Replies

Of course they didn't go strip for money, but according to your logic, what would be wrong if they did (as long as they meet your bottom line of "improving the morale of others")?

For one thing, (and here comes that nasty double standard!) men in strip clubs looking at women are far more lascivious than women in strip clubs looking at men. It's just a different environment. It's much more social. Were they stripping, they would be in an entirely different situation than being at a male strip club. Besides, I said it was good because it improved THEIR morale, not the morale of others.

Or, according to your thinking, men in speedos and bow ties dancing around is just plain funny...then I suppose you see nothing wrong with male educators who go out & earn some extra income "improving the morale" of female voyeurs. After all, they wouldn't be doing anything sexy. It would just be a "funny" act. And what could possibly be wrong with educators who moon-light as comedians?

The real question is, why do you think you do get to say what people do on their own time? Unless you think their students will be at these clubs, I really don't see what difference it makes. Personally, I don't plan to send my kids to public school primarily because I have _NO_ control over what kind of person the teacher is or what they pass along to my children. It's the bitch of a free society - I won't tell someone else what they can and cannot do when they are not working so long is it doesn't directly affect their job, but I do have the right to decide whether I want to be involved in that system at all.

The presumption that we know the entire moral code of a person by one part of their life is simply ridiculous - I would bet there are plenty of people on this board who are quite conservative parents, teachers or both who have activities they wouldn't ever let on to their children. And so long as it's kept away from the children, it's their perogitive.

Protecting the innocence of children and taking away all the freedom of adults do NOT go hand in hand.

"For one thing, (and here comes that nasty double standard!) men in strip clubs looking at women are far more lascivious than women in strip clubs looking at men. It's just a different environment. It's much more social. Were they stripping, they would be in an entirely different situation than being at a male strip club."

Yup, and thank goodness it wasn't a CFNM party, lol! And if one does not know what that is.... just google it ;)

The real question is, why do you think you do get to say what people do on their own time?

Hey, people do what they want. They act. They act publicly. They endure the fall-out & consequences (if any). Sometimes, it's ho-hum who cares? Sometimes, it's legal consequences. Sometimes, it's social consequences (a type of social sanctioning or social distancing).

Taxpayers pay the salaries of government employees like educators. Educators are role models and character-influencers of children and are generally accountable to taxpayers. Not everything they do that's morally and publicly inappropriate is going to be a "fire-able" offense. And I can think of a lot of perfectly legal things that an educator could do on their own time which would hurt his or her ability to effectively communicate to children and would at least prompt a discussion w/his or her supervisor.

And do you pretend to think that's any different w/most of us? I think we could all think of perfectly legal behavior (e.g. appearing as a superjerk or exhibitionist on some reality show) which would indeed effect our on-the-job relationships in some way--even if they didn't effect our on-the-job performances.

That's the real world! Not some compartmentalized wall of split personalities (Joe Public vs. Joe Private) & ne'er the twain shall meet!

The presumption that we know the entire moral code of a person by one part of their life is simply ridiculous - I would bet there are plenty of people on this board who are quite conservative parents, teachers or both who have activities they wouldn't ever let on to their children. And so long as it's kept away from the children, it's their perogitive.

Even you made one important disqualifier at the end: And so long as it's kept away from the children...

The fact that these female educators frequent strip shows is no longer a fact "kept away from the children" now is it?

The presumption that we know the entire moral code of a person by one part of their life is simply ridiculous - I would bet there are plenty of people on this board who are quite conservative parents, teachers or both who have activities they wouldn't ever let on to their children. And so long as it's kept away from the children, it's their perogitive. Protecting the innocence of children and taking away all the freedom of adults do NOT go hand in hand.

Neither does protecting the freedom of adults go hand in hand with never allowing social sanctions or other consequences from befalling those adults who fail to protect children via their immoral shotgun behavior. What? You want a safety net for all adults from any negative social consequence for any and all legal, public acts they may engage in?

If so, whose best interest do you have in mind? Protecting the adult desires enacted in the public square, or protecting children?

The presumption that we know the entire moral code of a person by one part of their life is simply ridiculous...

The presumption that you can't know something about someone w/out having access to their entire moral code is utterly ridiculous.

Oh, yeah, now I recall Jesus' famous words. Weren't they something to the effect of, "You shall know them only by understanding their entire moral code."

No, that wasn't it. What was it, now? Oh, oh, oh, yeah. Now, I remember:

"You shall know them by their fruit."