MUN prof refuses to wear device for hearing disabled student,

[Reba]

Human Rights ? I guess deaf and hoh people rights don't count !

It said Human Rights on her web site .

I know. Ironic, heh?

 

[Reba]

there a sect of brethren who do this...Some years ago a judge who a member was drummed out because he watched tv or something like that....Near me there a sect,the little girls have long hair with yellow ribbons and will have to leave school at 16 no more education..Any electrical things are classed as from the devil

Yes, must be a separate sect.

 

[Barbaro]

She rides in cars. Modern cars are way more high tech than an FM transmitter.

She can ride in cars. I speculate she also drives. I can't tell if she is either a Indian or Pakistian.

My husband is an engineer and we have Iranian, Indian and Pakistan friends through the work. You know some of them are Hindu are engineers. They still practice and do tech works. *shrugs*

I think this professor is narcissist and can do whatever she wants to.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

Yes, must be a separate sect.

But this should not used to violent other people rights . She has no business being a teacher if she is going to use her belief to refuse to teach all of her students . Or she should put this down in the college catalog that she doesn't wear devices to help deaf and hoh students b/c of her beliefs so students won't waste their time and money signing up for her damn class .

 

[Reba]

But this should not used to violent other people rights . She has no business being a teacher if she is going to use her belief to refuse to teach all of her students . Or she should put this down in the college catalog that she doesn't wear devices to help deaf and hoh students b/c of her beliefs so students won't waste their time and money signing up for her damn class .

Sorry, I was referring to caz's post about the Plymouth Brethren.

Anyway, if it is her belief she should state what that belief is and what it's based on. Even Kim Davis did that much. I don't understand what the big secret is.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

Sorry, I was referring to caz's post about the Plymouth Brethren.

Anyway, if it is her belief she should state what that belief is and what it's based on. Even Kim Davis did that much. I don't understand what the big secret is.

This is why I feel this is a discrimination case ,she has not given any real facts about what her religion has written down about not being allowed wear the device . She had not even said what her religion is so how do we know if this true or not .

 

[DeafDucky]

Wait a minute.

Did anyone notice the title of the course? "History of Espionage"

Maybe she thinks the FM device is some sort of spy equipment.

This seems to make the most sense along with the possibility that she thinks it's a recording device and doesn't want her lectures to be taped/recorded.

 

[jonnyghost]

I'm sorry but if you take a job in service to the public you have to be willing to accept that your obligation to that service outweighs your personal beliefs. If you're not willing to fulfull you obligations then get a new job. Teachers, police, fire fighter, judges, officials and the like are paid by us and need to do their jobs. Descrimination or just plain stupidity she should be fired.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

I'm sorry but if you take a job in service to the public you have to be willing to accept that your obligation to that service outweighs your personal beliefs. If you're not willing to fulfull you obligations then get a new job. Teachers, police, fire fighter, judges, officials and the like are paid by us and need to do their jobs. Descrimination or just plain stupidity she should be fired.

Amen !

 

[caz]

Yes, must be a separate sect.

It is.They strange people

 

[hoichi]

What ever her religion is, im not suprised that one or some would be opposed to it.
And i respect that.
The best thing was done. The dude that wanted to learn went elseware to another course, the prof still has her rights respected. Win win
As for me.
I always abide by the maxim
"Dont stay where your not welcome".
If hearie dont want to use tech to help deaf, and dont sign. Fine.
We should go elseware then. We should help eachother, and if we do not posses those means as at this moment we dont. We need to create them. For our sake.
I wont fight to force some religious adherent of gods knows what to bow down to me and do what i want. Im an anti auhtoritarian of the old school. Good luck in. Screwing. Dogs or sacrifising goats or what ever is she does..
Better classes are out there.

 

[Reba]

What ever her religion is, im not suprised that one or some would be opposed to it.
And i respect that.

I think part of the contention is that according to her religion it is NOT prohibited to use the device. Also, she has never stated publicly why it's prohibited. It seems like something she just made up.

The best thing was done. The dude that wanted to learn went elseware to another course, the prof still has her rights respected. Win win

What if she was the only professor offering that course, and the student needed it as a graduation requirement? Then what would the option be?

As for me.
I always abide by the maxim
"Dont stay where your not welcome".

If we all followed that maxim racial integration would have never happened, among other things.

If hearie dont want to use tech to help deaf, and dont sign. Fine.
We should go elseware then. We should help eachother, and if we do not posses those means as at this moment we dont. We need to create them. For our sake.

What if professors refused to use ASL interpreters for Deaf students? Should those students just move along?

I wont fight to force some religious adherent of gods knows what to bow down to me and do what i want. Im an anti auhtoritarian of the old school. Good luck in. Screwing. Dogs or sacrifising goats or what ever is she does..
Better classes are out there.

We still don't know if it is really a religious requirement or just a personal preference. The parties involved are keeping silent about it.

 

[hoichi]

[

I think part of the contention is that according to her religion it is NOT prohibited to use the device. Also, she has never stated publicly why it's prohibited. It seems like something she just made up..

What religion is she? Do we even know what sect or faith she is an adherent of?

What if she was the only professor offering that course, and the student needed it as a graduation requirement? Then what would the option be?
.

I think in.that case the university has to obviously re work how it handles.such cases. Its not impossible to find accomadation for everyone. It should be a goal worth attaining.

If we all followed that maxim racial integration would have never happened, among other things..

Youve been to the hood lately?

Segregation is still very much a real thing. In society as well as a very real reality in jail.
Ive never understood the idea of forcing by force people to live amongst each other if they dont wish too.
Its a silly notion really, but to each their own. If people didnt or dont want to live around me or with me. Im not the type to force them to be in my presence. Thats just looking for trouble and resentment In my eyes. i have enough self respect not to be beg or foce others to be around me or live with me. I prefer to stay where im welcomed not where im despised,
Peoples milliege varies. Some like to be where they are despised and loathed. Fair enough.

And how has forced de segregation really worked out?
In almost every american city i have ever been too, segragation was a reality.

What if professors refused to use ASL interpreters for Deaf students? Should those students just move along?
.

No.
The student should get the terp. If the prof refuses to speak so be it.
There is a.difference.between someone.wearing something and.a terp terping sound already removed from the profs mouth.

We still don't know if it is really a religious requirement or just a personal preference. The parties involved are keeping silent about it.

Right. But she has stated it is a religious ideal on her part.
Who the hell am i or is anyone to argue otherwise.
If that is what she believes so.be it

 

[Reba]

What religion is she? Do we even know what sect or faith she is an adherent of?

We don't but apparently the school knows. I don't know why they keep it a secret.

From my previous post:

". . . The student in question, William Sears, says the professor has refused to wear the FM transmitter citing religious beliefs, but Mills claims that argument has some flaws.

He says when the previous incident was raised, at that time a representative of the religion in question claimed there was no tenet they were aware of that would prevent someone from wearing such a device…."

I think in.that case the university has to obviously re work how it handles.such cases. Its not impossible to find accomadation for everyone. It should be a goal worth attaining.

In this case, they did NOT provide accommodation for the deaf student. From what I read, this course was taught by that professor only. The student had to take an entirely different course after the semester had started.

Youve been to the hood lately?

This may come as a shock to you but there is a world outside of "the hood." The hood is not the standard to judge every community by.

Segregation is still very much a real thing. In society as well as a very real reality in jail.
Ive never understood the idea of forcing by force people to live amongst each other if they dont wish too.
Its a silly notion really, but to each their own. If people didnt or dont want to live around me or with me. Im not the type to force them to be in my presence. Thats just looking for trouble and resentment In my eyes. i have enough self respect not to be beg or foce others to be around me or live with me. I prefer to stay where im welcomed not where im despised,
Peoples milliege varies. Some like to be where they are despised and loathed. Fair enough.

It's about the law. American schools, public accommodations, military, government agencies, etc., are legally desegregated. That required schools, for example, to allow students, who because of their color, were not always "welcome." If we followed your maxim, we would still have separate government schools for black and white students, separate seating in movie theaters and restaurants, and restricting black soldiers to working in the galley.

In the area of education, since when do instructors have the right to allow only those students that they "welcome" to class?

And how has forced de segregation really worked out?
In almost every american city i have ever been too, segragation was a reality.

It was uncomfortable at first but it has in some areas, and in others not so much. Where I live, no one thinks twice about mixed races in school, at work, in the military, in politics, etc. Socially, we still have a way to go but under the law segregation by race isn't allowed. When it's attempted, those aggrieved have the legal right to satisfaction.

Following your maxim, desegregation, much less integration, would never happen.

No.

The student should get the terp. If the prof refuses to speak so be it.

There is a.difference.between someone.wearing something and.a terp terping sound already removed from the profs mouth.

Not if it's truly based on a religious belief. Someone could use that excuse for not using terps, too. I've met several people, including college instructors, who objected to having terps present. They didn't use the religion excuse but they probably could have.

Right. But she has stated it is a religious ideal on her part.
Who the hell am i or is anyone to argue otherwise.
If that is what she believes so.be it

So far, she hasn't stated what it is she believes. She has not explained why it's against her religion to use an FM microphone.

I think the student has every right to know what it is about the device that offends her religion. Otherwise, how can the school ever work out a solution to the problem?

If something was against my religion at a workplace I wouldn't hesitate to explain what it was and why. (In fact, I have done that in the past.) It shouldn't be kept a secret.

 

[whatdidyousay!]

We don't but apparently the school knows. I don't know why they keep it a secret.

From my previous post:

". . . The student in question, William Sears, says the professor has refused to wear the FM transmitter citing religious beliefs, but Mills claims that argument has some flaws.

He says when the previous incident was raised, at that time a representative of the religion in question claimed there was no tenet they were aware of that would prevent someone from wearing such a device…."


In this case, they did NOT provide accommodation for the deaf student. From what I read, this course was taught by that professor only. The student had to take an entirely different course after the semester had started.


This may come as a shock to you but there is a world outside of "the hood." The hood is not the standard to judge every community by.


It's about the law. American schools, public accommodations, military, government agencies, etc., are legally desegregated. That required schools, for example, to allow students, who because of their color, were not always "welcome." If we followed your maxim, we would still have separate government schools for black and white students, separate seating in movie theaters and restaurants, and restricting black soldiers to working in the galley.

In the area of education, since when do instructors have the right to allow only those students that they "welcome" to class?


It was uncomfortable at first but it has in some areas, and in others not so much. Where I live, no one thinks twice about mixed races in school, at work, in the military, in politics, etc. Socially, we still have a way to go but under the law segregation by race isn't allowed. When it's attempted, those aggrieved have the legal right to satisfaction.

Following your maxim, desegregation, much less integration, would never happen.


Not if it's truly based on a religious belief. Someone could use that excuse for not using terps, too. I've met several people, including college instructors, who objected to having terps present. They didn't use the religion excuse but they probably could have.


So far, she hasn't stated what it is she believes. She has not explained why it's against her religion to use an FM microphone.

I think the student has every right to know what it is about the device that offends her religion. Otherwise, how can the school ever work out a solution to the problem?

If something was against my religion at a workplace I wouldn't hesitate to explain what it was and why. (In fact, I have done that in the past.) It shouldn't be kept a secret.

Since she has not said what her beliefs are how can the parents even know if wearing the device is against it?? This could just be something the woman made up .

 

[hoichi]

[

We don't but apparently the school knows. I don't know why they keep it a secret.

From my previous post:

". . . The student in question, William Sears, says the professor has refused to wear the FM transmitter citing religious beliefs, but Mills claims that argument has some flaws.

He says when the previous incident was raised, at that time a representative of the religion in question claimed there was no tenet they were aware of that would prevent someone from wearing such a device…."
et.

Indeed. But we dont know what she is. And i agree she should state it. Everyone shoukd be aware.

In this case, they did NOT provide accommodation for the deaf student. From what I read, this course was taught by that professor only. The student had to take an entirely different course after the semester had started.
et.

Indeed they didnt.but if it is going to accomade all religious adherence, then it also must accomodate those which that adherence, what ever it is affects.

This may come as a shock to you but there is a world outside of "the hood." The hood is not the standard to judge every community by.


It's about the law. American schools, public accommodations, military, government agencies, etc., are legally desegregated. That required schools, for example, to allow students, who because of their color, were not always "welcome." If we followed your maxim, we would still have separate government schools for black and white students, separate seating in movie theaters and restaurants, and restricting black soldiers to working in the galley.

In the area of education, since when do instructors have the right to allow only those students that they "welcome" to class?


It was uncomfortable at first but it has in some areas, and in others not so much. Where I live, no one thinks twice about mixed races in school, at work, in the military, in politics, etc. Socially, we still have a way to go but under the law segregation by race isn't allowed. When it's attempted, those aggrieved have the legal right to satisfaction.

Following your maxim, desegregation, much less integration, would never happen.
et.

Right, yet thrrough all that segregation still exists, its even getting worse, in some places. The fact allot of america is segregated in spite of
law. Ive been in side, ive been through the hood,ive lived amongst latinos as my girl friend was mexican and im half breed italiano was able to pass as latin. As we are the first latins..."-)...no blacks generally were welcome around, gringos even hardly.take a stroll through a black hood and tell me if de segregation has worked.
Really

Not if it's truly based on a religious belief. Someone could use that excuse for not using terps, too. I've met several people, including college instructors, who objected to having terps present. They didn't use the religion excuse but they probably could have.
et.

They could, and if they did the university needs to accomodate us Deaf.

So far, she hasn't stated what it is she believes. She has not explained why it's against her religion to use an FM microphone.
et.

Yes i know, until we know its just conjecture

I think the student has every right to know what it is about the device that offends her religion. Otherwise, how can the school ever work out a solution to the problem?
et.

Agreed

If something was against my religion at a workplace I wouldn't hesitate to explain what it was and why. (In fact, I have done that in the past.) It shouldn't be kept a secret.

Agreed

 

[Reba]

Since she has not said what her beliefs are how can the parents even know if wearing the device is against it?? This could just be something the woman made up .

That's what some people suspected; that it had nothing to do with religion and that she was afraid her lectures might get recorded.

 

[hoichi]

That's what some people suspected; that it had nothing to do with religion and that she was afraid her lectures might get recorded.

Or it could be a valid adherence to somw strange sect or faith.
Both ideas at this time.are valid.
We dont know

 

[Reba]

Right, yet thrrough all that segregation still exists, its even getting worse, in some places. The fact allot of america is segregated in spite of
law. Ive been in side, ive been through the hood,ive lived amongst latinos as my girl friend was mexican and im half breed italiano was able to pass as latin. As we are the first latins..."-)...no blacks generally were welcome around, gringos even hardly.take a stroll through a black hood and tell me if de segregation has worked.
Really

As I posted before, "the hood/barrio/ghetto" and "inside the joint" are not where the majority of Americans live, and shouldn't be the standard that our society is measured by.

Really.

 

[hoichi]

As I posted before, "the hood/barrio/ghetto" and "inside the joint" are not where the majority of Americans live, and shouldn't be the standard that our society is measured by.

Really.

In other words.
Ignore the very real facts.
Cool