by the largest school district in the United States (Orange County) one time that the district spends half its time in lawsuits by the parents and the other half in lawsuits by the teachers.

Twenty years ago, the number of teacher in the San Diego school district that was paid to stay at home was over 2,500 teachers. It cost the district less to pay the teachers to stay at home than to try and fire them.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 03:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2679
Joined  2011-04-24
Lois - 15 June 2013 11:52 PM

  You have proven that have nothing to say about morality, so stop talking about it.

I can see where you are coming from with your feelings about morality, but…...no, I’m not going to stop talking about it.

You can be replaced in any position you are in if someone decides to stalk you. You don’t have to be a teacher to be threatened and for that threat to affect other people.

Nah. Relax.

 Signature 

Raise your glass if you’re wrong…. in all the right ways.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 03:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6044
Joined  2009-02-26

This is such a bizarre situation with so many dynamics involved, I have no clue how to assess the a priori principle in this dilemma.
Is California a “right to work” state?  If so they can fire and replace anyone for any reason, I am not even sure that a (private/religious) school must give notice and if the teacher would qualify for unemployment insurance. After all she was not fired for “cause”, but for potential external threat.

Could a black teacher be fired, if a white supremacist threatened to kill all black teachers?  If I understand this correctly, this female teacher is divorced from this man and has no “arms length’ connection to him anymore. This guy is just a terrorist and should be treated as such. Send this deranged mind to Gitmo, or some hellhole where he is separated from society altogether.
I used Gitmo as it is the place that houses fundies who think it is perfectly ok to kill your wife, if she sues for divorce you without the husband’s permission.

Perhaps this is simplistic, but he should be classified as a potential threat to “society”, not just the teacher and her charges. Is this woman safer by firing her? Is the school safer for firing her?
IMO, there is a clear direction toward an insidious theocratic take-over, where the church becomes “untouchable” and individuals can call for a fatwah on anyone.  You have a mad man after you? Be gone, you must have caused this situation in the first place and the man has HIS rights to his “property” too as clearly stated in scripture.

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 04:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  169
Joined  2011-11-06

General statement and opinion: All schools, at least public schools (I realize the one being discussed is private), should have one unlocked entrance with a guard and a metal detector. Obviously, times have changed and schools are now targets. Nearly every other government building (i.e. courts, federal gov’t buildings) have security at check in and a detector you must walk through. I graduated in 2004 and the schools I attended had probably 15 different side and back entrances that were unlocked and completely open for anyone to walk in, most likely, unquestioned. I think side and back entrances should be badge protected, so teachers and staff can obviously be the only ones to open them. Also, there needs to be security at the main entrance.

Now, related to the specific case, domestic violence is a very very personal target of anger. I highly doubt this man was a threat to children. I think context is important in this case; and there was most likely other ways to work with the teacher, such as putting her on leave (even unpaid) until she got the situation handled with a restraining order and took other steps to diffuse the situation. Again, schools need security as aforementioned—there needs to be a message to the public that “you’re not getting in here unless you have official business and, even then, you’re going to go through security!”

[ Edited: 16 June 2013 04:59 AM by FinallyDecided ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 06:14 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
Mike Yohe - 16 June 2013 02:45 AM

I feel sorry for the teacher, and do not think it is fair.

I do not blame the church. If the ex-husband even came on to the school grounds and verbally scared the children the parents would sue and the school close down. I do not think the school had a choice. If this had happened in other states I think the school would have done something. But this was in California. The one to blame is the Trial Lawyers Association who runs the state.

The thinking that the school should hire guards or pay the teacher to stay a home, well that is government thinking. Private schools do not have the luxury of spending an endless amount of taxpayers’ money. 

Why did she not get a restraining order or sue her ex-husband?


I was told by the largest school district in the United States (Orange County) one time that the district spends half its time in lawsuits by the parents and the other half in lawsuits by the teachers.

Twenty years ago, the number of teacher in the San Diego school district that was paid to stay at home was over 2,500 teachers. It cost the district less to pay the teachers to stay at home than to try and fire them.

She did have a restraining order. She did everything a person in her position should have done, including telling the school what was happening.  I don’t think he verbally scared the children.  News reports say he was just seen in the parking lot.  The teacher would have been better off if she hadn’t told the school. Then the school wouldn’t have overreacted. 

How many teachers in San Diego are paid to stay home has nothing to do with this case. It is a travesty.

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 06:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
mid atlantic - 16 June 2013 03:37 AM
Lois - 15 June 2013 11:52 PM

  You have proven that have nothing to say about morality, so stop talking about it.

I can see where you are coming from with your feelings about morality, but…...no, I’m not going to stop talking about it.


As a moral nihilist what can younpossibly have to say about morality?


You can be replaced in any position you are in if someone decides to stalk you. You don’t have to be a teacher to be threatened and for that threat to affect other people.

Nah. Relax.

I’m perfectly relaxed, especially about nihilism. 

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 11:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  623
Joined  2013-06-01

Lois,
I was asked over twenty years ago by the head of the Orange County school district to help them with their labor management. The guy wanted to work on education, but he spent all his time and resources in the court house.

He came to me because of some changes in labor laws I got done, and other laws that I was working on in the state capital.

I looked at taking it on as a project. But there was no way I was going to change the system. The Teacher’s Union and the Trial Lawyers Ass/ is two of the controllers of the laws in California.

Like I said, had this taken place in any other state, then fairness and doing what was right would have most likely taken place. But I would have been surprise to see it go differently in California. What some companies can do is offer the employee a job at the corporate headquarters or other location where there are no children.  This must not have been available to the school.

Lois, you are attacking the Catholic Church, my understanding is that the Church runs around 400,000 schools in the world, I could be wrong with that figure, but I think it is what I read. A lot of them are one room schools, but it is one of its biggest expenses for the church. Yet, with all that experience I bet the main Church had no control over this school because of the risk of operating in California. 

I would be interested to see what the American Catholic Nuns are saying about this. They have been standing up and taking a position and it is not always the popes or the main churches position. They have that insider knowledge.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 12:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04

Taking morality out of the equation (although one might not expect good Catholics to do that, as they seemingly did in this case), we can still ask “are we better off living in a society in which employers immediately cast off employees who (through no fault of their own) have become a liability to the company mission?” Those who want businesses to thrive, unfettered, and recognize how that is of value to us, might say “yes, absolutely.”  Those who care about the employee who is effected, and/or who recognize the value of empathy toward, and fair treatment of, individuals in our society, might say “no, absolutely not.”

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 01:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  623
Joined  2013-06-01

TimB, I agree with you, take it one level higher.
It is not about the business thriving. It is about the business operating next week.
The main church doesn’t care if the school is in or out of business. Most of these schools receive no protection from the main church. The church is concerned about three things, liability, liability and liability. The lawyers would love the main church to get involved.
Do you risk the jobs of all the other teachers for a crusade that you can not possibly win?
I didn’t think I could ever be a boss, because I did not have the ability to fire someone. But it turns out that firing a person is simple, you have to think of what’s best for all the employees and their families and the careers all these employees and what they are working for.

No body ever seems to blame the Trial Lawyers Ass. But it is known that no law is passed in California unless they back it, been that way for many years now. And what they back always creates ligation or work for their members. And that’s what you have here. It is a total mess in California.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 July 2013 04:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  50
Joined  2008-01-14
mid atlantic - 14 June 2013 07:09 AM

This is just a business being a business, the catholic doctrine has nothing to do with it. It is definitely spineless behavior towards Charlesworth, though.

Maybe in this case, an armed teacher would not be a bad idea.

Actually, no, it displays a courage that is unparalleled in this world. In fact, find yourself publicly spreading the news your shacked up, take communion while in that state, or obstinate homosexual, etc, or if you will, any activity that is a mortal sin and purposely not resolved, then they would eventually find themselves discreetly in the sidelines of the Church.

And that is good, I want top standards for my Church, not yet another protestant clone that bends to every whim man and his secular immorality can devise.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2