Republicans want Obama appointee fired because he's gay

[Peephole]

This is the statement that Peephole thinks is racist:

It's a pretty silly statement--"I don't want to disparage anybody because of his name, but we can't have a guy with this name as president"--but I'm having a hard time seeing the racism there. Then again, I don't have the conservative decoder ring that many of you folks own.

Yup, nothing racist about not electing a guy because his name is foreign.

Actually, if this part is true ...


... you can add my name to the list of "homophobes".

Read the thread, it's not.

The person in question came forward and said he didn't have sex and was of age of consent.

 

[oldhat]

It's a pretty silly statement--"I don't want to disparage anybody because of his name, but we can't have a guy with this name as president"--but I'm having a hard time seeing the racism there. Then again, I don't have the conservative decoder ring that many of you folks own.

Here's a link to Steve King's other questionable statements on race matters:

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/08/steve-king-record/

– King compared immigrants to “livestock” in proposing an electrified fence for the southern border.

– He has called undocumented immigration a “slow-moving terrorist attack.”

– King said that each senator who votes for the comprehensive immigration reform bill should “wear a scarlet letter A for amnesty.”

– King said the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib amounted to little more than “hazing.”

– King refused to vote for an innocuous House resolution commending the Muslims on the Ramadan holiday. (To attack those who did, he turned around and proposed a resolution commemorating Christmas.)

– King has decried an “assault on Christmas” from “secularists” who want to “eradicate Christ from Christmas.”

– King released a “report” baselessly claiming that undocumented immigrants have murdered more Americans than the combined death toll of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002.

– King praised Joe McCarthy as “a great American hero.”

– After the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed, King derisively said he was now at a place where there are 72 virgins who “probably all look like Helen Thomas.”

 

[Just thinking]

Well, yes and no. It depends on the relative ages and whether or not the state in question has "Romeo and Juliet" exceptions, or the equivalent, to their statutory rape laws.

Come on ... you're better than that. 15 years of age? ... talking about it to a teacher? Much older man? Is there no moral ground here to question?

To me that has the earmarks of someone's cry for help ... or something.

(PS --- Weren't Romeo & Juliet about the same age?)

 

[DC]

The teacher haters are so hypocritical. First they complain that public schools are failures, they can't teach kids anything. However, when the topics are evolution, homosexuality or socialism then public school are 100% effective at not just teaching them, but brainwashing the kids for life.

very true

 

[Alt+F4]

After the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed, King derisively said he was now at a place where there are 72 virgins who “probably all look like Helen Thomas.”

Come on now, that was kinda funny.

 

[quixotecoyote]

Come on ... you're better than that. 15 years of age? ... talking about it to a teacher? Much older man? Is there no moral ground here to question?

Question perhaps, but hardly condemn.

Have you seen the media circus the kids get dragged through every time this happens? If I was having legal sex with an older man and I got advice from a teacher, the last thing I need is it blasting all over the media.

If there's no crime, there's no obligation to report. If there's no obligation and his better judgement says the teen is better off without the police involved, then I don't see a problem.

(PS --- Weren't Romeo & Juliet about the same age?)

Yah, it's a misnomer.

 

[Thunder]

Hmm...this guy is trying to educate kids to not hate and want to beat up Gay kids??

oh my God!! how dare he teach tolerance!!!

instead, he should be teaching gay kids to choose to be straight, since that is what God wants.

 

[Phrost]

Wait, the OP even bolded the fact that they're specifically accusing this guy of pushing an agenda of homosexual-specific education in public schools, not "being gay".

Sure, this is probably rooted in bigotry. But if someone's actually pushing for separate schools for gay kids, there's a legitimate discussion to be had; one that shouldn't be derailed by wheeling out the "bigot" card.

 

[Just thinking]

Question perhaps, but hardly condemn.

OK, then ... question it on the better side of caution and report the incident. Even if the boy (15 year-old) is in agreement with the relationship, he's still a minor, and can be somewhat unfit to make these types of judgments even when it comes to himself.

Have you seen the media circus the kids get dragged through every time this happens? If I was having legal sex with an older man and I got advice from a teacher, the last thing I need is it blasting all over the media.

Oh, please ... what percentage of reports such as this make national coverage? Besides ... if the 15 year old is being taken advantaged of, he's still better off comparing media coverage to sexual abuse.

If there's no crime, there's no obligation to report. If there's no obligation and his better judgement says the teen is better off without the police involved, then I don't see a problem.

Lot of IF's in there ... let's clear them up with a proper investigation, not a condom.

 

[quixotecoyote]

For the record, age of consent was 16, with a 10 year leeway, so he was cutting it pretty fine, even though I don't see it as worth reporting.

Of course, since oral and anal sex was illegal at that time....

 

[quixotecoyote]

Oh, please ... what percentage of reports such as this make national coverage? Besides ... if the 15 year old is being taken advantaged of, he's still better off comparing media coverage to sexual abuse.

Yeah, still not gonna buy the sex = sexual abuse.

 

[Just thinking]

For the record, age of consent was 16, with a 10 year leeway, so he was cutting it pretty fine ...

Really ... IIRC 15 < 16. (Sorry, not horseshoes or hand grenades.)

But then again, maybe he wasn't a math teacher.

 

[Peephole]

OK, then ... question it on the better side of caution and report the incident. Even if the boy (15 year-old) is in agreement with the relationship, he's still a minor, and can be somewhat unfit to make these types of judgments even when it comes to himself.

He wasn't 15. He was 16.

Consenting adults not having sex with eachother is not a crime.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Wait, the OP even bolded the fact that they're specifically accusing this guy of pushing an agenda of homosexual-specific education in public schools, not "being gay".

Sure, this is probably rooted in bigotry. But if someone's actually pushing for separate schools for gay kids, there's a legitimate discussion to be had; one that shouldn't be derailed by wheeling out the "bigot" card.

You've lost me here. Since when does homosexual specific education mean separate schools for gay kids?

 

[Darth Rotor]

It seems politically foolish to me to put the gay thing up front, or even at all.

The later complaint about drugs and alcohol abuse might have been a more acceptable objection to this appointment. From the OP citation:

As the "safe schools" czar, Mr. Jennings is also charged with ensuring our schools and students are drug free. It is clear that Mr. Jennings is unfit to serve in this capacity, as well. His own history of unrepentant drug and alcohol abuse indicates that he is of the opinion that getting drunk and high as a young person is acceptable. In his memoir, Mama's Boy, Preacher's Son, Mr. Jennings describes his use of illegal drugs, without expressing regret or acknowledging the devastating effects illegal drug use can have on a person's life.

Why wasn't THIS the prime point of objection?

Looks like these legislators are going out of their way to be contrary. In doing so, they are abandoning possibly effective tactics.

I predict their objection lses.

They poisoned their own well.

DR

 

[quixotecoyote]

Really ... IIRC 15 < 16.

WOW

You have just exceeded all my expectations of you.

Please continue to do so in the future.

 

[yodaluver28]

Actually, if this part is true ...

Quote:
Mr. Jennings recounts a 15-year old student confiding in him that he had a sexual relationship with a much older man. Mr. Jennings' only response was to ask if the underage boy used a condom. As a mandatory reporter, Mr. Jennings was required by law to report child abuse, including sex crimes. Mr. Jennings cannot serve as the "safe schools" czar when his record demonstrates a willingness to overlook the sexual abuse of a child.



... you can add my name to the list of "homophobes".

It's not true for the most part. Jennings says that in 1988, a 16 year-old male student spoke to him about a relationship he was having with an older man. At the time, 16 was the age of consent in Massachusetts, where this took place. Even if the age of consent hadn't been 16, an adult having consensual sex with a 16 year-old would constitute statutory rape but not child abuse and certainly not pedophilia, as some have charged. In any case, Jennings argues that he was not aware of any sexual victimization of the student.

 

[Pardalis]

Even if this guy was/is a drug addicted child rapist does anyone really think the Office of Safe and Drugfree Schools is going to have any impact on what goes on day-to-day in American classrooms?

But if he doesn't show any remorse or indication that his drug use was bad for him, then I would agree he might not be the one for the job.

And if this is the reason some of the signatories agreed to sign, then this doesn't make them homophobes.

 

[Just thinking]

He wasn't 15. He was 16.

Evidence?

 

[Darat]

Cleaned up the thread somewhat with quite a few posts moved to AAH. Stop the personal attacks and insults, continuing to breach your Membership Agreement will result in further action, which may include suspension.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat