Welcome to America!!!

Welcome to America!!!

are the out of the FUCKING MINDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Blaming the victim, how noble.

Didn't someone once say something about a millstone in cases like this?

In a SANE world, molester summarily executed, collaborators lose ANY possibility of teaching EVER (Tenure laws work BOTH ways), attorneys disbarred, school sued into oblivion.

Molesting a child is terrible enough, to molest a child with severe mental and physical disabilities too horrific. But to then turn around and blame the victim? All I can say is there is a special place in hell for people like that.

The ENTIRE school board in this case should be FIRED. The “Terminator” better step up and start terminating some positions!! And, their lawyers need to be publicly flogged.

I'm not surprised this has happened in ultra-conservative OC.
The fact that the authority figures side with the molester and against the victim is par for the course with conservatives.

This is EXACTLY why I have NO respect for authority. NONE. NEVER WILL. It's shit headed scum like this that proves to me that there isn't a moral fiber to be found anywhere NEAR authority in this country.

It's not bad enough that they play the game like the catholic church, covering up and making the problem worse by not just doing the RIGHT thing in the first place, which would have been to throw this miscreant to the curb IMMEDIATELY, but now they have the gall to SUE the girl's family for THEIR damages? This girl is a minor, she is also in a position of need and supervision. That means NOT by a pervert who uses his power to abuse and molest.

This guy is what prisons are for. Not pot smokers or those who can't pay child support. This guy has shown that he can't be trusted NOT to be a sadist and a pervert. He cannot be trusted around weaker people than himself. His job should be gone immediately, it should have been gone after the first situation, and he should be locked up for being a danger to others.

The ones who protected him and moved him from one place to another so he could do it all over again should be fined and jailed for conspiracy to abuse. They made it possible for him to keep doing it and need to be held accountable. In our system, those who know of a crime and don't tell about it are just as guilty as those who did the crime itself.

The lawyers for the school district need to be horse whipped. They are purposely twisting things to make it seem like this girl has the mental capability to make such decisions when that is apparently not the case. This is just disingenuous and should be disallowed by the judge as false information. This lawyer just proves that it really is the 99% of them that makes the rest look bad. May he rot in hell.

The following is a statement from the article:

The seventeen-year-old victim, who has cerebral palsy, has the mental capacity of a seven-year-old and is confined to a wheelchair. Because she is unable to speak

And the school district is claiming this:

In a filing with the Orange County Superior Court, the attorneys claim that the wheelchair-bound girl “chose to encounter the known risk” of being alone with Gonzalez, that she “consented to” him lifting up her shirt, and that her injuries were the result of her having “failed to use due and reasonable care for her own safety and protection.”

Where is Republican Barton when you need him to apologize to the school district.

Are you kidding me? A conservative view of the law often implies inflexibility and objectivity as opposed to relativism. Many conservatives are devout Christians and see law as being made by God and rdemanding firm consequences and not by vicissitudinous Man and preferring “rehabilitation” and excuses. If anything, licentious behavior is more likely to be tolerated by a liberal society than a conservative one. Liberals are more likely to ask the public to be merciful with the molester due to his turbulent childhood than conservatives. Therefore, your perception of conservatives being “soft” on the law is ludicrous.

Conservatives tendency to be infected with religion is EXACTLY why it is more likely that they look the other way when something like this happens.

Good people will do good things. Bad people will do bad things. But, to get good people to do bad things, that takes religion.

Sensationalist fodder.

These are nothing more or less than standard civil suit pleadings…waiver, assumption of risk, contributory negligence. The attorneys for the school district would be committing malpractice to not raise them.

Now, can we move on to real issues?

This atrocity is the creature of insurance company lawyers. As likely as not, the school district has no control over the defense and has been threatened with cancellation of its coverage if it fails to “cooperate in the defense” of the suit.

Bullying the weak is typical of insurance companies and their money-grubbing shysters. They often are worse than the monsters they defend. This is the essence of profit-based capitalist justice.

Do a little research and you will find that there indeed are more conservatives doing despicable things. Being a Conservative is their cover.

so much for Compassionate Conservatives

I don't understand why lawyers get such a bad wrap.

Amazingly many people find the molestation of a 17 yo handicapped young girl and the smearing of her and her parents an issue.

Have a nice day.

Really how low can people go? Not only the twisted scum bag that would molest a disabled person, but the scum bags who try to blame this on the child. Truly sickening. What in the hell is wrong with some people now a days. What a joke as a species we are. Supposedly we're the smartest species on the planet, but you don't see animals doing the things we do to each other. Humans should be proud of all our inventions. Serial killers, murder, child molestation, rape, war, killing for sport, and the list goes on. Some people wonder why an intelligent race from another part of the galaxy doesn't drop by to say hi.

So let me get this straight – the school district claims a disabled 17 year old with the mental capactity of a 7-year old and unable to speak could legally give CONSENT?

If I'm on the jury, the award just jumped to $ONE BILLION.

Ah, non sequitir, glad to see you made an appearance.

The molestation is an issue; standard pleadings are not…These exact defenses are asserted in slip and falls, car wrecks, swimming pool mishaps, wrongful deaths, and –yes– civil suits for sexual assault.

The attorney is doing his job here, and that's exactly how the system of zealous advocacy works. These pleadings look and read as sleazy as they do because there do not appear to be any good faith, factual defenses to the allegations. That doesn't mean that the District's attorneys aren't doing there jobs.

That was my point, and one which you seemed to have missed.

Thank you bobdevo for the comment on the ability (or in this case lack of) to give consent. And if the district knew this guy was a perv way back in 2005, whoo boy! As far as the egregious behavior of the district's legal team, these may be “common” legal strategies, but most other school districts would have a) turned the guy over to the cops and b) settled with the parents.

Blaming victims of molestation and rape is common. This reflects what family values really means in our society.

what society do YOU live in? I thought the “she flaunted it she wanted it” excuse went out in the 80's.

That little tramp! Flaunting her c.p. tremors and 7-year-old intellectual capacity at that red-blooded, all-American, male teacher's aide! And doing it all from a wheelchair, no less! Somebody really needs to have a talk with these girls about the correct way of presenting themselves. I'm not saying that she “wanted” to be molested, but no doubt, she was probably twitching and palsying in a suggestive way, and using that childlike mental capacity to get attention! Throw in a wheelchair and I'm sorry, the situation just reeks of “come and get it.” I mean, hell, everyone knows that virtuous girls with cerebral palsy and the mental capacity of a seven-year-old use crutches to get around on. Only whores use wheelchairs…

also, the assertion of a defense is in no way a smear…it is merely a pleading. With no evidence, the pleading falls out…

Your are committing a couple fallacies here and possibly more. For one, whatever terrible behavior you have personally found with some Christians won't be espoused by all Christians. Furthermore, just because some choose to distort Scripture to suit their own terrible ends doesn't mean that it is right. So, I suggest you look to the scriptural ideal instead of the fallible Man that corrupts the ideal. You are certainly committing a fallacy of false conclusion when you assert that conservatives look the other way in cases of child molestation BECAUSE of their religious devotion. Are you sure that that is the exact cause of their alleged leniency toward molestation? If you can find God advocating child molestation in the Bible then I will bow unto you, but you won't. As I mentioned earlier, it's Man's leniency and morally relativistic ways that lead to problems, not the Faith itself.

Conservatives are soft on the law as long as the perpetrator is himself conservative and a member of a Christian denomination. Or, as long as their last name is Vitter, Gingrich, Ensign, Sanford, Berlin, Elliot, McKee, Thompson, Limbaugh, need I go on?

Dont cruicify me here; but in defence of Gonzalas; the family is sueing for mental and physical trauma, TRAUMA

A girl with a mental capacity of a 7 year old and cannot speak is complaining that having her shirt lifted up is physical trauma? Was she hurt during this? were there anykind of sexual acts involving penetration or pain? was she beaten, bruised? No absolutely not. As there are no reported signs of physcial damage, would someone like to show me the grounds that the family is using to to claim “physical trauma”? Because its not apparent to me.

What about mental trauma? Has anyone ever seen a person with cerebral paulsy want to express 'no', its actually quite the scene; in fact if the girl was protesting at any point there would have been certainly no mistaking, as in the other teacher witnessing the act or other students hearing the commotion. This was simply not the case. Its not like Mr. gonzalas could have coerrced her into doing this, or lied and said it was alright, told her to be quiet, she is unable to communicate, she goes by yes this feels okay or no this does not feel okay. So if the girl was not protesting and was not coerrced, again; i fail again to see where the trauma has occured.

Was the behaviour of mister gonzalas was wrong? sure it was, it was low, dirty, and wildly inappropriate and most definatly criminal – but did what he do cause trauma by definintiion? No he did not.

Civil case, out.

Dont cruicify me here; but in defence of Gonzalas; the family is sueing for mental and physical trauma, TRAUMA

A girl with a mental capacity of a 7 year old and cannot speak is complaining that having her shirt lifted up is physical trauma? Was she hurt during this? were there anykind of sexual acts involving penetration or pain? was she beaten, bruised? No absolutely not. As there are no reported signs of physcial damage, would someone like to show me the grounds that the family is using to to claim “physical trauma”? Because its not apparent to me.

What about mental trauma? Has anyone ever seen a person with cerebral paulsy want to express 'no', its actually quite the scene; in fact if the girl was protesting at any point there would have been certainly no mistaking, as in the other teacher witnessing the act or other students hearing the commotion. This was simply not the case. Its not like Mr. gonzalas could have coerrced her into doing this, or lied and said it was alright, told her to be quiet, she is unable to communicate, she goes by yes this feels okay or no this does not feel okay. So if the girl was not protesting and was not coerrced, again; i fail again to see where the trauma has occured.

Was the behaviour of mister gonzalas was wrong? sure it was, it was low, dirty, and wildly inappropriate and most definatly criminal – but did what he do cause trauma by definintiion? No he did not.

Civil case, out.

Wow, this is unbelievably sickening and disgusting. The school district officials should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. I feel so sorry for those parents.

Yeah, it's far more common than it should be. Our “family values” could end up mirroring those of South Africa where it's socially acceptable for women to be raped and molested and no one cares.

This just shows the kind of sensationalistic journalism that people just eat up. Cerebral palsy, while an effect on the brain's motor skills, does not effect an individual's mental abilities. Look it up people: cerebral palsy is caused when the part of the brain that affects motor skills and growth development somehow gets damaged early in the victim's life…usually diagnosed at child birth due to some sort of difficult pregnancy or some effect to the brain within the first three years. I am personally tired of people equating cerebral palsy with mental retardation(cerebral palsy…palsy “the shakes” caused by cerebral damage). It is terrible because they have difficulty with motor skills and speaking most assume them to be idiots and throw them in special ed classes where their ability to learn and advance is crippled. Now, what this person did was wrong…any type of sexual contact with students should be expressly forbidden, even more so since she was under 18(which is still illegal even with the person's consent if there is no parental consent). She may not have had the actual physical ability to say no, or may have had trouble communicating that or worse case scenario she may have allowed it. In any of these cases, saying that she has the mental capacity of a seven year old is not just blatant discrimination, it borders on libel in so much that there is no documented proof or this in this article, nor is there any quotations from experts or any sort of showing of iq or mental capacity tests…how can you say that she has the mental capacity of a 7 year old simply because she has cerebral palsy? are you an idiot? but like i said: such a statement is just used for sensationalism, to get people fired up, and to get more hits. Let's focus on the root of the story: a person in authority, using that authority to seduce an underage student(or force an underage student to commit sexual acts), and taking advantage of the fact that she has a physical disability which would normally lower self esteem or perhaps prevent her from resisting. Everything else you spoke of, and half these idiots on the board are just talking out of your ass.

just another fine example of ” republican family values” orange county……don't think i wanna go there….

No number of examples will illustrate your point that conservatives(i.e. ALL conservatives) are soft on the law when it involves conservative perpetrators. Again, that is fallacious. Just because Eliot Spitzer and Bill Clinton are adulterers doesn't give me the ability to truthfully claim that all Dems have cheated on their spouses. Also, how do you know that conservatives are soft on the law ONLY when it concerns conservative, Christian perpetrators? If I found evidence to the contrary, would you abandon your argument? I would conjecture that one is no longer legally conservative if one is prone to distorting the law. To me, your prattling of names doesn't remotely tarnish the idea of a conservative legal paradism, but rather, it serves to highlight those of whom are phony conservatives.

Spot on, spot on. I totally agree with you. For one Anoid who started defending this is either a child molester and/or a closeted child abuser. If it's “okay” that said teacher helper can lift a girls shirt and play with her private parts as long as she isn't hurt, then how would he feel if it was his daughter. Also If I was the parents, I would get a lawyer and take them to trial with a jury. Let them explain to the court and jury (the school lawyers and admin) how it was the 17 year old (still a minor) CP girl in a wheelchair that can't talk and has the mental functions of a 7 year old fault. Then at some time in the middle of the trial have the accused teacher assistant brought into court to question him and have him dance and fidget and explain how it was her fault and his other problems with being alone with female students and other disciplinary issues from the school. Then bring the girl into court to try to explain or be seen as the victim of this crime.

The lawyers and the school will want to settle and settle fast, because they aren't dumb (the ones that pushed out this reverse lawsuit are dumb but not the court lawyers). They know that the vast amount of people don't like child molesters or abusers. And having the perpetrator trying to explain what he did to this disabled child and call it her fault will make the jury extremely mad at not only him but the lawyers for the school and the school itself. They will want to know why in gods name didn't you get rid of this man a long time ago. These lawyers that the school have must be idiots or naive, because who wants to go into court and try to say it was the 17 year old CP girl that can't talk and in a wheelchair with the mental capacity of a 7 year old fault and the parents fault. A good lawyer would have settled and asked for a non-disclosure agreement and fire the teacher.

Spot on, spot on. I totally agree with you. For one Anoid who started defending this is either a child molester and/or a closeted child abuser. If it's “okay” that said teacher helper can lift a girls shirt and play with her private parts as long as she isn't hurt, then how would he feel if it was his daughter. Also If I was the parents, I would get a lawyer and take them to trial with a jury. Let them explain to the court and jury (the school lawyers and admin) how it was the 17 year old (still a minor) CP girl in a wheelchair that can't talk and has the mental functions of a 7 year old fault. Then at some time in the middle of the trial have the accused teacher assistant brought into court to question him and have him dance and fidget and explain how it was her fault and his other problems with being alone with female students and other disciplinary issues from the school. Then bring the girl into court to try to explain or be seen as the victim of this crime.

The lawyers and the school will want to settle and settle fast, because they aren't dumb (the ones that pushed out this reverse lawsuit are dumb but not the court lawyers). They know that the vast amount of people don't like child molesters or abusers. And having the perpetrator trying to explain what he did to this disabled child and call it her fault will make the jury extremely mad at not only him but the lawyers for the school and the school itself. They will want to know why in gods name didn't you get rid of this man a long time ago. These lawyers that the school have must be idiots or naive, because who wants to go into court and try to say it was the 17 year old CP girl that can't talk and in a wheelchair with the mental capacity of a 7 year old fault and the parents fault. A good lawyer would have settled and asked for a non-disclosure agreement and fire the teacher.

These attornies are dispicable and plain stooopid! both by her age, under 18 and her mental capacity she could NEVER consent to be individually responsible for her actions. I hope the parents attorny files a 2nd suit for these false and malicious attacks on their daughters reputation!

I hope the parents in the district remove the superintendent any board member who supported this shameful tactic!

All power and strength to this family! The young lady is fortunate that she has family to back her and people who care. My heart goes out to her.

The legal battle will take years. Between suit and appeals, they will probably have to be fighting this one for quite a while, especially since it is obvious that the school district would rather keep a known abuser than deal with a sticky situation. (Why – when parent's entrust the safety of their children to the school, and if the trust is gone, the children (and those federal dollars) might also leave?)

A teacher's aide almost certainly isn't on the tenure track; even if so, moral turpitude is a firing offense.

My lawsuit took 8 years. A box of bullets would have been cheaper and quicker. Decades later, I'm still angry. However, I was the 5th woman in that government office to be sexually manhandled, that I know of. The others had all left. If they had protested their treatment, maybe my supervisor wouldn't have thought that sex with underlings was part of the perks of his job. By filing suit and remaining firm, my hope was that no other woman would suffer.

This aide must be removed from any position involving the vulnerable (seniors as well as children)… and the school board must be educated on how to properly deal with this sort of situation so that it doesn't happen again to any other child in their care.

I hope that the ACLU or one of the other NGOs can help this family. They'll need legal support and a long-term view to fight an entrenched (moated with alligators) system. It is a battle worth fighting.

an0id, I piss down your spine.

Pedophile

yeah, I know what conservatives claim to believe in, and I see how they act.

there's a reason why we all say IOKIYAR.

Did you read the last part where i said “wildly inappropriate and most definatly criminal”, yea that part, thats where i try and point to the reader than im not defending what he did and that i agree it was wrong. Maybe i wasnt clear enough for some of the audiance here…Im simply identifying what grounds the lawyers will (possibly) use to try and avoid civil law suite. I dont recall ever saying it was ethical; the act or the lawyers.

Be mad all you want at me, its the american judicial system that lets things like this go ahead as they do.

Utter and complete bollocks. Just because the girl is unable to vocally express herself does not mean that she is a vegetable incapable of fear or trauma. Imagine “an0id” you were locked in a mental box and you were being abused against your will. You would be traumatised for sure, as was this poor victim.

Did anyone ask her if she was 'traumatised”?

Im not advocating that this guy “gets off on a meer pedophilia charge”, im arguing as a lawyer might.

I can see this makes people angry, and by right. Makes me angry. Dont cruicify me, crucify the lawyer who puts his face on the line to defend this “man”

Sorry but sometimes you just have to hold up your hands and this is one of them.
Heads should roll for this as well as vast amount of damages. That way the insurance companies would ensure that these perverts could never be employed to care for vulnerable people.

Another one who cant read between the lines…

So she “chose to encounter the known risk” of being alone with Gonzalez? Well, if he was a known risk, then the district should have KNOWN to fire him. Not a smart argument, assholes.

What this really proves is this: don't let your children go to public school in Orange County.

Conservatives use God and Jesus as shields for the most disgusting and perverse actions.
They are happy to dismember children using remotely piloted bombs in the hope of killing few alleged terrorists and then honestly believe they are doing Gods work!!
I cannot find adequate words to express my disgust of these people !
Christians and all religious people are either duped well meaning idiots or perverted scum.

What matters is the ideal, not those that distort or misrepresent the ideal. Would I be right to paint all Democrats as adulterous as a result of Eliot Spitzer's affair? Or what about Bill Clinton's affair? Or JFK's affair with Marilyn Monroe? Or Lyndon Johnson's affair with Alice Glass? I could go on, but that proves nothing beyond those immediately involved. The truth is that man, regardless of his political affiliation, is incapable of exemplifying the ideal. So, pointing out the foibles of conservatives does nothing to refute conservative concepts, just as pointing out the foibles of liberals does nothing to legitimately refute liberal concepts. I would argue that true conservatives do not manipulate the law.

This should never have happened in a normal society. Schools are meant to protect and nurture our children, not fuckin molest them!

Then why did W run roughshod over the law in every possible way for eight years, starting with the fact that he was never elected? His entire “presidency” was nothing but a continuous exercise in criminality.

“Conservatives,” i.e., reactionaries, don't give a shit about rules. They are the ultimate relativists. The only thing they care about is helping the rich and powerful. There's a certain kind of pseudo-leftist, very popular in the 90's, that thinks everything is relative and therefore won't do much of anything about anything. The rise of this viewpoint represented a reactionary tendency destroying the left from within, not actual leftism, and it led to nothing but right-wing dominance, predictably. A genuine leftist wants a society based on firm laws and rules that are applied no matter who you are.

Reactionaries like to POSTURE about how absolutist they are in order to con people into voting for them. This has nothing to do with their behavior.

I have no idea if anyone ask her if she was 'traumatised” but you simply assume that because the victim has cerebral palsy that she is an imbecile. It is notoriously difficult to assess the mental capacity of a sufferer of cerebral palsy. Apparently the lawyers assumed she had the mental capacity to consent without demonstrating how a cerebral palsy sufferer might adequately accomplish this.

Tell you what, stupid. Let someone fondle and molest your seven year old and then you tell us if they are traumatized. Pinhead!

Why are you so obsessed with people having affairs? It is between them and their partners and no one else.
If they are political liars murderers and thieves then that is a different matter.
As for saying true conservatives to not manipulate the law what does that mean?
What about Conservatives with a capital “C” ?

I see that you bring up a couple of consensual adult affairs in this story of molestation of a child.

Thus do you prove my point that you conservatives are perverts.
Your moral relativism is showing, dear.

an0id you are suffering from testosterone poising! The base of your argument says that 7 year girls can't experience emotional trauma from being sexually molested? You misogynistic idiot it does not matter if she protested, even 7 yr old knows it was wrong for the perv to look at or touch he breasts….unless you live in the Ozarks and like fiddle muzak! In that situation she would only know it’s wrong if it was not a relative! Humor folk’s humor!

Seriously an0id, you would fit in nicely at the school districts law firm. F'n Neanderthal!

1 And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

3 And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:

5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,

7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. 1And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;

2 And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night.

3 And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat.

4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:

5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

6 And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him,

7 And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly.

8 Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

The best way for these parents to settle the suit is to rally the community to oust the superintendent and any Board members who think that this in an appropriate way to treat the parents of THEIR district. The Board has the authority to direct the defense and settle the claim. They are just as culpable for this fiasco as the Principle.

There is no room between the lines in your argument. You cannot inoculate yourself by saying what the perv did was wrong. It either happened or didn't. If it did, the damage was done parse!

Ya see even taking your argument to the extreme and the girl “wanted” the prev to look at or touch her 7 year old breasts she will grow up! Yes even she will grow mentally and she will HAVE the memory of the event and with mature knowledge she will realize that something bad happened and she may or may not be able to deal with it. Credible studies suggest that 25-35% of ALL young women are molested in some manner before the age of 18. The psychological consequences of these trauma result in obesity, anorexia, social dysfunction and suicide. Many of these victims have consciously blocked out the event but it eats away at their subconscious until other life stresses trigger the memories. And then the real trauma begins.
If you have a wife or sister I suggest you have a serious talk about your position and see what they have to say. Be ready to spend the night on the couch or get disinvited from family gatherings unless you are willing to “get it”! OBTW I'm a MWM.

In an effort to serve the online community best, please verify your account so that your comments will post as soon as they are posted in the future. Thanks

Yea, even my wife thinks your kinda stupid.

I'll spell this out very simply for you. The lawyers will argue that there was no damage because she is unable to identify that damage occured. END POINT.

And the stupid compass spins again….

The guy has something wrong with him and the only thing more wrong than what he did is that america actually has an appeal process for type of behaviour. I just simply gave a possible excuse for a defence in a civil suite.

One final note on this, re-read again that part where i said “Was the behaviour of mister gonzalas was wrong? sure it was, it was low, dirty, and wildly inappropriate and most definatly criminal “. You clearly didnt read the entire post and just began fuming and replying. I mean, seriously, ive already corrected a few people here, had you read further you might have realized before your spastic thesaurus inspired moment the compass wouldnt be pointed at you.

Idiot.

civil suite or not, the guys going to jail for a long time. I wonder well he's going to cope with that environment… haha

I live in 'liberal' California and have had to deal with the consequences of reporting rape. It never happened to me, it never happened to my 6 year old daughter. God bless our f'n society.

I absolutely agree…the only problem is that no insurance company on earth is going to insure intentional torts; the district is screwed.

And what did God do to the Sodom? He destroyed it and everything in it. God does not instruct people to molest.

But yet your reasoning is still fallacious. Those that are lax with the law cannot be called conservative by the word's very definition. So, in this case, it is inherently not conservative or traditional to equivocate and re-define justice for a child molester. The law is concrete and not open to wild interpretation(or it should not be, if one is a conservative). And being a staunch libertarian, I find both parties to be eerily similar these days. The liberals were rabidly supportive of Cindy Sheehan during Dubya's reign, but have since lost their resolve since Obama assumed power. The same sudden permissiveness of Democrats can be seen in their continued support of Obama despite his Bushite abuse of civil liberties in the areas of wireless wiretapping and secret renditions. In fact, Obama has only expanded Dubya's war effort to places like Pakistan and the saber is undeniably rattling for Iranian blood. And this bellicosity is not just limited to Obama. What about Clinton's nation building exercises in places like Haiti, Somalia, and Bosnia? That was not very peaceful, and sadly, each subsequent president seems to be looking to outdo the last in terms of war-mongering.

Clearly, the parents exposed the child to the lewd, diabolical sexual impulses of public agency employees who, by dint of their association with satanically inspired public agencies that should be disbanded according to constitutional principals, in order to provoke the assault and set up a claim for damages. Therefore, the child should be taken away by CPS and the parents should be shipped to Gitmo as enemies of the state.

Last I checked, duct tape does not equal consent.

I made a point to say that because some engage in bad behavior, whether it was consensual or not, does not mean that you can generalize to the larger group. Not all Democrats cheat on their spouses despite my numerous examples. Not all Republicans are war-mongers(though many are, Ron Paul is an example that is not). I myself am libertarian and do my best to be consistent in my reasoning. Anyway, your straw man argument is cheap. What's ironic here is that you are angry at a public school district, a government-operated school district. To me, this describes yet another failure of government-run schooling, but yet what repercussions will there be for such government malfeasance? Should those living in Santa Ana that disapprove refuse to pay taxes for the school district? Nope, because that would be illegal. One doesn't have a choice. So what recourse do the people have? None. If this happened in a private school, parents would withdraw their children in droves and the school would disappear for the betterment of humanity, not to mention the crippling criminal charges that would rightfully be brought against the perpetrators. So, which sounds more like justice to you?

Since you didn't like my illustration that not all Democrats cheat on their spouses despite my evidence to the contrary, I will use another illustration. How about war-mongering? Obama is every bit the war-monger Bush was, but it would be fallacious of me to assert that ALL Dems are war-mongers. Dennis Kucinich comes to mind as a stark opponent to our imperialist wars protracted by Obama. So, not all conservatives are lax on molestation. I'm conservative(libertarian, really), and I think molestation is reprehensible. What now?

You are begging the question here. How do you know that all conservatives are reactionaries and that all conservatives don't care about the rules? You merely assume such things because you certainly haven't proven those points. Furthermore, I'm conservative(libertarian, really) and I care deeply about the consistency of the law. Maybe you think I'm a liar and you are entitled to believe what you want, but my insistence seems to conflict with your worldview. It annoys me that people here are so illogical so as to distort the very definition of “conservative” to include those that are lenient toward molesters. There is nothing conservative or traditional in such a definition.True conservatives should call for harsh penalties befitting this crime regardless of the circumstances and because some don't means nothing to diminish the conservative legal perspective. Would I be right to say that basketball players are terrible people because Ron Artest beat up some fans in 2004 or that Latrell Sprewell choked his coach? No, because many do not act this way. Not all conservatives like Dubya and Reagan, not all conservatives like war (i.e. Ron Paul). This also means that Republicans are wrong to paint all liberals as socialists although some are very fond of progressive European policies without adopting moniker of “socialist” (i.e. Kucinich).

You are begging the question here. How do you know that all conservatives are reactionaries and that all conservatives don't care about the rules? You merely assume such things because you certainly haven't proven those points. Furthermore, I'm conservative(libertarian, really) and I care deeply about the consistency of the law. Maybe you think I'm a liar and you are entitled to believe what you want, but my insistence seems to conflict with your worldview. It annoys me that people here are so illogical so as to distort the very definition of “conservative” to include those that are lenient toward molesters. There is nothing conservative or traditional in such a definition.True conservatives should call for harsh penalties befitting this crime regardless of the circumstances and because some don't means nothing to diminish the conservative legal perspective. Would I be right to say that basketball players are terrible people because Ron Artest beat up some fans in 2004 or that Latrell Sprewell choked his coach? No, because many do not act this way. Not all conservatives like Dubya and Reagan, not all conservatives like war (i.e. Ron Paul). This also means that Republicans are wrong to paint all liberals as socialists although some are very fond of progressive European policies without adopting moniker of “socialist” (i.e. Kucinich).

You need to study more about how attorneys argue damages. Not all are “current” and not all have to be realized at the time of the incident.

Follow this case and learn something!

My sympathies to your wife for having to put up with your antiquated notions!

a) she's a minor. Period.

b) she's a student and a teacher pleaded GUILTY to molesting her.

c) CP may well not be the only issue this poor child has, you're assuming the “writers of the article” made up her mental deficiency out of whole cloth. It may well have been stated by her parents who have had her tested. Life is not exhaustive in all matters all of the time.

d) ranting about an aside when we're talking about the SCHOOL trying to blame the victim (even if she WAS willing, it's illegal for teachers to molest children) to cover their ass is pretty sad.

Priests known to have molested children are still out there molesting children. Explain that one.

someone just needs to give this pedophiles info to the local biker group.

…must of been a purpose driven rape…

That's hilarious, if a litttle inside RCdom

This response itself is trauma producing and should be litigated with a demand for triple damages for intent.

Is there a single human being working for this school district? This is outrageous and the people behind it should be fired for simply being bad human beings.

this makes no sense, please explain. who are you?

Just about everyone, including yourself, has made this same mistake. Just because some people(in this case, priests) choose to distort biblical law doesn't mean that the law itself is bad. Is liberty bad because some criminals feel “free” enough to rob, rape, and murder? Should we live in a full-fledged police state and suffer a wide-scale loss of freedom because a few criminals decide to grossly abuse their freedom? To me, such a policy would be fallacious and destructive. Just because some choose to subvert the law, doesn't mean we ALL subvert the law. I too am disgusted with priests who molest and their superiors that cover-up the misdeeds.

This is outrageous, but issues like this happen far more often than the public know about.

Also… I think you need a new proofreader for your articles. The head of a school is not a “princIPLE”…. it's a princiPAL. Come on now people…

I hate to even sound conservative this way…but it might just be time to bring back public floggings. Any lawyer who steps into a court and issues statements like these should have the flesh whipped off of their bodies and then be disbarred and chased out of town. It's inexcusable that judge would even hear this spoken and not chase the man out of court. Our culture has truly reached its low ebb.

You don't get the point here, Igrobertson. It was Lot, the only “RIGHTEOUS” man in Sodom, who offered to let the entire city rape his young daugters. Yet it was Lot, the rape-promoter, who was saved from the city's destruction by God. And then Lot went on to have sex with his daughters himself, by the way. For which God never punished him.

Apparently, God has some very lax attitudes about the sexual abuse of girls and women. The Bible has some other examples of this: David, taking the betrothed of his friend away from him, and then God cursing the **woman** because she hated David for doing that to her; the tribe of Benjamin, raping and killing a man's wife (by the way, the husband had thrown her out the door to be raped); Abraham coldly using his wife Sarah in an extortion scheme in Egypt, in which God played a major part; Abraham throwing Hagar and her son out into the desert to die when he didn't need them anymore because he had a son by Sarah.

God always demands restitution and your examples are weak. Lot, like all of us was fallible, and while he did some terrible things he was fearful of God and was the only remotely principled man in Sodom. But then you think that the death of his wife is no punishment? Or how about the God’s punishment in regards to the incestuous birth of Moab and Ammon? The Ammonites and Moabites were lowly people in God’s eyes and were routed by the Israelites when Israel put their faith in God. In regards to David, you should read II Samuel 12. Nathan rebukes David for having scorned God by committing adultery and having Uriah killed. David lost several sons but was then repentant of such horrid behavior as evidenced by the book of Psalms. And read Judges 20 to see what the fate of the Benjaminites was (they were routed by the Israelites with God’s help). And in regards to Abraham, you say “coldly” when I believe it wasn’t foisted upon her. Furthermore, a lie is still a lie to God, but God is merciful, otherwise no one could be forgiven. Just because Abraham lied does not mean that he disavowed God is absurd. Even Pharaoh rebuked Abraham for his deception because, after all, the law was written even on Pharoah’s heart. And finally, I’m certain that while Abraham cast Hagar and Ishmael out, God was responsible for saving them by providing water and promising Ishmael that he will become the leader of a great nation. You may not like how God handles things, but there is consistency is his ruling. Besides, who are you to judge His actions? Until you can prove yourself to be , omnipotent, blameless and perfectly logical, your sense of justice will forever be arbitrary and imperfect

you know if the school board, the school admistration and the attorneys for the school and teacher feel this was all the childs fault, and has nothing to do with the lack of action on the part of the school system, then I say we suggest that each of these person's children be placed in the classroom with this teacher, and let nature take it's course. Somehow, with this suggestion being thrown on the table, I think each person claiming that it's all the students fault, will have a sudden change of heart when it's their child that is the one that is left at the mercy of this “teacher” Apparently in the school boards opinion, and that of school adminstrators it's ok to leave this pervert in a classroom with children who can't object or voice their fears-well it may not be ok, but it certainly makes the lives of the school personnel much easier AND the school board/system isn't afraid of law suits because no one knows what is happening. amazing-when did caring for and protecting children come down to a matter of dollars and cents, instead of just a matter of what is the RIGHT THING TO DO?

I would start with the Principal & the School Board and then save the most lashes for their attorneys!

I read the WHOLE post and that is why I choose to add my literary 2 cents. I get it that you are not defending the perv’s action but you don’t seem to “get” that your suggested legal defensive won’t hold up in court.
I suggest that you consult an attorney friend and ask him/her if your “theory” would hold water. I suspect he would, as I have tried to explain to you in multiple ways, tell you that it would be the equivalent of a legal sieve.

He pleaded guilty.

Despite your amateur legal argument, I'm pretty sure a jury will disagree with you, thus she has a case.

by contrast, there are now scores of kids in jail or worse, in psychiatric 'clinics' (several of these have recently been exposed for using massive and many shock treatments as punishment and 'behaviour mod' on children and teens), for the 'crime of 'sexting;' sending naked photos of themselves around to friends or lovers. these will be hounded forever after as 'sex offenders' for practicing the 1st amendment right to freedom of expression.

and in oklahoma a couple of years ago, a really demented religious old judge threw an 18 year old boy in prison for 10 years for giving a blowjob to a 15 year old. this same judge had also put an elderly couple in jail for having sex in their fenced in back yard, as witnessed by a peeping tom cop.

if it were my kid thrown into prison by goons like these; the prosecutor, judge and jury would be on my list. if these kids ever get out of jail and clinics; they should make sure the villains get their rightful comeuppance.

In an effort to serve the online community best, please verify your account so that your comments will post as soon as they are posted in the future. Thanks

HOLD IT!
This is just the lawyer's first shot! He's establishing his negotiating point.
He's a LAWYER, fer christsake! That means he's morally handicapped.
What would you expect of him? It's his job to behave this badly.
…and since his client is a school district, who's holding the leash?
Has anyone told him what's out of bounds?

i volunteer for raw…your post are going up because they are getting approve right away…if you verify your account they wont need to be approved…that's all…raw went to verified accounts due to spam and death threat from unverified users..

Markus, if you really want to scam people, you have to first be intelligent.

what?…

I don't know what your problem is, but I'll bet it's hard to pronounce!

Are you a professional ass-clown, or is this your first public audition?, markusgarvey is a Moderator, is he running a scam on behalf of Raw story, or on his own initiative on the site owned and operated by Raw Story.

I think the Aliens forgot to remove your anal probe…..

God was implicit in Abraham’s extortion scheme. Therefore, he must have approved of it. The whole story paints the Pharoah as the only one acting with integrity. And it’s not like Abraham did that just once out of ignorance of what would happen. He did it about three times — shaking down the Pharoah and being richly rewarded for just leaving with his sister-wife and taking his God with him. He left Egypt as a very rich man, thanks to his God-given extortion scheme.

If David were truly repentant, why didn’t he try to make up for the damage he did to the woman that he took away from her betrothed? And I am not talking about Uriah and Bathsheba here — this one was a completely different offense.

Did the angels of the Lord stop Lot from offering his daughters to the rapists? We don’t get that insight. Instead, the rapists turned down the prospect of young virgins, preferring the angels instead. But that is no excuse for Lot or the angels.

And unlike you, I do not find “consistency” in God’s behavior or rulings. Tell that one to the woman that God cursed for hating David after David took her away from her beloved.

There is a crucial concept that you seem to be ignoring and it is this: Go does not reward because of the sin, but IN SPITE OF the sin. Again, God is merciful, and man is sinful by his very nature, but what is important is they didn’t revel in their sin, they were repentant and worked hard to be righteous. Abraham certainly lied on several occasions, and David committed adultery, but like I said in my last response, neither abandoned their faith and their fear of God. Unless you can demonstrate that David, Lot, and Abraham were in fact apostates and yet were still favored by God, I would say that you are being arbitrary and simply disagree with God’s definition of justice, which hardly presents any legitimate opposition to my worldview. Today, murderers often spend less time in prison than drug offenders and I know that to be unjust because God designates murder as a capital crime deserving death and marijuana possession as, well, not nearly so capital of a crime. Whether you like it or not, there exists a consistent explanation as to why man is sinful and requires God’s mercy. By your metric, anyone who claims to have faith and fails in some moral arena is showing God to be equivocatory and arbitrary which is most certainly not the case. I found it interesting that you impose some moral standard when you asserted that Lot had “no excuse” for his behavior. He’s a sinner, as are you, as am I. And so I am interested to hear your source for judging others when God’s law seems oppressive and foolish ? Do you arbitrarily cherry-pick God’s laws according to your current disposition or do you solely look within to arbitrarily formulate justice that is appended to nothing beyond yourself? You treat God as if He abrogated a promise to intervene in all soon-to-be sinful moments, but He never made such a promise and therefore your presuppositions of justice are just that: your own. You also have the gall to doubt David’s repentance because he didn’t do things to satisfy your demands for justice. Man is sinful due to what transpired in the Garden of Eden, due to Adam and Eve’s disobedience, but God is merciful enough to not only give us “guidelines” on how to please Him but is merciful in giving us second chances by way of Grace. Also could you provide me names of this other couple that David offended?

I seriously Hope the parents take the officials for every thing they got, and that the teacher in question gets put into the general population in prison. Let him see what it's like to be taken advantage of by someone bigger, meaner and stronger than he is…

2 Samuel 3:
13 “Good,” said David. “I will make an agreement with you. But I demand one thing of you: Do not come into my presence unless you bring Michal daughter of Saul when you come to see me.”
14 Then David sent messengers to Ish-Bosheth son of Saul, demanding, “Give me my wife Michal, whom I betrothed to myself for the price of a hundred Philistine foreskins.”

15 So Ish-Bosheth gave orders and had her taken away from her husband Paltiel son of Laish.
16 Her husband, however, went with her, weeping behind her all the way to Bahurim.

2 Samuel 6:

16 As the ark of the LORD was entering the City of David, Michal daughter of Saul watched from a window. And when she saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD, she despised him in her heart.

23 And Michal daughter of Saul had no children to the day of her death.

I hate to say it, but you are in error here too. Paltiel did not have a right to Michal. David had not issued a writ of divorce and so Paltiel’s claim as her husband was illegitimate. Furthermore, Michal was insolent toward King David (who was favored by God over Saul) at a time that should have been jubilant and while David did not punish her, God did for her lack of respect and lack of faith. This left her without children. And Paltiel should have made sure that she was his to marry, but instead he was committing adultery. King David and all appointed leaders serve as God’s viceregents. If one curses a King or President, one curses God. Even folks like the Egyptians were beholden to God’s rule. However, one should be reminded that deviant leaders are to be reproached honestly and graciously if they cast aside God and his constraining laws. So, in other words Christians should not have been tolerant of Hitler and his cruel policies.

got it, thnx. will verify now.

Thank You…sorry for any confusion…

[...] Kane at The Raw Story tells the disturbing tale of  a school district that blamed a disabled student for her own [...]

You are blaming the victim (reminds me of a certain school system in Orange County…). Michal loved David and convinced Saul to give her to him. She protected David by telling him of her father’s intention to kill him. Then when David fled Saul’s court, he repaid Michal’s loyalty by marrying someone else.

Saul then gave Michal to Paltiel. There’s nothing there that says that she was given a vote in the matter. Nevertheless, she and Paltiel must have loved each other very much, and it is a touching story how Paltiel follows her, crying, when she is summoned back to David (who only needed her to cement his tie to the throne, so that was a political move).

So David was acting like a jerk, and Michal understandably hated him for it. For which God punished her, and not David. Which brings me back to my original point, that the standards for the treatment of women and girls by God and his “righteous” men leaves a lot to be desired.

I didn’t write the rules. Their marriage was illegitimate whether the story is touching or not. There are a lot of things that sound “nice” but are in error according to God’s rules. Again, you may not like God’s justice, but Saul had no right to give his daughter away. Read some reputable biblical commentary and see what other theologians say about it. I’m certainly not alone. So, there is no blaming the victim, just my reiterating that God is not capricious. How about you address some of the other things I’ve asked you? Such as, how do you go about making moral judgements, as you have is past posts, without recognizing God as the progenitor of all righteous law?

I do not recognize that “God is the progenitor of all righteous law.” He approved of slavery, told people to burn witches, directed people to kill men who don’t grow a beard, stone adulterers, kill homosexuals, etc., etc. God may be the progenitor of **some** righteous law, but certainly not all of his laws are righteous.

You are incorrect about God’s approval of slavery amongst other things. Indentured servitude to repay an outstanding debt is one thing, but one cannot legitimately argue that American slavery, which was based on cruelty and took place via kidnapping(a capital crime deserving death), to be permissible to God. Also, your point about shaving the beard is a ceremonial law that passed away with burnt offerings and peace offerings with the advent of Christ’s reign. The moral laws remain, but the ceremonial laws do not. So, I assume that you are a “cherry-picker”? Is your moral authority based solely upon what seems “right” to you? I find it interesting that NONE of your gripes demonstrate God perverting His law, but only deviations from YOUR inadequate and arbitrary moral compass. Finally, in regards to your last post, I got to thinking about your accusing me of “blaming the victim” and you’re right, but instead of that being a point of criticism, I find my blame to be appropriate. Paltiel should have asked whether Michal was his to marry.

You are incorrect about God’s approval of slavery amongst other things. Indentured servitude to repay an outstanding debt is one thing, but one cannot legitimately argue that American slavery, which was based on cruelty and took place via kidnapping(a capital crime deserving death), to be permissible to God. Also, your point about shaving the beard is a ceremonial law that passed away with burnt offerings and peace offerings with the advent of Christ’s reign. The moral laws remain, but the ceremonial laws do not. So, I assume that you are a “cherry-picker”? Is your moral authority based solely upon what seems “right” to you? I find it interesting that NONE of your gripes demonstrate God perverting His law, but only deviations from YOUR inadequate and arbitrary moral compass. Finally, in regards to your last post, I got to thinking about your accusing me of “blaming the victim” and you’re right, but instead of that being a point of criticism, I find my blame to be appropriate. Paltiel should have asked whether Michal was his to marry.

You are incorrect about God’s approval of slavery amongst other things. Indentured servitude to repay an outstanding debt is one thing, but one cannot legitimately argue that American slavery, which was based on cruelty and took place via kidnapping(a capital crime deserving death), to be permissible to God. Also, your point about shaving the beard is a ceremonial law that passed away with burnt offerings and peace offerings with the advent of Christ’s reign. The moral laws remain, but the ceremonial laws do not. So, I assume that you are a “cherry-picker”? Is your moral authority based solely upon what seems “right” to you? I find it interesting that NONE of your gripes demonstrate God perverting His law, but only deviations from YOUR inadequate and arbitrary moral compass. Finally, in regards to your last post, I got to thinking about your accusing me of “blaming the victim” and you’re right, but instead of that being a point of criticism, I find my blame to be appropriate. Paltiel should have asked whether Michal was his to marry.

Here are NT examples of the approval of slavery and even of beating slaves:

“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB)

“For the law was given by Moses,…” (John 1:17).

“…the scripture cannot be broken.” –Jesus Christ, John 10:35

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

“And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.” Colossians 3:22
“Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.” (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

I’m not a “cherry-picker” since I am not bound by any Biblical laws. But I do think that Biblical laws can be considered moral or immoral, depending on the good or the harm that it directs people to do to other people.

If you are concerned about morality, then you could do better than Biblical law as your guide. But I won’t presume to tell you what to do about that. It’s your own personal choice – as long as you refrain from killing your neighbors who don’t agree with you (like the Bible says to your should do to them).

On the other hand, you could be called a “cherry-picker” for saying that not all of the Biblical laws have to be followed.

And since you said in a former post that you think people are supposed to be respectful and obedient to kings, don’t you also think that Paltiel had accept Saul’s daughter if that was what the king wanted him to do? After all, God put Saul in charge.

OK, I’m done with this subject now. I have other things to get done. But before leaving, I will say that I agreed with your postings to other bloggers about the nature of true conservatism. None of the neo-cons’ many crimes are consistent with true conservatism. I’m glad that there are true conservatives out there that recognize that fact.

Here are NT examples of the approval of slavery and even of beating slaves:

“It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB)

“For the law was given by Moses,…” (John 1:17).

“…the scripture cannot be broken.” –Jesus Christ, John 10:35

“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.” (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)

“And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.” Colossians 3:22
“Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.” (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

I’m not a “cherry-picker” since I am not bound by any Biblical laws. But I do think that Biblical laws can be considered moral or immoral, depending on the good or the harm that it directs people to do to other people.

If you are concerned about morality, then you could do better than Biblical law as your guide. But I won’t presume to tell you what to do about that. It’s your own personal choice – as long as you refrain from killing your neighbors who don’t agree with you (like the Bible says to your should do to them).

On the other hand, you could be called a “cherry-picker” for saying that not all of the Biblical laws have to be followed.

And since you said in a former post that you think people are supposed to be respectful and obedient to kings, don’t you also think that Paltiel had accept Saul’s daughter if that was what the king wanted him to do? After all, God put Saul in charge.

OK, I’m done with this subject now. I have other things to get done. But before leaving, I will say that I agreed with your postings to other bloggers about the nature of true conservatism. None of the neo-cons’ many crimes are consistent with true conservatism. I’m glad that there are true conservatives out there that recognize that fact.

So, I must be missing your point because you mention “slavery” but yet slavery, as defined in the Old Testament, was vastly different than our more modern concept of slavery. First of all, because of original sin, slavery exists. It’s not because God favors servitude. Secondly, your understanding of Scripture is one-dimensional. How about you look up the Greek and Hebrew that is behind your citations of the term “slave”. The word “slave” serves as a poor translation. I believe it to mean bond-servant instead of “kidnapped and abused piece of property” In Exodus 21:20, a master was worthy of punishment (i.e. death) if he killed his servant. The servant was not to work on the Sabbath. Or how about Deuteronomy 15:14? After 6 years of service (also unlike modern slavery), the servant was to be released and given grain, cattle, and wine. The servant was also to be treated as a part of the master’s household as evidenced by Leviticus 22:11. Obviously, the Bible has a different model of “slavery”. Again, your gripes boil down to what bothers you and not logical incongruences. You are simply a Benthamite utilitarian awash in fallacies. At last, you admit that you are a moral relativist that disavows moral absolutes. You purport to judge as to the good or harm an action causes someone, but yet “goodness” is not universal and, in fact, ends with you. If everyone should act according to their own goodly whims, then how can government operate? Forget government, how can a father discipline a disobedient child? What is “disobedience” without an absolute standard? And isn’t ironic that you, being the utilitarian relativist, were so quick to express disapproval toward David and Lot? It only goes to show that everyone operates under the guise of standards whether one admits it or not. I also ask, how do you know that killing your neighbor is a crime (or in my world, a sin and a crime). If I were Muslim and my neighbor a Jew, I could kill him with impunity according to Sharia (prohibitions of murder only apply to fellow Muslims). In fact in the Qur’an, at Sura 2:193, Muhammad commands Muslims to “Fight them(Jews and Christians) until there is no more persecution, and worship is devoted to God.” That would be devotion to Allah, of course, since no other God would suffice in their eyes. What’s funny is that the Jewish tribes of Medina were there first, and so the Qur’an cloaks this bellicose rhetoric in defensive posturing. Heck, Muhammad beheaded a number of them himself some 1400 years ago. And I’m sure there are many third-world backwaters that operate under similar terms. So, without using the Bible, prove to me that killing your neighbor is a universally criminal act. You can’t.

Two final, quick points…People should honor their leaders when they are good and doing God’s will. Saul was not God’s choice for a king, it was the choice of the people. And yes, God knew that this would happen, but hopefully you see my point. So, heads of state should be honored so long as they are not disobeying God, which is why Christians should have done more to follow God, the King of Kings, and helped the Jews in Nazi Germany than to claim that Romans 13 proscribed them from doing so (which is an incorrect interpretation). So, Paltiel should have rebuffed when he discovered she was already married, because that would infuriate God. Better to die with God’s approval than a ruthless King’s. And secondly, thanks for being one of the few to see my point about “true conservatism”. And, of course, no hard feelings for all of this. Cheers.

omfg

What a bunch of assholes! The lawyer is doing his job, imo. If anything it's the school district that's morally handicapped. People, stop blaming lawyers here since they're pretty much paid to do carry out the dirty work of this ilk (the district). Your beef is with the district, not the lawyers. However, I don't expect a rethuglican county to show any sympathy towards a disabled student.

It's the school district, along with that damn county said district is located in, that's morally handicapped. Not the lawyer.

You miss my point. No one in that school district will step up to the plate and take control of the situation. They'll hide behind each other in a sort of collective cowardice, and all will hide behind the lawyer. No one will take charge until the negative publicity kicks in. Then they'll all say they were against it from the start. Maybe they were, but that was the time to speak up.

NO, you actually miss my point. What I said was to not lay all of this on their lawyer. He's basically getting paid to do this. Frankly, you should be calling that entire district morally bankrupt.

I thought I did.

You probably did, it just looked to me like a rant against a lawyer hired by the school. Don't get me wrong what happened to this student was completely heinous and inexcusable, but I just can't stand it when people seem to think that they lawyer's morally bankrupt because the school hired them. Frankly, this lawyer's just getting paid for this at the end of the day. That school district's still gonna be morally bankrupt when the lawyer leaves.

My conclusion was failing miserably at that time.

Homeschool And Grade Your Child…

I found your entry interesting thus I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog :)…

viagra london,viagra 345)()(

viagra erection photos,viagra faqs 345)()(

side effects of lipitor,Lipitor cost 345)()(

Hey there, was just surfing through the www searching for some info and stumbled across your page. I am impressed by the info that you have on this page. It shows how well you get this subject. Bookmarked this page, will come back for more. You, my friend, ROCK!!!. Greets from arbeitsrecht wiesbaden

I just couldnt leave your website before saying that we really enjoyed the useful information you offer to your visitors… Will be back often to check up on new stuff you post!

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.

[...] « Hot Air weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/24753/colleen-thomas-warns-alien-attack-imminent/ School district blames disabled student for own molestation | Raw Story Wedding Invitation Etiquette » Blog Archive » Wedding Invitation Wording? Rush Limbaugh [...]

[...] in Santa Ana, California. The school had first tried to keep the molestation under wraps, but then according to Raw Story, the district’s lawyers responded “by not only blaming the girl for her own abuse but [...]

Web site provides a variety of information about diets, emotional eating, fitness, nutrition, cooking and more… CLICK HERE

I know it sounds crazy but this reminded me of Abraham Lincoln’s: “Everybody likes a compliment.”

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.

Major thanks for the article post. Will read on…