Cedarburg

What a mess.

So happens I know a couple of Cedarburg schoolteachers--not well, but well enough. There's a very real and deep divide "in the ranks" of the teachers on this question, as well. One of them is a union activist, and based on my observations, damn near a moonbat-lefty. The other is neither.

The leftist predicted this outcome last year. He was absolutely certain that the teacher would be re-instated. The other guy feared that the re-instatement would occur.

The arbitrator managed to avoid the real question by adopting a "fairness" standard. Since another District employee had NOT been fired for cruising the Web on District machines, the porn-peeper should not be fired, either. But the other web-cruiser was looking for stock quotations, not TeenHotBabesWithBikinis.

Of course, the case should NOT be all about process. It SHOULD BE all about substance, as Nichols points out in today's JSOnline

The libertarian-crowd is neutered on this one. They will defend, to the death, the concept that pornpeepers are just fine to have around, so long as they don't touch.

After all, what's the harm in porn? It's just like prostitution, no? Willing parties, and all that...

Actually, there's a growing body of evidence that suggests there IS a problem, which comes as no surprise to Conservatives. Remember all those pervert priests? Most of them had porn-stashes. Many (not all) heterosex offenders (rapists and slut-chasers) have porn-stashes.

These are statistically-significant coincidences.

I don't make the claim that ALL porn-peepers act out. And I don't make the claim that all pervert-actors (hetero or homo) have porn stashes.

But the Catholic Church regards porn-viewing as a serious (mortal) sin, (given the usual conditions,) and I would guess that the WELS folks are of similar mind.

At some point, maybe not far down the track, this debate will get the serious attention it deserves.