D'oh!!!
Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
Posted on 06/17/2004 7:21:12 AM PDT by esryle
COVINGTON, Ky. (AP) -- When Covington schools Superintendent Jack Moreland saw an advertisement for a Chippendales show, he thought it would be a good morale booster for his female employees. So he shelled out $420 to send 20 female staff members to a Chippendales show to see buff men strip off most of their clothing.
It worked, but it also raised the ire of at least one person, who wrote an anonymous letter to the state Office of Education Accountability accusing Moreland of using school-district funds to pay for the strip show.
Moreland said he spent $420 of his own money for the show - and faxed his personal credit-card receipt to investigators.
"I did it in fun, and they went in fun, and I don't think there was any harm done," he said.
Bryan Jones, a lawyer for the Office of Education Accountability, said he couldn't confirm or deny whether his office looked into a complaint.
The women who attended the show said they enjoyed it.
"We just laughed and laughed and laughed," said Jena Meehan, the superintendent's secretary. "It was a spectacle, to be sure, and to have all of us there was even funnier."
Chippendales is a high-class male revue that became popular in the 1980s. Well-muscled young men wearing bow-ties and bare chests strip to scanty undies for female audiences.
Moreland is the former president of the Council for Better Education, the superintendents group that brought the historic lawsuit that resulted in the Kentucky Education Reform Act of 1990 and its revolutionary reform of Kentucky's public schools.
And I was telling you that your love of oiled-up, bowtied guys in banana-hammocks is all right with me. I'm not judging.
"$420/20=$21.00
Yeah, a fancy MacDonald's?"
This Principal is not that bright, he'd probably spring for Hooters.
A strip act is immorality and it was done in public. And it was paid for by a public official who in his official capacity as Superintendent encouraged these public school teachers to attend.
It was not illegal, but it was immoral. You can and should expect public officials to practice some level of morality especially school teachers.
If it's an elected position the public can and should call for his resignation. And faily that they should vote him out of office the next election. If he's appointed, he should be fired for poor judgement and failure to uphold the role model expected of that position.
"It wouldn't be ok, because the Superintendent is promoting public nudity."
Nothing public about it. It was in a private place. And technically it's not nudity. The underwear is mighty skimpy but no skimpier than you would see on some beaches. And generally speaking women don't go there and lust after the men. My wife went to one of these years ago with friends, but it was me she lusted after when she got home.
Almost all (if not all) American states are "Employment-at-will" States. That means you can fire employees for a good reason, bad reason (except illegal reasons, such as firings based on race) or no reason at all. It is perfectly legal to fire somebody for engaging in what you consider to be immoral reasons, even if the conduct occurred outside of the workplace. Whether it's a smart employment practice is another question, of course.
However, these folks are all government employees and their employment is probably governed by a collective bargaining agreement that lays out under what circumstances they can be fired. I would be surprised if there was a generic morals clause in their contract.
The other point is, anyone who saw them at the strip club was engaging in the same type of behavior. I'm not sure anyone who has just received a lap dance from a guy dressed up like a cowboy has the right to be morally outraged.
Huh? They went to a Chippendales review performed in a private establishment attended only by people who were there voluntarily. How does that qualify as "in public?"
It was not illegal, but it was immoral. You can and should expect public officials to practice some level of morality especially school teachers.
Sure, and I would say there is serious disagreement as to whether or not a Chippendales show counts as immorality. I certainly don't think so.
It's a public place in the sense of being open to the general public for commerce. Such places are regulated in practically every community in America, whether privately owned or not.
"And technically it's not nudity."
And Baywatch isn't technically a flash show, like my cousin calls it. But we know it is.
Couldn't disagree more. The children who sit in the classrooms of teachers who would participate in this are hurt on a daily basis. Then society as a whole shares in it. These people need to get in a new line of work. They shouldn't be teaching children.
And if the morals of the county in which this guy is superintendent have degraded to the same level, this guy will keep his job and might even be congratulated.
"It's not enought to identify you. So by your own standard, you are a coward with ulterior motives."
You had best THINK before you blabber.
I've thought about it.
If I apply the same standard you applied to this teacher, "you are a coward with ulterior motives" because you have yave complained about others but have failed to fully identify yourself.
D'oh!!!
Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
Interesting. Once upon a time morals and many laws went hand in hand. Morals is defined as relating to right and wrong behavior.
But even those who ardently declare that we should not be burdened by moral laws still recognize when they have been wronged and they protest.
Do you mean whatever someone choses to do on their nights off that is LEGAL is nobody's business?
How? Is there any evidence whatsoever that these teachers in any way acted innapropriately in the classroom?
These people need to get in a new line of work. They shouldn't be teaching children.
Why not?
I have to admit that twenty years ago I worked part-time as a stripper in an all male review because I was an impoverished student and realized that I could make more money doing that in four hours than I could working twenty hours at my other job. For the most part, the women did not seem "like they were trying to act like they were having a good time," although there were always a couple at evey show who I don't think knew what they were getting into or went along only because they were afraid to say no. To the best of my knowledge, none of the guys were gay, and while some shaved their entire bodies, most like me, did not. Also, while some of the guys had big bulging Arnold Schwartzenegger type muscles, some of us had lean, sinewy builds. My point is that we enjoyed what we did, and most of the ladies enjoyed the show. The money was great, and there was no harm done.
Certainly. However, there is a biug difference between enforcing laws passed through the democratic process and enforcing the morals of whoever happens to be in power at the time. How do you go about enforcing morals in the public sphere?
Do you want him teaching your kids? Or influencing those that do?
It wasn't illegal but it was wrong.
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.