Posted on 08/01/2005 5:23:17 AM PDT by SJackson
Reprobate behavior like that of the sodomite professor are the epitomy of Biblical teaching concerning fools:
Psa 53:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and have done abominable iniquity; There is none who does good.
Psa 92:5 O LORD, how great are Your works! Your thoughts are very deep.
Psa 92:6 A senseless man does not know, Nor does a fool understand this.
Psa 92:7 When the wicked spring up like grass, And when all the workers of iniquity flourish, It is that they may be destroyed forever.
Psa 92:8 But You, LORD, are on high forevermore.
Psa 92:9 For behold, Your enemies, O LORD, For behold, Your enemies shall perish; All the workers of iniquity shall be scattered.
Prov 10:23 To do evil is like sport to a fool, But a man of understanding has wisdom.
Prov 14:16 A wise man fears and departs from evil, But a fool rages and is self-confident.
Prov 17:12 Let a man meet a bear robbed of her cubs, Rather than a fool in his folly.
Prov 17:13 Whoever rewards evil for good, Evil will not depart from his house.
Prov 23:9 Do not speak in the hearing of a fool, For he will despise the wisdom of your words.
Prov 26:8 Like one who binds a stone in a sling Is he who gives honor to a fool.
Prov 26:11 As a dog returns to his own vomit, So a fool repeats his folly.
Prov 18:6 A fool's lips enter into contention, And his mouth calls for blows. Prov 18:7 A fool's mouth is his destruction, And his lips are the snare of his soul.
Prov 27:3 A stone is heavy and sand is weighty, But a fool's wrath is heavier than both of them.
Mat 7:6 Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces.
I suggest the Biblical approach to this professor's folly:
Prov 26:3 A whip for the horse, A bridle for the donkey, And a rod for the fool's back.
And Finally:
Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
Rom 1:21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man; and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves,
Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature.
Rom 1:27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
Rom 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers,
Rom 1:30 backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful;
Rom 1:32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
You should have filed a sexual harrassment complaint on day one.
This would be front page news. NOW would be holding rallies. There would be a candlelight vigil on campus.
Looking at his C.V., It's pretty obvious that he's not qualified to be teaching Poli. Sci. His highest degree is an M.L.S which I believe is a Masters in Library Science. How he got put in front of a 300 level class is beyond me.
So he spends the whole semester on The Prince which is maybe 150 pages long. He follows this up with the xeroxed rantings of some existentialist lunatic.
I'm familiar with this school of teaching.
To me the worst part of the whole story is that Prof. Vocino is obviously just faking it. For this, the educational system collected tens of thousands of dollars.
At least with the scoutmaster, you can flee.
The author really needs to grow a pair and get more on his game.
If he didn't like the way he was treated in class, drop the class. If he wasn't quick witted enough, he should have expanded his knowledge base and quickened his response time.
If a professor asked who I "f*cked" last weekend, I wouldn't hesitate to tell him it was none of his 'f*cking' business.
This column comes across as a protracted whine. We won't score points with spokespeople like this.
I never understood the mentality of people who do this. Why would I give two hoots what you do with your genitalia?
Would they introduce themselves by saying, "Hi my name is Michael Vocino and I fold the toilet tissue before wiping."?
It just seems so odd that they would think that I would even care.
PS In class discussions of a personal nature I always said, "No comment."
I busted heads for four long years at Vassar College, and I never whined or complained about it like the author of this article.
I think the whole article is a whine.
I wonder if the university would need an official complaint to do something about the prof then?
The student should've dropped the class or changed professors after the very first class period - or at most the 2nd. He could have also explained to someone in the department why he was doing so.
I also thought this was going to be about the Vice President.
"Looking at his C.V., It's pretty obvious that he's not qualified to be teaching Poli. Sci. His highest degree is an M.L.S which I believe is a Masters in Library Science. How he got put in front of a 300 level class is beyond me."
His entire C.V. is weak. Notice he has only a few refereed articles. He calls them a selection which is no doubt a way of covering up the fact there aren't others. Only a MLS degree and this jerk is a full professor--unbelievable. He's a perverted old fraud the university is probably too timid to deal with. Or maybe he likes to service some in the school's admin office.
Homosexual Agenda Ping.
It is extremely important that you read this article in its entirety. Then, everyone you know who may be thinking of attending a university, sending their child or grandchild to a university should read it.
I can't say a word, the article says enough.
Except this: Do you think this university and this professor are unusual?
Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.
A rather unfortunate name for the student paper's website, given the story.
BTW, with students tape recording lectures in nearly every university classroom, why didn't it occur to this guy to do likewise?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.