no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: May 22, 2013 10:46:37 AM
Just did a search to see if she had found employment and couldn't find any updates.
"Porn isn't ending marriages -- its the lack of love, trust, communication and honesty that's doing them in."
You're right again norm, porn is just a symptom of the real problem. Marriage was taking a hit long before internet porn.
"What a fantasy world the above poster must reside in! The USA has never been in greater shape than it is today -- and plenty of room for improvement clearly remains."
The US has "never been in greater shape"? The US debt was downgraded for the first time in history in 2011. The national debt is higher than ever with each new baby born with a $50,000+ share of it. 30 fold increase in tuition cost at my Alma Mater, student loan defaults at new records, bankruptcies from out of control health care costs, new premium hikes after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care, Chronic unemployment over 7.5% in spite of a near zero interest rate business environment, and responsible folks with savings losing to inflation with yields lower than during the great depression. We could go on and we won't even touch on social issues.
Who's living in a fantasy world? But, you're certainly right in your last point - there's plenty of room for improvement.
[Edited by: no1doc at 5/22/2013 10:50:17 AM EST]
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:12,808
Points:2,614,235
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Mar 27, 2013 2:56:15 AM
"I'm just glad Jesus told me that none a the conservatives postin' here ever watch that p-rn stuff"
Praise Yahweh! Thems bin saved from ruination and shirley must now bee on the road too righteousness. Perspiring words, yes Sir.
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Mar 25, 2013 1:47:17 PM
"Is porn really the cause of 50% of all divorces?"
Not defending Porn in the least, but to blame half of marriage failures on porn is simply a cop-out; its an easy way to blame something (or someone) else for your own marital problems and/or failures.
Porn isn't ending marriages -- its the lack of love, trust, communication and honesty that's doing them in.
Too many people would rather take the easy way out and blame it all on porn rather than take the road less traveled and do the hard work of making marriage work.
SMH
|
KatmanDo
Champion Author
Detroit
Posts:12,808
Points:2,614,235
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Mar 25, 2013 1:36:30 PM
"One bad apple spoils the whole country and them parents is just more bad apples doin' more spoilin' of what was once a great county."
What a fantasy world the above poster must reside in! The USA has never been in greater shape than it is today -- and plenty of room for improvement clearly remains. Folks in the past weren't nearly as aware of problems going on as today's residents are. But that doesn't mean the problems didn't exist -- it just meant the folks were considerably more ignorant of them than we are today.
|
no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: Mar 25, 2013 10:18:50 AM
"Deep Throat" porn actor Harry Reems dies after turbulent life He was able to outlive his porn fame and said this in an interview: "I live in a small town where everybody knows everybody and nobody thinks of me as a porn actor." RIP Harry.
|
PiqueOil
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:6,199
Points:799,205
Joined:Aug 2005
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2013 9:58:12 AM
I don't need me no more evidence that libs done destroyed the nation. This one teacher doin' what she done: that seals the deal for your's truly.
One bad apple spoils the whole country and them parents is just more bad apples doin' more spoilin' of what was once a great county.
Them libs don't mind nothin' if it's got to do with s-x and p-rn.
I'm just glad Jesus told me that none a the conservatives postin' here ever watch that p-rn stuff, tho its' a little disconcertin' to have a topic so vile and ungodly spoke about here.
But the grater point is that no more evidence is needed of the destruction of the moral fiber of the nation. Now its just a matter of packin' the guns and ammo 'n' Glenn Beck gold and gettin' out.
|
no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2013 9:47:32 AM
Is porn really the cause of 50% of all divorces?
Published on December 12, 2011 by Kevin B. Skinner, Ph.D. in Inside Porn Addiction "In a 2004 testimony before the United States Senate, Dr. Jill Manning shared some interesting data regarding pornography and relationships. In her research she found that 56 percent of divorce cases involved one party having an obsessive interest in pornographic websites.1 Another source, the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, polled 350 divorce attorneys in 2003 where two thirds of them reported that the Internet played a significant role in the divorces, with excessive interest in online porn contributing to more than half such cases."
From the link: "I have a hard time imagining that the 500,000 divorces in the United States each year are because of porn. Nevertheless, if even 25% of the 500,000 divorce cases are due to porn, that is 125,000 marriages each and every year that are a direct result of pornography.
That's too many broken homes. That's too much hurt and pain.
Is it okay to suggest that pornography might not be good for our society? Sure a majority of people who view porn aren't obsessed by it, but what about those whose lives are out of control because of it? There is a tremendous cost to society whether we acknowledge it or not."
The path to healthy intimacy.
by Kevin B. Skinner, Ph.D.
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2013 12:21:19 PM
"If this document is accurate, should it make a difference?"
What she did 5-6 years ago is irrelevant to what she was doing while working for the Oxnard District.
I think the only reason they brought up that old information is to try to bolster their hypocrisy and double standards in firing someone for what they did in the past before they began working for you.
|
no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2013 11:39:09 AM
Was pron star a substitute teacher during the time she was making films?
"The Oxnard district thinks Halas was teaching while appearing in pornography on the side. On Thursday, Assistant Superintendent Sean Goldman presented a document that shows Halas was a substitute teacher for four school districts in February and March of 2006, when she was still making the videos.
Schwab questioned the accuracy of the document."
......................
If this document is accurate, should it make a difference?
[Edited by: no1doc at 2/23/2013 11:41:23 AM EST]
|
101Speedster
Champion Author
Ventura
Posts:30,418
Points:2,716,670
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 10:41:01 AM
I hope she appeals this decision to a higher court.
|
Panama19
Champion Author
Louisville
Posts:25,320
Points:2,544,285
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 10:33:45 AM
TAFKATP, "Does anyone need more evidence that Liberalism has destroyed the moral fiber of our once great Nation?"
No.
|
Panama19
Champion Author
Louisville
Posts:25,320
Points:2,544,285
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 10:31:25 AM
BlackGumTree, thoughtful post, well stated.
Thank you.
|
no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2013 10:20:58 AM
If you plan a career being in the public eye, starring in porn for internet consumption is bad juju. Especially if you plan to teach a class of testosterone surging boys.
What was she thinking? Maybe she could teach at a school for the blind. Maybe kindergarten? Her predicament is a little like the lady who leaves the rest room with toilet paper trailing behind her. Somebody always notices. But in her case, the trailing paper is stuck to her, unless the whole internet is scrubbed. You may be right about Pandora's box. Let's start taxing internet porn. Might do wonders for for government revenue. Naah, can't tax "free speech" - right?
"Life is tough, it is tougher if you are stupid."
John Wayne
Bad choices can have consequences.
|
AC-302
Champion Author
Los Angeles
Posts:26,587
Points:2,902,320
Joined:Aug 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2013 1:14:17 PM
While I think it's not optimal to have porn stars as teachers, I agree that it's certainly not illegal. I do think it's wrong of her to be fired for something she did some time ago. If she CONTINUED to do porn, well, that might be a different matter.
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2013 9:11:25 AM
"As long as the internet exists, her past will always be with her. Do any of her defenders think porn should be banned from the internet??????? I suspect Stacie might say yes."
Unfortunately, you can't ban porn from the internet. Its part of the Pandora's Box that we brought upon ourselves when we let the internet be open to all. However, I guess you could restrict porn in one of those countries where the government controls everything, but then we in America have a different type of government (or at least I hope so) and would not allow that.
The problem isn't porn, its the self-righteous people who probably have looked at porn themselves in the secrecy and privacy of their own homes, but then act as if Stacie is the worse person on the planet for having porn in her past; hypocrites they are.
As I mentioned previously in this thread, the Woman at the Well had a past too; one that Jesus pointed out and one that everyone in that Samaritan town all knew about. However after a conversation with Jesus, she was set free of her past and began a new life and told everyone in town about a man who told her everything she had ever done.
But unlike the folks of today, the people in that town received her witness and went to meet this man Jesus for themselves. That is what all these modern hypocrites need to do today. Stop condemning Stacie and go and meet the Man Christ Jesus and let him tell YOU all the things you ever did. Then they'd stop being the 1st to cast stones at Stacie and repent of their OWN past sins...
|
no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: Feb 17, 2013 8:47:52 AM
Good post BGT.
As long as the internet exists, her past will always be with her. Do any of her defenders think porn should be banned from the internet??????? I suspect Stacie might say yes.
[Edited by: no1doc at 2/17/2013 8:49:58 AM EST]
|
101Speedster
Champion Author
Ventura
Posts:30,418
Points:2,716,670
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 15, 2013 8:52:02 PM
I would hire her.
|
BlackGumTree
Champion Author
Virginia
Posts:18,439
Points:1,459,665
Joined:Dec 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 15, 2013 8:43:40 PM
There are lots of people who do not understand the nature of things and the purpose of education.
Males and females are different. Not only physically but also psychologically for the gender roles they will have throughout life.
When a baby is born, its brain is basically empty; it needs to learn everything. Studies of the differences of the sexes have established that while a fetus a female will grow a particular section of her brain much larger than males while males do the same with a different part of the brain. The result is that females are more people oriented and males are more object oriented even on the day that they are born.
We have schools to teach children what they need to know to get through life. They have to learn the language of their parents, how to read, write, and do mathematics; they are not born with this knowledge. They also need to learn what is good and what is bad. Some of that knowledge is called morals. For example, touching something very hot is bad as a burn will result.
While children are in school, they are still learning to distinguish what if good from what is bad. Many parents and school employees don't realize this.
It has been pointed out that what Stacie did was legal. But it is not an activity that should be promoted as something good. Students learn from the examples of their teachers in addition to the subjects they study. From this point of view what Stacie did years ago was bad for what she is doing now.
It is now obvious that the parents need to be more vigilant over what their children are learning and to participate more in getting them through the early stages of life where a lot of learning take place. School personnel, especially teachers with activities in their past that are considered bad by many people should make sure this past is hidden from students so that they are not misled by a bad example.
Stacie was easily identified in the porn by her students. It's not so bad that they saw her without clothes on but it is bad that they saw what she was doing and saying.
So teachers with problem pasts, school boards, and parents should take steps to ensure that students do not see this type of material and if they do, they cannot identify the characters with people they now know.
Parents should take care that young children learn the value of learning as much as they can as well as they can and as quickly as they can. The parent should also realize that in helping the child, doing the lesson for the child is harmful to the child.
As adults male and females complement each other with their different natures. This shows up in cats and dogs as well as other animals in addition to humans. Learning is necessary for all mammals. The more you know the better off you are.
I hope Stacie and others like her, Boards of Education, and parents all learn from this and can find a way to employ people with problem pasts without causing a problem for themselves.
|
PopcornPirate
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:3,908
Points:1,171,505
Joined:Nov 2006
|
Message Posted: Feb 15, 2013 9:29:22 AM
All you guys can't tell me that when you went to High School. A new young female teacher. You did not undress her in your head????
If she had to do porn ( BTW which is a LEGAL PROFESSION ) before she was able to be hired as a teacher.......SO WHAT?
|
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author
Tucson
Posts:683
Points:9,420
Joined:Nov 2012
|
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2013 10:53:07 PM
@RNorm ---- for profit prisons are a scourge upon our society, that only encourage more and more incarcerations and not solving the underlining problems with the individuals.
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2013 7:53:20 PM
"yet another reason to stay away from california"
You might want to check your OWN state before casting those stones:
"A former Pennsylvania juvenile court judge was sentenced on Thursday to 28 years in prison for accepting payment to send juveniles to a for-profit detention facility in a scandal dubbed "kids for cash,".
Former Luzerne County Juvenile Court Judge Mark Ciavarella, 61, accepted nearly $1 million from a developer who built the detention facility, prosecutors said.
Under the "kids for cash" scheme, thousands of juveniles were shipped to the private center on minor or questionable charges by Ciavarella and another former judge, Michael Conahan, according to juvenile advocates.
"Mr. Ciavarella abused his position of trust and inflicted a deep and lasting wound on the community he vowed to service," U.S. Attorney Peter Smith said following the sentencing.
"The scheme involved a corrupt agreement with the operators of the for-profit juvenile facilities," Smith said. "It was a wholesale arrangement in which the judges concealed their interest and thereby did great damage to the public."
The U.S. Attorney's office called the case the "largest and most sustained political corruption inquiry" in the area.
Ciavarella was convicted in February of 12 charges, including racketeering conspiracy and money laundering."
See what I mean about being so quick to be holier than Californians???
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2013 7:50:34 PM
"norm, once again I agree with you, she had put it behind her, and had moved on, and it sounds like she is a great teacher, something that can't be said about many teachers."
The sad thing is that while all the folks are "up in arms" with faux moral outrage, they're overlooking the teachers who actually ARE abusing their kids.
The irony...
One of the unintended consequences when those with sin are the 1st to cast stones...
|
wbacon
Champion Author
Philadelphia
Posts:13,415
Points:2,983,835
Joined:Jun 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2013 7:10:19 PM
yet another reason to stay away from california
|
noseatbelt
Champion Author
Indiana
Posts:7,627
Points:205,330
Joined:Feb 2004
|
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2013 6:00:56 PM
norm, once again I agree with you, she had put it behind her, and had moved on, and it sounds like she is a great teacher, something that can't be said about many teachers. I wonder what would have happened, if it had come out that she was a former, drug addict?
|
no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: Feb 14, 2013 5:43:03 PM
The court decision was only last month and was in the news yesterday. The moderator thought the update was appropriate and had no problem with the bump. It's the mod's call. Feel to post a comment with substance,... if you have enough free time..., which you apparently have.
[Edited by: no1doc at 2/14/2013 5:46:59 PM EST]
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 13, 2013 1:27:40 PM
"Surprised this old topic even got resurrected again knowing the GB site rules regarding old topics not active for some time...someone must have a lot of free time on their hands..."
Sometimes the mods will allow an old topic to be revived if there is new information and if it is requested beforehand.
Since the appeal wasn't part of the OP, but has now run its course, I think the mods allowed it, because it sheds new light on an old thread.
|
KansasGunman
Champion Author
Kansas City
Posts:21,434
Points:2,104,400
Joined:Oct 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 13, 2013 1:24:52 PM
Surprised this old topic even got resurrected again knowing the GB site rules regarding old topics not active for some time...someone must have a lot of free time on their hands...
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 13, 2013 1:09:10 PM
"Teacher loses appeal"
This is just wrong. And all the self-righteous folks applauding this (like the OP) should be ashamed of themselves.
She had left that life behind and it was the KIDS who discovered it. She was not engaged in Porn and had been an exemplary teacher before the kids (who shouldn't be looking at porn themselves) were sharing the teacher's past with one another.
Shame on her fellow teachers who downloaded the porn themselves in their effort to get her fired.
Lots of folks throwing stones, but ignoring their own sins, past and present.
SMH
|
101Speedster
Champion Author
Ventura
Posts:30,418
Points:2,716,670
Joined:May 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 13, 2013 12:52:09 PM
Once a porn star, always a porn star?
I guess they are forcing her to return to porn.
Maybe she should teach at the junior college or college level.
[Edited by: 101Speedster at 2/13/2013 12:53:21 PM EST]
|
no1doc
Champion Author
Milwaukee
Posts:20,565
Points:1,777,265
Joined:Oct 2007
|
Message Posted: Feb 13, 2013 12:48:30 PM
Teacher loses appeal
|
flyboyUT
Champion Author
Utah
Posts:22,850
Points:1,011,635
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: May 3, 2012 10:20:00 PM
SGM here is the post in its entirety --
.
>>>"There are some that believe hunting for sport is immoral. There are some that think that hunting period is immoral based on the ability of being able to obtain all of your nourishment needs at a grocery store. Not all of these people are liberals or conservatives."
I have yet to meet or hear of a conservative who thinks hunting for food is immoral! If someone honestly believes that then it must be because they think that animals have rights or something. When will we mount a campaign that carrots dont like to be ripped out of the ground and have a large amount of their roots torn off then skinned alive and tossed in a pot of boiling water. Cant you hear the trees screaming as their neighbor is cut in pieces by an instrument of torture.
little debil that dog just aint gonna hunt no how.
Want to bet these same people who think its immoral to shoot and eat animals have no problems with killing unborn children. Me thinks their morals are out of whack.
Hey do they think its immoral to have a person as president who jokes about eating Fido but believes its ok to drop bombs on civilians who happen to be American citizens?
It seems like one persons morals just might be the next persons joke.<<<
Now I'm not sure how you got that impression out of it but let me set the record straight just in case there are any doubts.
1. That comment was a sarcastic jab at some liberals.
2. I have no problems at all at eliminating people who have declared war on America and have taken step to wage war on America. I do have some concerns that this may be done lightly and would prefer that it is not done lightly. But in the case of the individual you have mentioned he has forefited any citizenship rights he may at one tiem have held. He made himself into an enemy combatant and as such is subject to being killed or captured anywhere at any time.
Clear enough now?
|
sgm4law
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:18,811
Points:2,378,630
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: May 3, 2012 9:30:07 PM
<<<Hey do they think its immoral to have a person as president who jokes about eating Fido but believes its ok to drop bombs on civilians who happen to be American citizens?>>
Wow, flyboy, are you coming out against the killing of anwar al awlaki? Because he was an American citizen...
|
sluggopyle
Champion Author
North Carolina
Posts:23,608
Points:1,075,890
Joined:Dec 2005
|
Message Posted: May 3, 2012 7:06:07 PM
=> It's california, what do you expect?....even the illegals are avoiding it because it has moved so far to the left. <=
Uh -- how is firing a teacher for something in her past a philosophy of "the left"? Or "the right" for that matter?
This thread doesn't even belong in this forum. It's supposed to be "US Politics".
|
Edpap
Champion Author
Pennsylvania
Posts:4,336
Points:507,150
Joined:Oct 2011
|
Message Posted: May 3, 2012 10:14:04 AM
It's california, what do you expect?....even the illegals are avoiding it because it has moved so far to the left.
|
sluggopyle
Champion Author
North Carolina
Posts:23,608
Points:1,075,890
Joined:Dec 2005
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 8:36:22 PM
=> Again what are the rules for emnployment? Did the teacher break any rules? If she did she has lost her right to continue employment for breaking the rules of employment. <=
While that's a worthy point on its own, we here do not know exactly what those rules are, just as we do not know who it was that came up with the discovery in the first place (the idea that the students found it is a popular assumption but by no means established).
However, this point is moot anyway, since this teacher's apparent legacy is a part of her past employment --not concurrent with her present one.
=> Libeals, in their arrogance, believe that there is no higher authority than themselves <=
"They" do huh?
Check who started this thread. Then tell me why you used the third person there (put it on the list; I'm still waiting to hear why you made the past tense into the present, a leap that not even the sleazy tabloid headline makes). Seems to me that declaring what courses may or may not be open to a person's life based on their past, which is your position here, is the ultimate arrogance of self-imagined authority.
=> Sluggo, really, anohter Argumentem ad Verbosity? <=
As long as you see it as a bunch of words whose meaning is to be ignored rather than digested or addressed, which is all you've been doing with my arguments since you dredged this story up, yeah-- verbosity is pretty much all it is. Now if there were strawmen, ridicule or whatever, you could quote 'em. OTOH if you can't handle the logic, then just admit your case is full of holes. As I've pointed out for two months now, to crickets.
"Does anyone need more evidence that Liberalism has destroyed the moral fiber of our once great Nation?"
As I answered two months ago to this same sentence, and to the same crickets: what do you mean "more"? What the hell does any of this have to do with "Liberalism"? Where's your case?
Take your own advice, Pil-- "Read the comments after the story". The only entity clucking like a schoolmarm at this story is the sensationalist headline. And you fell for it hook, line and sinker.
[Edited by: sluggopyle at 5/1/2012 8:43:15 PM EST]
|
flyboyUT
Champion Author
Utah
Posts:22,850
Points:1,011,635
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 8:32:17 PM
I can understand TAF saying that he thinks porn is "immoral" behavior. That is his opinion and he is entitrled to it. I might add that I think that viewing it probably is immoral also on some level. But that is neither here not there in this discussion about should the teacher have been let go.
AS I tried to say more than once - what written rules or commonally accepted oral rules acknowledged by all did she violate. When it comes to firing someone the rules or reason for the firing had better be written down and preferably signed by all parties cause its gonna go to court and I think the lady will win bigtime.
Personally I have no problems with what she did in the past. Waht counts is what she is doing now. But I can see how this will rile some folks up.
No matter how many tiems you have to say all that counts is the rules nobody wishes to deal with that.
|
eldiablopoco
All-Star Author
Grand Rapids
Posts:895
Points:53,820
Joined:Apr 2011
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 8:20:55 PM
flyboyUT, we are not arguing here. I have no problem with you hunting for food. In fact, I commend you for seeking out financial responsibility according to your needs.
The problem is governing morality and how to go about it. My argument is that you can't govern morality because individuals have similar in some instances but different in other for measuring right and wrong towards behaviors.
I enjoyed your response because it actually provided an example that furthered my point that I was attempting to express to TAFKATP.
|
flyboyUT
Champion Author
Utah
Posts:22,850
Points:1,011,635
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 8:01:25 PM
eldiablopoco - while we will disagree - I dont wish to be disagreeable with you. I am not upset with you at all....
But saying that its somehow not right to go kill your own food (meat) whiel putting on airs of gentility because you pay other people to kill the animal, butcher it and prepare it for your table is not very honest in my jaundiced eyes. I have hunted a lot in my life - especially when I just got out of college and had bills to pay and not a whole lot of money coming in. They may have had meat in the butchers case but I chose to pay bills and shoot my meat. I got a couple of hundred pounds of healthy meat for the price of a handloaded shell and some work. But I had all my loans paid off within a year of getting out of school. Can the snobs who put their nose up in the air and sneer at those who hunt say the same thing?
|
eldiablopoco
All-Star Author
Grand Rapids
Posts:895
Points:53,820
Joined:Apr 2011
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 7:52:35 PM
flyboyUT, it is okay.
The premise behind some feeling that there is no need to hunt is based on the availability of what is out there. By a technical standard, there is no real need to hunt for food. Some say that it is wasteful to hunt for food in the wild because units available in stores go unconsumed. In addition, someone has taken the time and utilized capital and other resources to raise food in captivity that has negated the need to hunt.
|
flyboyUT
Champion Author
Utah
Posts:22,850
Points:1,011,635
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 7:32:33 PM
eldiablopoco what I was trying to get at in muy clumsey way was that the idea of its immoral to hunt for food but its ok to go the the store and buy food someone else has killed and taken care of for you is not logical. I shouldnt have been sarcastic but then there are times I'm not all that I want to be too.
The whole 'one shouldnt hunt' is such a sad sorry statement on loopy thinking that it makes me trot out the nasty evil twerp in me.
|
eldiablopoco
All-Star Author
Grand Rapids
Posts:895
Points:53,820
Joined:Apr 2011
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 7:28:05 PM
"I have yet to meet or hear of a conservative who thinks hunting for food is immoral! If someone honestly believes that then it must be because they think that animals have rights or something."
That brings about two points fluboyUT. Come visit and I will introduce you to some. Second, if you apply a blanket approach like TAFKATP did, then it would be a contradiction to his accusation toward liberals.
"Hey do they think its immoral to have a person as president who jokes about eating Fido but believes its ok to drop bombs on civilians who happen to be American citizens?"
I have failed to see the immorality in the joke. The joke implies that it is something to laugh about, not take seriously. Is it okay to drop bombs on civilians who happened to be American citizens is not okay; however, to take your point a little farther, I don't think that it is okay to drop bombs on ANY civilian. In addition, I also think that it is wrong that your attempting to equate this practice to the current administration while failing to realize that dropping bombs and other hazardous materials on civilians, including Americans, is a practices that has taken place under multiple administrations.
|
jdhelm
Champion Author
Iowa
Posts:11,862
Points:1,198,890
Joined:Dec 2009
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 5:40:29 PM
- - - i think she was born too late, she shoulda been a teacher when jfk and the other kennedy boys were around, it woulda been ok then . . .
maybe she has an inside track with the ss . . .
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 5:29:46 PM
"Hey do they think its immoral to have a person as president who jokes about eating Fido but believes its ok to drop bombs on civilians who happen to be American citizens? "
You mean civilians that have declared war on the USA? Really, are they still civilians if they're stating they're at war?
little debil that dog just aint gonna hunt no how
|
flyboyUT
Champion Author
Utah
Posts:22,850
Points:1,011,635
Joined:Aug 2008
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 5:20:58 PM
"There are some that believe hunting for sport is immoral. There are some that think that hunting period is immoral based on the ability of being able to obtain all of your nourishment needs at a grocery store. Not all of these people are liberals or conservatives."
I have yet to meet or hear of a conservative who thinks hunting for food is immoral! If someone honestly believes that then it must be because they think that animals have rights or something. When will we mount a campaign that carrots dont like to be ripped out of the ground and have a large amount of their roots torn off then skinned alive and tossed in a pot of boiling water. Cant you hear the trees screaming as their neighbor is cut in pieces by an instrument of torture.
little debil that dog just aint gonna hunt no how.
Want to bet these same people who think its immoral to shoot and eat animals have no problems with killing unborn children. Me thinks their morals are out of whack.
Hey do they think its immoral to have a person as president who jokes about eating Fido but believes its ok to drop bombs on civilians who happen to be American citizens?
It seems like one persons morals just might be the next persons joke.
|
eldiablopoco
All-Star Author
Grand Rapids
Posts:895
Points:53,820
Joined:Apr 2011
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 4:39:37 PM
TAFKATP, you are conflicted.
Either you make morals governed by laws and/or regulations and establish some form of punishment or you don't. If you don't, then you leave people to their own devices to do as they please.
But I'm back to my original premise. What I think might be morally correct, you might not!
In addition, you can't make a blanket statement like this: "Libeals, in their arrogance, believe that there is no higher authority than themselves - and if it feels good: Do it"
There are some that believe hunting for sport is immoral. There are some that think that hunting period is immoral based on the ability of being able to obtain all of your nourishment needs at a grocery store. Not all of these people are liberals or conservatives.
[Edited by: eldiablopoco at 5/1/2012 4:40:31 PM EST]
|
eldiablopoco
All-Star Author
Grand Rapids
Posts:895
Points:53,820
Joined:Apr 2011
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 4:39:04 PM
TAFKATP, you are conflicted.
Either you make morals governed by laws and/or regulations and establish some form of punishment or you don't. If you don't, then you leave people to their own devices to do as they please.
But I'm back to my original premise. What I think might be morally correct, you might not!
In addition, you can't make a blanket statement like this: "Libeals, in their arrogance, believe that there is no higher authority than themselves - and if it feels good: Do it"
There are some that believe hunting for sport is immoral. There are some that think that hunting period is immoral based on the ability of being able to obtain all of your nourishment needs at a grocery store. Not all of these people are liberals or conservatives.
|
RNorm
Champion Author
San Bernardino
Posts:44,819
Points:778,485
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 4:31:49 PM
"Again what are the rules for emnployment? Did the teacher break any rules? I"
Maybe you should ask the guy who keeps insisting she broke the rules...the guy that tried to imply that her past porn life was being currently engaged...neither of which are true.
|
TAFKATP
Champion Author
Denver
Posts:4,411
Points:33,720
Joined:Sep 2011
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 4:18:18 PM
"I guess if morals should be govern by laws and/or regulations."
But they aren't. You can do something "wrong" without it being illegal.
Actually, it seems to be the liberal side in this threat that is equating legality with morality. Rather odd.
One definition of morality is: "concerned with or derived from the code of behaviour that is considered right or acceptable in a particular society."
So, we can conclude, that at one time pornography, adultery, divorce, homosexuality, and abortion were once considered "immoral" and now they are not (at least by Liberals) that the state of morality has declined as a result.
Libeals, in their arrogance, believe that there is no higher authority than themselves - and if it feels good: Do it!
The question is where does this disintegration of morality stop?
Or do we simply become an immoral society, or more accurately, amoral, like many before us?
[Edited by: TAFKATP at 5/1/2012 4:19:11 PM EST]
|
eldiablopoco
All-Star Author
Grand Rapids
Posts:895
Points:53,820
Joined:Apr 2011
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 4:11:20 PM
"Does anyone need more evidence that Liberalism has destroyed the moral fiber of our once great Nation?"
I guess if morals should be govern by laws and/or regulations. But then again, I'm not a robot and my interpretation of right and wrong when it comes to behaviors is much different than others.
I'm still on the fence about gay rights, abortions, recreational sex, etc.
|
teacher_tim
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:15,731
Points:744,585
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: May 1, 2012 4:10:41 PM
Just an observation:
The pictures in the OP link made it through my school system's firewall.
|