Should Students be Expelled for Religious/Sexual Beliefs?

[Bramborska]

Let's be honest, 10,000 fucks isn't a lot of sex. I mean, if Ford had a car that blew up 1 out of 10,000; they'd be screwed pretty badly.

Yet another person that doesn't understand mathematics. Less by more than four orders of magnitude does not mean less than 1 in 10,000. It means that the chances are less than whatever they were before DIVIDED BY 10,000.

I'm not sure that they specify what the chances are before they divided by 10k...? I mean, I didn't see anything... So what's the problem with assuming 1 in 10,000?

[The Rich Port]

So who wants to make an argument for expelling the student who just voiced her opinion?

I sure as hell do.

Why? All she did was express her opinion. Is just because it's different than yours?

I wouldn't expel her. That way, I can FORCE her to read the novelization of "Brokeback Mountain".

[Soheran]

I actually live in California and belong to a church that strongly supported the anti-gay marriage initiative in 2008. After the passage of Proposition 8, individuals who hold family values sacred were mocked and belittled routinely.

Oh, boo hoo.

A majority of your state voted to take a fundamental constitutional right away from gay people, without a shred of serious justification... and the ones you say are persecuted are the perpetrators of this injustice, rather than the victims?

I'm sorry you felt "mocked and belittled"--actually that's a lie, I'm not sorry in the slightest, I hope opponents of same-sex marriage are mocked and belittled continually everywhere for the silly and hateful nonsense they propagate. But even if I were a nicer person, and were actually sorry, I would still be rather more concerned for the group of people whose mere inclusion in an institution to which everyone else already has access brought about such a ludicrous paranoid furor, rife with bigoted messages about the terrifying possibility that gay people might (*gasp*) actually see their existence acknowledged in public schools, and that marriage needed to be "protected" from their deviant selves. And that's just the campaign rhetoric. When it comes to the fact that you and your right-wing homophobic compatriots still have all your rights under the law, while same-sex couples have been deprived of equal protection and of their constitutional right to marry, I think even my hypothetical nice self would have a very hard time feeling much sympathy for you and your fantasies of persecution.

Start whining when we start prohibiting religious figures from expressing anti-gay bigotry, okay? Not before. Not merely because people disagree with you, and express it.

Also, homosexuality is celebrated everywhere.

No. You have no idea what you are talking about. It is not. Our society is laden with homophobia and awash in heteronormativity. You seem to believe that the fact that a (slim) majority has finally come around to disagreeing with a strong version of the "traditionalist" moral nonsense about homosexuality means that "homosexuality is celebrated everywhere", but this is silly. Same-sex couples cannot marry in forty-five states, and they are denied the federal rights and benefits of marriage in all fifty. People can be fired in most states simply for being, or perceived as being, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered. Majorities continue to oppose same-sex marriage, referenda reaffirming the institutionalized legal discrimination against gay people continue to be introduced and continue to pass, major values-propagating institutions from churches to the Boy Scouts continue to be condemnatory toward homosexuality, federal gay rights legislation cannot pass in the most liberal Congress in a very long time... I could go on and on.

[Unhealthy2]

Educational ethics are a very simple matter with education bodies. Failure to meet ethical standards of work leads to disciplinary action

And the only reason we let people in the scientific fields get away with violating scientific methodology ethics is because scientists love to disprove other scientists, and any such violations would be laughed to death at the peer review level.

[Conserative Morality]

I'm not sure that they specify what the chances are before they divided by 10k...? I mean, I didn't see anything... So what's the problem with assuming 1 in 10,000?

Likely, that number is far more likely than what it really is, is what he's trying to say.

[Bramborska]

If I'm reading right, the one from Michigan "refused to work with gay clients in a positive manner."

The one we're discussing merely aired her views in the classroom.

In one, it implies Michigan babe actually sat down with a person of the homosexual persuasion, and tried to convince him (her?) out of it. I believe the current discussion focuses on an individual who never sat down with a client.

I'm not sure how significant that is, but there's probably a significant difference between discussing in class and actively trying to alter someone's psychological health.

The question is do you think it is right for someone to openly state they could not hold to the ethics of their field of study?
What if a science student declared that they would not submit their work for peer review?
What if a historian declared they would not cite sources?
Should they be allowed to continue on their course?

I think those are a bunch of questions asked in a manner that expects a simple Yes/No response. I'd rather not play that game.

Educational ethics are a very simple matter with education bodies. Failure to meet ethical standards of work leads to disciplinary action

Uh, I feel like I'm on a circus.

The board which issued the ethic code, and the one which issued disciplinary action were two separate entities.

As I said before... If you'd care to look... There's a large difference between graduating from Augusta University and practicing in the US.

[Ryadn]

The HIV virus is small enough to get through the rubber of the condom

This is an often-exposed lie, widely circulated by the Catholic Church.

You want proof? Have at it! http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1411838

An article that's 16 years old? Really? Go back another decade and they'll tell you that you can get AIDS from toilet seats.

[Unhealthy2]

I'm not sure that they specify what the chances are before they divided by 10k...? I mean, I didn't see anything... So what's the problem with assuming 1 in 10,000?

Because that's horribly inaccurate unless the chances before are at least like 50%. Even if the initial chances were as bad as 1 in 10, you get a final result of 1 in 100,000, which is way different than 1 in 10,000.

Also, assuming that it's 1 in 10,000 is essentially assuming that it will be really, really high without the condom. I don't see any good justification for such an assumption.

[Barringtonia]

I didn't see that having a student go to a pride parade was part of the course criteria.

Well I saw it as a chance to remain on the course, the alternative is that she's just out.

There are some very good Christian beliefs that have very good effects on society, like, "love thy neighbor as thy self".

Fixed, just because good beliefs coincide with Christian beliefs doesn't mean anything - are you saying the mantra prior to Christianity was 'hate thy neighbour as thy self' - of course not.

I think there's a place in the world for Christian counselors. If nothing else than to help other Christians, perhaps?

I believe they're called priests but then I believe, as a female, she might have difficulty with the criteria for that as well.

I have a radio comercial for a local university that offers something like "regular degrees for custom majors"? WTF The guy got his degree in "educational justice" and a job as a school principal. WTF if "educational justice"? Does he make sure all the kids have equal access to crayons? Are some students promoted or held back due to ethnicity? Teaching institutions are acting crazy nowadays.

Good to see that one is sticking to its guns over course criteria then, standards eh?

[Soheran]

I wouldn't expel her. That way, I can FORCE her to read the novelization of "Brokeback Mountain".

Was it ever novelized? I read the short story, but I thought that's all there was.

[Unhealthy2]

Likely, that number is far more likely than what it really is, is what he's trying to say.

I think he's just trying to cover his ass and doesn't want to admit that he made a math error, honestly.

[Ryadn]

Which basically means that the counselor cannot come under the influence of bias when treating patients, regardless of what they may feel personally about the person(s)/situation and must provide the same care as they do for everyone else. This student, evidently, cannot in good conscience follow proper medical consensus on the issue, because of her morality or her religion, and thus should not be a counselor. Period.

Yeah, that was the sort of bit I was wondering about. But can a counselor restrict their practice? In other words, are there certified counselors out there that do the Xtian only thing like this bint would?

WTF really is a counselor anyway? Someone help me out here. Too lazy to google.

Re: restricting practices---yes. There are Christian counselors who do not work with gay people. A responsible certified counselor will take an extensive patient history in the first session, and if the person's sexuality will likely be an issue, they will refer the client to another counselor who works with gay clients. This is permissible in California.

[Unhealthy2]

An article that's 16 years old? Really? Go back another decade and they'll tell you that you can get AIDS from toilet seats.

Actually, a far worse problem is that the article clearly shows the opposite of what he thinks it does.

[Senestrum]

The idea that personal beliefs should be magically immune from criticism regardless of their effect on a person's ability to do their job is ridiculous. I bet an adamant flat-earth wacko being expelled from a physics class would get laughed at by everybody here, but this woman's opinion should be magically immune from criticism because... why, again? This sort of outlook could have massive negative effects, intentionally or not, on a gay person she's working with.



Also, any christian feeling prosecuted because of pro-gay people is being stupid. It's not our fault that people have to be dragged away from dark-age mentalities.

[Kreanoltha]

The HIV virus is small enough to get through the rubber of the condom

This is an often-exposed lie, widely circulated by the Catholic Church.

You want proof? Have at it! http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1411838

An article that's 16 years old? Really? Go back another decade and they'll tell you that you can get AIDS from toilet seats.

I do believe I responded to that fail a few post ago. Ah yes. Here it is:

You're still holding an unsupported opinion and calling it fact

I might not have finished reading that because I was rushing to get a link.

[Bramborska]

I'm not sure that they specify what the chances are before they divided by 10k...? I mean, I didn't see anything... So what's the problem with assuming 1 in 10,000?

Likely, that number is far more likely than what it really is, is what he's trying to say.

So basically we can assume something larger than 1 in 10,000? Huh... 1 in 10^10000 sounds about right?

Seriously, if the rate of failure rate for condoms was mimicked by practically any other industry... It'd be pulled so fast from the market it'd be a joke.

[Unchecked Expansion]

I'm not sure that they specify what the chances are before they divided by 10k...? I mean, I didn't see anything... So what's the problem with assuming 1 in 10,000?

Likely, that number is far more likely than what it really is, is what he's trying to say.

So basically we can assume something larger than 1 in 10,000? Huh... 1 in 10^10000 sounds about right?

Seriously, if the rate of failure rate for condoms was mimicked by practically any other industry... It'd be pulled so fast from the market it'd be a joke.

0.4%?

[Bramborska]

Likely, that number is far more likely than what it really is, is what he's trying to say.

I think he's just trying to cover his ass and doesn't want to admit that he made a math error, honestly.

I know, why didn't I just assume a number that agreed with you? Clearly a math error... Because it dealt with things other than letters.

[Unhealthy2]

The idea that personal beliefs should be magically immune from criticism regardless of their effect on a person's ability to do their job is ridiculous. I bet an adamant flat-earth wacko being expelled from a physics class would get laughed at by everybody here, but this woman's opinion should be magically immune from criticism because... why, again? This sort of outlook could have massive negative effects, intentionally or not, on a gay person she's working with.



Also, any christian feeling prosecuted because of pro-gay people is being stupid. It's not our fault that people have to be dragged away from dark-age mentalities.

Because throwing away reason to hate gays is more socially acceptable than throwing away reason to believe in a flat earth. That being said, we'd probably give the flat-earther the degree just so we could laugh at how bad his papers are and tear them a new asshole in peer review.

[Tmutarakhan]

If I'm reading right, the one from Michigan "refused to work with gay clients in a positive manner."

The one we're discussing merely aired her views in the classroom.

No, she also communicated her determined intent to be hostile to gay clients to the faculty.

In one, it implies Michigan babe actually sat down with a person of the homosexual persuasion, and tried to convince him (her?) out of it. I believe the current discussion focuses on an individual who never sat down with a client.

I'm not sure how significant that is, but there's probably a significant difference between discussing in class and actively trying to alter someone's psychological health.

The significance is that this one was stopped before she did any damage.

[The Rich Port]

As a Catholic who has no problem with gay marriage, I am bewildered at the reactions people have to it. I seriously don't see the problem with it.

I want to ask a question to my fellow Catholics: do you really trust The Bible? I mean... It was written thousands of years ago, probably by a bunch of unknown old guys, who constantly edited it all throughout that time.

I mean, I'm just confused that it's such a big deal. Because I seriously doubt that God will send you away from His side just because you fell in love with someone who's the same gender as you.

Could ONE of you stop bickering to explain this to me... Because now I'm worried.

[Ryadn]

Christians are routinely persecuted and ostracized while homosexuality is celebrated and accepted.

Where in the FUCK do you live? It sure ain't on Earth. You guys have had the keys to Western Civilization for like 1,500 years now. You're still in the overwhelming majority. There are still laws that force non-Christians to live by some of the laws of Christianity in some areas in the US. Basically, you're essentially saying the fact that you're being told that you're not allowed to force everyone to pay lipservice to Christianity and that the US can't treat Christianity different than any other religion means you're being persecuted.

Also, how many places is homosexuality celebrated? Far fewer than the number of churches, I'll tell you that much. Far fewer than the number of politicians that feel the need to constantly remind us that they're Christian. I'll tell you that.

I actually live in California and belong to a church that strongly supported the anti-gay marriage initiative in 2008. After the passage of Proposition 8, individuals who hold family values sacred were mocked and belittled routinely. Also, homosexuality is celebrated everywhere. I have already stated this. It is celebrated in the media, on college campuses, in public schools and even in some workplaces. Finally, I have no problem discussing this with you or anyone else on this forum. Obviously, we disagree and that is ok. However, I would ask you to refrain from using profanity when talking to me. I haven't cursed at you and I really don't appreciate it. I'm not sure how old you are, but I am an adult and am more than capable of discussion without resorting to insults or other inflammatory speech. Thanks.

People who voted for Prop 8 do not 'hold family values sacred'. They hold their own interpretation of what 'should be' above everyone else's, and then cry because people call them out for the blatant bigotry they practice.

[Unchecked Expansion]

The idea that personal beliefs should be magically immune from criticism regardless of their effect on a person's ability to do their job is ridiculous. I bet an adamant flat-earth wacko being expelled from a physics class would get laughed at by everybody here, but this woman's opinion should be magically immune from criticism because... why, again? This sort of outlook could have massive negative effects, intentionally or not, on a gay person she's working with.



Also, any christian feeling prosecuted because of pro-gay people is being stupid. It's not our fault that people have to be dragged away from dark-age mentalities.

Because throwing away reason to hate gays is more socially acceptable than throwing away reason to believe in a flat earth. That being said, we'd probably give the flat-earther the degree just so we could laugh at how bad his papers are and tear them a new asshole in peer review.

I get the feeling you enjoy reviewing bad papers. Possibly with a really big stamp that just has HAHAHAHA in huge letters.
I hope so anyway

[Unhealthy2]

So basically we can assume something larger than 1 in 10,000?

It will necessarily have to be at least a little larger than 1 in 10,000. However, you make it sound as if I'm like "Yeah pick any number you want." when really, all I'm arguing for is being honest with use of numbers. Apparently, this makes me the bad guy.

[Kreanoltha]

An article that's 16 years old? Really? Go back another decade and they'll tell you that you can get AIDS from toilet seats.

Actually, a far worse problem is that the article clearly shows the opposite of what he thinks it does.

I do believe I responded to that fail a few post ago. Ah yes. Here it is:

You're still holding an unsupported opinion and calling it fact

I might not have finished reading that because I was rushing to get a link.