Teachers Union opposes the 'no sex offenders a teachers' law

Quote:A bipartisan bill that would stop convicted sex offenders from working in schools has been passed by the House but is running into a foe as it heads to the Senate: major teachers' unions like the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers.

...

In letters to lawmakers, the unions have claimed the measure might jeopardize workers' protections under union contracts.

But .. but .. what about the childrens?!?!

Teacher unions care more about the revenue they would lose than the safety of our children.

Funny how they can have a zero tolerance when it comes to kids biting pop tarts into the form of a gun but not when it comes to sex offenders teaching our children.

Kid's T-shirt with a gun or flag on it is @ to go to jail for or be dismissed,
but Unions want to have Sex Offenders working next to our children, give
me a break.

They don't like anything being told to them. They like to think they are a profession that self polices, much like doctors or lawyers; they aren't.

They need extensive testing for new teachers before they hire them.
Should include questions on a separate test of:

• How many children should Americans be allowed to have.
• How important is reducing the National Debt?
• Do you believe in the Constitution of the US?
• Can you write a decent letter home to little Johnny's parents? Prove it.
• Quickly jot down a time line of civilization utilizing as many specific dates as possible.
• Could be so many other questions....
  

The teachers union must suspect they have a lot of pervs among their members.

(10-24-2013 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The teachers union must suspect they have a lot of pervs among their members.

Or that they have a person that was convicted when they were 18 and the "victim" was 17. Now grown up, married and wanting to teach but can't due to the above situation. Do you feel that person should never teach children? I thought you guys hated zero intolerance? Now you want it? It should be done on a case by case basis.

(10-25-2013 03:04 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(10-24-2013 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The teachers union must suspect they have a lot of pervs among their members.

Or that they have a person that was convicted when they were 18 and the "victim" was 17. Now grown up, married and wanting to teach but can't due to the above situation. Do you feel that person should never teach children? I thought you guys hated zero intolerance? Now you want it? It should be done on a case by case basis.

Convicted of what?
Unless an act of violence was involved, on those facts you have no crime in most, if not all, states.
And if violence was involved, then absolutely no to teaching.

(10-25-2013 03:04 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(10-24-2013 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The teachers union must suspect they have a lot of pervs among their members.

Or that they have a person that was convicted when they were 18 and the "victim" was 17. Now grown up, married and wanting to teach but can't due to the above situation. Do you feel that person should never teach children? I thought you guys hated zero intolerance? Now you want it? It should be done on a case by case basis.

So, your beef is really how one gets tagged a sexual offender. I can agree with that. But once you get tagged, you should not be allowed to work with children.

Decisions have consequences. Your life isn't ruined. Find another profession. People have to do it all the time.

(10-24-2013 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The teachers union must suspect they have a lot of pervs among their members.

It's not just a suspicion.

Is it worse than the Catholic Church?

I told you guys about that kid who was sent a video of a 15 yr. old girl performing acts on herself. he forwarded it to a buddy. yeah that 18 yr. old is now a sexual predator. Violence sure. heck if anything the union should be against it. It narrows the pool so that should drive up wages, but i understand their stance.


I guess I would start here: Do you believe in rehabilitation?

(10-25-2013 03:04 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(10-24-2013 10:40 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  The teachers union must suspect they have a lot of pervs among their members.

Or that they have a person that was convicted when they were 18 and the "victim" was 17. Now grown up, married and wanting to teach but can't due to the above situation. Do you feel that person should never teach children? I thought you guys hated zero intolerance? Now you want it? It should be done on a case by case basis.

Roberto,

I believe most states required that the "adult" be 3 years older than the "minor." In your scenario, I don't believe a crime was committed.

I also believe this should be done by a case by case basis, but can you imagine the backlog, the lawyers, the law suits, the appeals, etc. If something like that happens it will cost a fortune and guess who pays?

(10-25-2013 08:56 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Is it worse than the Catholic Church?

I've seen a mathematical analysis that says clearly yes.

I didn't think this one completely through. This must be a state thing. In ohio we have to give finger prints. Every year we have to have a background check. I would bet this is already happening in most states. For sure in Ohio.

(10-25-2013 09:01 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I told you guys about that kid who was sent a video of a 15 yr. old girl performing acts on herself. he forwarded it to a buddy. yeah that 18 yr. old is now a sexual predator. Violence sure. heck if anything the union should be against it. It narrows the pool so that should drive up wages, but i understand their stance.


I guess I would start here: Do you believe in rehabilitation?

For a for real Pedophile........rehab..... nope. Pedophile once, pedophile always. In the case of a 19 yr old banging a 16 yr old - I don't think that actually fits the definition of Pedophile. Teacher banging a student - sorry, one can NEVER go there.