Originally posted by Britannia
We're not saying that they're more important! It is our duty to protect the innocent! We're not protecting them because they're in some way 'superior' to adults... it is because they are unable to care for themselves.
Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
that does not make them more important in the late 80's and early nineties believing the word of children over adults with little or no corroboration caused a great deal of problems for innocent people, I know of a teacher who served 9 months in prison on the word of a child which was later to be found false. Who needed the protection more, the man on rule 43 or the lying child? His wife left him before it came out it was all lies and I don't think the rifts in hi relationships with his own children ever healed totally. They were not protected. Its not as simple as you believe my friend, Bardock and I see that. Its simple for tabloid think though.
Yes so who needed proitection here and who was innocent 🙂
Because someone looks innocent, and acts innocent it does not make them innocent. Because someone looks guilty and acts guilty it does not make them guilty.
Corroboration is always needed.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I came in halfway but it seems as if the premise of this thread has nothing to do with children making false accusations, Whirly. The premise of this thread is that a man admitted he thinks about having sex with children and works in a school.
No the premise of this thread is someone made a statement, the context of which is unknown (joke etc, ver a ttractive girl who looks 20 and is 15 and he says she's fit etc.), and can someone lose their job over a statement. - Or even a fantasy they have no intention of carrying out - the answer is simple and clear - No they can't without corroboration. He may well get a warning or a suspension, Interestingly a Headteacher in London was texting students (the texts were ambiguous) he stepped down as Head and became a deputy in another local education authority.
When Doctors, Teachers, Police Officers etc actually have fantasy's and act on them damage is obviously great, however, a alleged statement made by someone could be a malicious slur etc, without corroboration. Context is always the key and each case must be individually judged.
A man works at an airline.
He says "I have a great desire to and contemplate flying the planes at my disposal into buildings."
A man works at a school.
He says "I have a great desire to and contemplate having sex with the children in my care."
Neither are saying they "will" do anything.
Do either of these cases warrant action on the part of any authority, be it the person's employer or the legal system?
Originally posted by Whirlysplatt
No the premise of this thread is someone made a statement, the context of which is unknown (joke etc, ver a ttractive girl who looks 20 and is 15 and he says she's fit etc.), and can someone lose their job over a statement. - Or even a fantasy they have no intention of carrying out - the answer is simple and clear - No they can't without corroboration. He may well get a warning or a suspension, Interestingly a Headteacher in London was texting students (the texts were ambiguous) he stepped down as Head and became a deputy in another local education authority.
When Doctors, Teachers, Police Officers etc actually have fantasy's and act on them damage is obviously great, however, a alleged statement made by someone could be a malicious slur etc, without corroboration. Context is always the key and each case must be individually judged.
Originally posted by eleveninches
I was thinking about this the other day. Do you think that pedophilles should be able to be arrested just because of their sexual orientation even if they have not commited any crime. I think that as long as they dont commit any crime, then they should be left alone, even though you might not agree with what they think.
I read in the news a few weeks ago that a male teacher had confessed to having pedophillic fantasies. But the school refused to fire him, as he hadnt committed a crime, and they didnt want to be thought of as being the 'thought police'.
Are any thoughts illegal?
Should they be illegal?
Should they be monitered?
What are your thoughts on this topic?
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
A man works at an airline.
He says "I have a great desire to and contemplate flying the planes at my disposal into buildings."A man works at a school.
He says "I have a great desire to and contemplate having sex with the children in my care."Neither are saying they "will" do anything.
Do either of these cases warrant action on the part of any authority, be it the person's employer or the legal system?
Of course not.......why should it....I can say I have a great desire to kill my boss....I'd never do it though...and i wouldn't feel very happy if I got fired....might actually make me kill him..........what aboot that teacher....now he is somewhere he can get supervised and knows that he will get caught when he does anything. If he gets fired...what if he moves...gets another job and as a hobby rapes little kids...you know that would be the fault of exactly those authorities that pretend to do good for kids.......plus he didn't do anything...one cannot get judged for something they didn't do......
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
A man works at an airline.
He says "I have a great desire to and contemplate flying the planes at my disposal into buildings."A man works at a school.
He says "I have a great desire to and contemplate having sex with the children in my care."Do either of these cases warrant action on the part of any authority, be it the person's employer or the legal system?
Warning, interview and observation and on the outcome of these measures further action may or may not be required.
How easy in a school do you think it is to molest a child?
How easy do you think with a flight crew do you think it is to crash a plane?
Originally posted by Bardock42
Of course not.......why should it....I can say I have a great desire to kill my boss....I'd never do it though...and i wouldn't feel very happy if I got fired....might actually make me kill him..........what aboot that teacher....now he is somewhere he can get supervised and knows that he will get caught when he does anything. If he gets fired...what if he moves...gets another job and as a hobby rapes little kids...you know that would be the fault of exactly those authorities that pretend to do good for kids.......plus he didn't do anything...one cannot get judged for something they didn't do......
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
So you're saying neither of those scenarios warrant any action, not even observation of behaviour, psychological/psychiatric assessment etc?
Oh observatoion sure...why not....can't stop them from observing...anything else...no....that would just lead to authoritarian bullshit....
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Whirly your old (no offence) do you have kids? (If you do) May I ask if you would allow your children to be taught by someone who has openly admitted a desire to have sex with your child?
This is not the point, I understand a lot of people say things that they do not mean, I have neices and have been a step dad and am still in touch with those children. I would need a lot more information before judging a person based on a statement they made under conditions I do not know.