"safe schools czar" Kevin Jennings further exposed

[Coyote]

Did he have proof that notifying the parents would put the child in danger?

Read.

I've already said, several times in several different ways that neither you nor I know what the family situation was. You haven't a clue. I haven't a clue. I'm asking a rhetorical question because you are making a blanket judgement that the parents should always be notified.

No, he didn't. Therefore, he had a moral and ethical duty to notify school administrators or the parents directly.

And...you know that how? Oh wait. You don't.

I do agree though that he should have notified the school administrators and it was poor judgement not to do so.

IF, he had proof that notifying the parents would put the child in danger, then it would be his moral and ethical duty to notify social services of both the danger of the parents, and the dangerous behavior that the child was engaging in.

That's iffy because it's usually not that black and white clear. The parents might not harm the child but the child's life could be made a misery and there is nothing illegal about that that he could notify social services. As far as the child's behavior - again, the child was of the age of consent and there isn't a thing social services can do.

He had no proof, therefore his moral and ethical obligation was to notify chool administrator or the parents directly.

You know that how?

He was obviously an educated man. A teaching professional who knew what his moral and ethical obligations were. He failed on every level.

He was 24 years old and new in the job.

 

[Wicked Jester]

An unwarranted assumption?
Oh now that's rich!
Yeah, I suppose if you're a dirtbag parent, your childs safety isn't a primary concern.

LMAO! at the sheer weakness of the Obamabots arguments.

Clearly you never taught in public schools or you would realize a disturbingly large portion of parents have virtually no concern about their children. You never did answer the question of what you would do if you suspected a "Fag beating REAL MAN" father of a student in your class would beat the boy to death in a fit of rage at being informed of his "girly" son's liaison with an anonymous man. Would you feel ANY guilt or remorse about the death, having done your "I was only following orders" duty?

Having repeatedly stated that I oppose Jennings appointment what makes you possibly believe I am an Obamabot?
Should I include a list of those things I oppose which are near and dear to liberals like him? I oppose Welfare, socialized medicine, and gun control to name the big three.

Actually I do favor gun control Texas style - gun control is hitting your target.

Good for you!
Your opinions on this subject are perfectly in line with the Obamabots. Except for your opposition to Jennings appointment.
Now, go read my #439 post. It clearly explains your question about "fag beating REAL MAN"
Obviously, if the child felt that either of his parents would react that way, he would have made it known. Jennings failed on all counts!

Oh, and BTW. I qualified expert on every weapon I had the pleasure of firing in the service.
CENTER MASS, BABY!

 

[Charles Stucker]

Your opinions on this subject are perfectly in line with the Obamabots. Except for your opposition to Jennings appointment.
Now, go read my #439 post. It clearly explains your question about "fag beating REAL MAN"

Great so now I get the best of both worlds -I'm a gun toting Texas fascist AND Obamabot at the same time.
I suppose I'll have to go to that thread about fascism in modern America and admit it's alive and well, much to my surprise. Does this mean I now have to move to Germany to avoid the Nazi's?

And your answer is terribly incomplete as you insist you would not tell the parents if you had PROOF. Proof is far from suspicion and your insistence that without proof it would be dangerous blah, blah truly indicates a rather narrow mindset on your part.

Oh wait I should have noticed your litmus test mentality before - anyone who disagrees with you is an Obamabot. I'm sorry it must be one of those weeks, I'm normally not so slow on the uptake.
Perhaps you should change your name from Jester to Litmus

 

[Wicked Jester]

Not at all!

What you are advocating is not doing anything at all simply because there is a completely false, automatic assumption on your part that the Kid is going to get the crap beat out of him, or worse, by a parent. So, in your way of thinking, the teacher should have just done what he did, which was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. He was a trained, credentialed teacher. He knew damn good and well what he should have done. At the very least, he should have immediately reffered the kid to a school counselor. Even HE'S admitted he fucked up. The school administrators admitted he fucked up. There are several of those administrators who are behind the drive to have his ass tossed. The kid admitted to him that he had a penchant to go out, meet a strange ADULT man in a bathroom, and went home with him. He was 16 years old. He was a Minor who obviously had a reckless mindset that very well could get him killed. As a teacher, AN ADULT TEACHER, he should have known that action was necessary to find out what exactly was going on in the kids head. He advised him to use a condom, THAT WAS ALL!
There is NO EXCUSE!
And i'll ask you this question:
What if it were YOUR kid, and you found out that a teacher did absolutely nothing about it. How would you feel?

Are you going to sit there and tell me you wouldn't be pissed off?

SERIOUSLY!

 

[mudwhistle]

I already answered your question and it's not a simple black/white answer either.

If it were my child I would hope that we would have the level of communication where my child could confide in me about something like homosexuality. But that is not always the case in many families and acceptance of that is highly variable. If my child could not - I would hope that there was an adult that he could trust enough to talk to and get advice from.

As a parent I would want to know, but then, as a parent I would have no problem with homosexuality. What if I did though? What if my husband despised gays? What if the home situation was one in which the child could not go to his parents? See it's not just the parents and their rights, it's also what is best for the child and none of us here know that - we don't know the situation.



You talk about tragic consequences but have you thought about the possibility of tragic consequences in informing the parents that their child is not only having sex but - is also homosexual? And this was 20 some years ago?



They are valid questions, but they are questions without clear cut answers requiring a lot of personal judgement.

And, by the way...I previously answered...guess you don't read to well

Well, i'll give you credit, you didn't just mysteriously disappear.

I don't care if it involves a homosexual MINOR CHILD or not. Jennings was NOT the parent of the child. The Parents of the MINOR CHILD had every right to be informed. Jennings had a moral and ethical duty to inform THE PARENTS of the MINOR CHILDS dangerous behaivior. The SAFETY of the MINOR child is the PARENTS primary concern. Jennings was appointed to advise on the safety of CHILDREN in our schools. He screwed up in protecting the SAFETY of that MINOR CHILD. Therefore, he has no business advising ANYBODY on the safety of children in our schools.
There is absolutely no such thing as MINOR CHILD/TEACHER privelege.
Jennings fully undermined the PARENTS of said MINOR CHILDS responsibility of protecting THEIR MINOR CHILD!
There are no excuses. There are no valid arguments as to why he would FAIL to exercize his moral and ethical obligation of notifying said MINOR CHILDS PARENTS!
Absolutely none whatsoever.
And parents who are RESPONSIBLE and truly love their children understand this.

There in is the caveat.

I will agree that he made a poor judgement call - but, I also have no way of knowing the background of the child and what was going on - neither do you.

What is his moral and ethical obligation if notifying the parents put the child in danger?

I think the kid was in danger of getting the High Hard One from an authority figure.

That's danger enough for me.

 

[Coyote]

Well, i'll give you credit, you didn't just mysteriously disappear.

I don't care if it involves a homosexual MINOR CHILD or not. Jennings was NOT the parent of the child. The Parents of the MINOR CHILD had every right to be informed. Jennings had a moral and ethical duty to inform THE PARENTS of the MINOR CHILDS dangerous behaivior. The SAFETY of the MINOR child is the PARENTS primary concern. Jennings was appointed to advise on the safety of CHILDREN in our schools. He screwed up in protecting the SAFETY of that MINOR CHILD. Therefore, he has no business advising ANYBODY on the safety of children in our schools.
There is absolutely no such thing as MINOR CHILD/TEACHER privelege.
Jennings fully undermined the PARENTS of said MINOR CHILDS responsibility of protecting THEIR MINOR CHILD!
There are no excuses. There are no valid arguments as to why he would FAIL to exercize his moral and ethical obligation of notifying said MINOR CHILDS PARENTS!
Absolutely none whatsoever.
And parents who are RESPONSIBLE and truly love their children understand this.

There in is the caveat.

I will agree that he made a poor judgement call - but, I also have no way of knowing the background of the child and what was going on - neither do you.

What is his moral and ethical obligation if notifying the parents put the child in danger?

I think the kid was in danger of getting the High Hard One from an authority figure.

That's danger enough for me.

Another moron.

Tell me....do get worries with daughters male teachers? Or is it just homosexual teachers?

 

[Coyote]

Are you really this retarded?????

Not at all!

What you are advocating is not doing anything at all simply because there is a completely false, automatic assumption on your part that the Kid is going to get the crap beat out of him, or worse, by a parent.

Uh,no. No assumption on my part. The only thing CLOSE to an assumption is a statement saying essentially - WE do not know the background to the situation - do WE?

But, alas, I forget - your reading skills contain impenatrable potholes.

So, in your way of thinking, the teacher should have just done what he did, which was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

Go back and read what I said. I did not say that - for one - nor did the teacher do "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING". You are just chock full of falsies aren't you?

He was a trained, credentialed teacher. He knew damn good and well what he should have done. At the very least, he should have immediately reffered the kid to a school counselor. Even HE'S admitted he fucked up. The school administrators admitted he fucked up. There are several of those administrators who are behind the drive to have his ass tossed.

He admitted he showed poor judgement - good for him. Like no one ever had poor judgement before. Trained and credentialed does not equal experience. That's true in most professions. Are teachers somehow exempt? Or - just homosexual teachers?

The kid admitted to him that he had a penchant to go out, meet a strange ADULT man in a bathroom, and went home with him. He was 16 years old. He was a Minor who obviously had a reckless mindset that very well could get him killed. As a teacher, AN ADULT TEACHER, he should have known that action was necessary to find out what exactly was going on in the kids head. He advised him to use a condom, THAT WAS ALL!

Are you SURE that was all? I mean, that was all that was reported in the rightwing talking points...but how long does it take to say "use a condom".......

There is NO EXCUSE!
And i'll ask you this question:
What if it were YOUR kid, and you found out that a teacher did absolutely nothing about it. How would you feel?

Are you going to sit there and tell me you wouldn't be pissed off?

SERIOUSLY!

Seriously. How often are you going to keep asking me a question I have already answered?

 

[Wicked Jester]

Are you really this retarded?????

Not at all!

What you are advocating is not doing anything at all simply because there is a completely false, automatic assumption on your part that the Kid is going to get the crap beat out of him, or worse, by a parent.

Uh,no. No assumption on my part. The only thing CLOSE to an assumption is a statement saying essentially - WE do not know the background to the situation - do WE?

But, alas, I forget - your reading skills contain impenatrable potholes.

So, in your way of thinking, the teacher should have just done what he did, which was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

Go back and read what I said. I did not say that - for one - nor did the teacher do "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING". You are just chock full of falsies aren't you?



He admitted he showed poor judgement - good for him. Like no one ever had poor judgement before. Trained and credentialed does not equal experience. That's true in most professions. Are teachers somehow exempt? Or - just homosexual teachers?

The kid admitted to him that he had a penchant to go out, meet a strange ADULT man in a bathroom, and went home with him. He was 16 years old. He was a Minor who obviously had a reckless mindset that very well could get him killed. As a teacher, AN ADULT TEACHER, he should have known that action was necessary to find out what exactly was going on in the kids head. He advised him to use a condom, THAT WAS ALL!

Are you SURE that was all? I mean, that was all that was reported in the rightwing talking points...but how long does it take to say "use a condom".......

There is NO EXCUSE!
And i'll ask you this question:
What if it were YOUR kid, and you found out that a teacher did absolutely nothing about it. How would you feel?

Are you going to sit there and tell me you wouldn't be pissed off?

SERIOUSLY!

Seriously. How often are you going to keep asking me a question I have already answered?

Uh, excuse me but, I wasn't addressing you.

I've got to boogie. It's time to start the weekend. I'll address YOU, next week.

Have a good weekend!

Oh, and if ya' get a chance, check out my "Two examples of Anita Dunne" thread. It's quite compelling indeed!...Ya' just might learn something!

 

[mudwhistle]

There in is the caveat.

I will agree that he made a poor judgement call - but, I also have no way of knowing the background of the child and what was going on - neither do you.

What is his moral and ethical obligation if notifying the parents put the child in danger?

I think the kid was in danger of getting the High Hard One from an authority figure.

That's danger enough for me.

Another moron.

Tell me....do get worries with daughters male teachers? Or is it just homosexual teachers?

I wasn't thinking homosexual or otherwise.

Having sex with your students is an abuse of authority.....and a perverse abuse of the public trust...much less the trust of the parents of the kids.

I could care less what sex you were or what your persuasions were.

 

[Coyote]

I think the kid was in danger of getting the High Hard One from an authority figure.

That's danger enough for me.

Another moron.

Tell me....do get worries with daughters male teachers? Or is it just homosexual teachers?

I wonder why there are soooooooo many cocksuckers on this forum.

I wasn't thinking homosexual or otherwise.

Having sex with your students is an abuse of authority.....and a perverse abuse of the public trust...much less the trust of the parents of the kids.

I could care less what sex you were or what your persuasions were.

Oh, I totally agree. I just find it interesting that you seem to assume that was could be the case. With your usual dirth of evidence.

 

[mudwhistle]

Another moron.

Tell me....do get worries with daughters male teachers? Or is it just homosexual teachers?

I wonder why there are soooooooo many cocksuckers on this forum.

I wasn't thinking homosexual or otherwise.

Having sex with your students is an abuse of authority.....and a perverse abuse of the public trust...much less the trust of the parents of the kids.

I could care less what sex you were or what your persuasions were.

Oh, I totally agree. I just find it interesting that you seem to assume that was could be the case. With your usual dirth of evidence.

You're the one making the assumptions, not me.

My thoughts were on sex in general, not gay sex or any other.

 

[Coyote]

I wonder why there are soooooooo many cocksuckers on this forum.

I wasn't thinking homosexual or otherwise.

Having sex with your students is an abuse of authority.....and a perverse abuse of the public trust...much less the trust of the parents of the kids.

I could care less what sex you were or what your persuasions were.

Oh, I totally agree. I just find it interesting that you seem to assume that was could be the case. With your usual dirth of evidence.

You're the one making the assumptions, not me.

My thoughts were on sex in general, not gay sex or any other.

Do you normally assume teachers are having sex with their students?

That's really a very uncommon though much publicized occurance.

 

[mudwhistle]

Oh, I totally agree. I just find it interesting that you seem to assume that was could be the case. With your usual dirth of evidence.

You're the one making the assumptions, not me.

My thoughts were on sex in general, not gay sex or any other.

Do you normally assume teachers are having sex with their students?

That's really a very uncommon though much publicized occurance.

I don't assume that. I thought we were talking about a specific occurance, weren't we?

I've noticed something about gays and the issue of homosexuality, child molestation, and other topics along that line.

I've never gotten any negative comments here until I made the mistake of speaking my mind on a subject that should be pretty cut and dried.

Yesterday I got two. Both made no sense at all. A moderator called me a liar because I said I don't like the fact that this teacher was fucking one of his students and that an Obama Administration official's only response was that he should have worn a rubber.

It really gives me the impression that those who are heavy into this subject tend to be some really nasty people. They think that anyone who thinks screwing children must be homophobes. They tend to put words in your mouth because they assume way too fucken much.

To all you that think fucking boys is a good thing....I'm done talking about this subject.

And to anyone who thinks I've got a problem with gays...you're wrong...and if you don't believe me then go fuck yourself. What you think really doesn't matter. You're gonna think it no matter what I say anyway.

 

[JScott]

I just spent over an hour reading this thread and have come to a few conclusions.

1. Crazy people really dont know they are crazy.
2. Political shows need to be disassembled.
3. Psychologists believe most people in the world are border line. I believe it even more now.
4. Prejudice is rampant in this country.

 

[Coyote]

You're the one making the assumptions, not me.

My thoughts were on sex in general, not gay sex or any other.

Do you normally assume teachers are having sex with their students?

That's really a very uncommon though much publicized occurance.

I don't assume that. I thought we were talking about a specific occurance, weren't we?

I've noticed something about gays and the issue of homosexuality, child molestation, and other topics along that line.

I've never gotten any negative comments here until I made the mistake of speaking my mind on a subject that should be pretty cut and dried.

Yesterday I got two. Both made no sense at all. A moderator called me a liar because I said I don't like the fact that this teacher was fucking one of his students and that an Obama Administration official's only response was that he should have worn a rubber.

If a teacher was fucking one of his students I would be right in line with you to fire his ass. But that isn't the case here nor is there even the slightest evidence of it. If you did indeed say so, then the moderator is right: you are a liar.

It really gives me the impression that those who are heavy into this subject tend to be some really nasty people. They think that anyone who thinks screwing children must be homophobes. They tend to put words in your mouth because they assume way too fucken much.

Nasty? No. I believe in fairness and I believe in the rule of law.

To all you that think fucking boys is a good thing....I'm done talking about this subject.

I think adults fucking children is a bad thing. I don't care if it's boys or girls. But the age of consent is defined by the law and that is what we go by.

And to anyone who thinks I've got a problem with gays...you're wrong...and if you don't believe me then go fuck yourself. What you think really doesn't matter. You're gonna think it no matter what I say anyway.

Ok, I'm wrong. But I still wonder you would say this teacher is fucking a child or why you limit your statement "To all you that think fucking boys is a good thing" to....just boys.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Do you normally assume teachers are having sex with their students?

That's really a very uncommon though much publicized occurance.

I don't assume that. I thought we were talking about a specific occurance, weren't we?

I've noticed something about gays and the issue of homosexuality, child molestation, and other topics along that line.

I've never gotten any negative comments here until I made the mistake of speaking my mind on a subject that should be pretty cut and dried.

Yesterday I got two. Both made no sense at all. A moderator called me a liar because I said I don't like the fact that this teacher was fucking one of his students and that an Obama Administration official's only response was that he should have worn a rubber.

If a teacher was fucking one of his students I would be right in line with you to fire his ass. But that isn't the case here nor is there even the slightest evidence of it. If you did indeed say so, then the moderator is right: you are a liar.



Nasty? No. I believe in fairness and I believe in the rule of law.

To all you that think fucking boys is a good thing....I'm done talking about this subject.

I think adults fucking children is a bad thing. I don't care if it's boys or girls. But the age of consent is defined by the law and that is what we go by.

And to anyone who thinks I've got a problem with gays...you're wrong...and if you don't believe me then go fuck yourself. What you think really doesn't matter. You're gonna think it no matter what I say anyway.

Ok, I'm wrong. But I still wonder you would say this teacher is fucking a child or why you limit your statement "To all you that think fucking boys is a good thing" to....just boys.

Are you a parent Coyote?

 

[Coyote]

I don't assume that. I thought we were talking about a specific occurance, weren't we?

I've noticed something about gays and the issue of homosexuality, child molestation, and other topics along that line.

I've never gotten any negative comments here until I made the mistake of speaking my mind on a subject that should be pretty cut and dried.

Yesterday I got two. Both made no sense at all. A moderator called me a liar because I said I don't like the fact that this teacher was fucking one of his students and that an Obama Administration official's only response was that he should have worn a rubber.

If a teacher was fucking one of his students I would be right in line with you to fire his ass. But that isn't the case here nor is there even the slightest evidence of it. If you did indeed say so, then the moderator is right: you are a liar.



Nasty? No. I believe in fairness and I believe in the rule of law.



I think adults fucking children is a bad thing. I don't care if it's boys or girls. But the age of consent is defined by the law and that is what we go by.

And to anyone who thinks I've got a problem with gays...you're wrong...and if you don't believe me then go fuck yourself. What you think really doesn't matter. You're gonna think it no matter what I say anyway.

Ok, I'm wrong. But I still wonder you would say this teacher is fucking a child or why you limit your statement "To all you that think fucking boys is a good thing" to....just boys.

Are you a parent Coyote?

Does that matter? It shouldn't.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I was just wondering about your comment on "...I don't care if it's boys and girls.." As a parent of a beautiful baby girl I find it unconscionable that one could condone sex between two children. Just my opinion......and please correct me if I misinterpreted your response.

 

[Coyote]

I was just wondering about your comment on "...I don't care if it's boys and girls.." As a parent of a beautiful baby girl I find it unconscionable that one could condone sex between two children. Just my opinion......and please correct me if I misinterpreted your response.

Ah - you misunderstood. I said I don't care if it's boys or girls meaning I think it's equally reprehensible if it's an adult abusing a boy child or a girl child. Does that make more sense?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Thanks C