PDA

View Full Version : Fired for being irresistible....


TexasRN
12-24-2012, 02:02 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/12/melissa-nelson-dental-assistant-fired-for-being-irresistible-is-devastated/

I'm sure most of you have seen this on the news. The dental assistant was fired because the dentist was afraid he would have an affair with her. I think it's unfair that she got fired but I can't blame the dentist for wanting to safeguard his marriage. At first I couldn't decide who I should side with but after reading more about it, the assistant was inappropriate at times in her text messages and conversations and allowed the dentist to also be inappropriate. I now firmly side with the dentist's wife who demanded she be fired and the dentist who decided to seek pastoral advice and fired his assistant. It sucks that she will now have to find a new job in these uncertain times but I can't blame the guy who did the right thing by his wife.

Thoughts?


~Amy

adamt
12-24-2012, 04:41 PM
major kudos to the dentist, there is no need to put yourself in a bad situation like that

if more people wouldn't set themselves up to fail, then they wouldn't!!
the dentist is just trying to set himself up for success, shame on the woman for making a federal case out of it

F34R
12-24-2012, 04:49 PM
I think it's wrong. He's been working with her for 10.5 years, and he's only firing her because his wife caught him for what he had been doing. If his wife hadn't caught him, he wouldn't have fired her.

Its even worse that other men in a judicial standing said he could fire her for nothing she did wrong at all. It's pathetic.

Maybe he should learn to love his wife, and stop fooling around. Firing someone because you can't control your own urges. What a sick and pathetic excuse of a man. I hope his life gets turned upside down. I hope people that went to him before decide to find someone with better character.

NateR
12-24-2012, 05:21 PM
I think the doctor has shown a rare level of integrity that we just don't see these days. So I applaud him, even though he likely should have fired her much earlier.

What's that old saying? It takes two to tango? It doesn't take much for a woman to shoot a man down, so obviously she was participating in the inappropriate behavior as well.

Of course, this is going to be twisted into some kind of "gender-bias" issue, which is bullcrap. It's not a matter of one being completely right and the other being completely wrong. I'm sure they were both wrong in some way. I think the dentist did the right thing... eventually. But, he should have never allowed the situation to progress as far as it did.

Also, aren't the constant observations that the judges were "all male" a form of gender bias on their own? I think the implication that male judges are incapable of being impartial in a case like this is the real "gender bias" in this story.

F34R
12-24-2012, 07:47 PM
I think the doctor has shown a rare level of integrity that we just don't see these days. So I applaud him, even though he likely should have fired her much earlier.

What's that old saying? It takes two to tango? It doesn't take much for a woman to shoot a man down, so obviously she was participating in the inappropriate behavior as well.

Of course, this is going to be twisted into some kind of "gender-bias" issue, which is bullcrap. It's not a matter of one being completely right and the other being completely wrong. I'm sure they were both wrong in some way. I think the dentist did the right thing... eventually. But, he should have never allowed the situation to progress as far as it did.

Also, aren't the constant observations that the judges were "all male" a form of gender bias on their own? I think the implication that male judges are incapable of being impartial in a case like this is the real "gender bias" in this story.

I don't think he has any integrity at all. If he did, he wouldn't have been "cheating" on his wife. He's a cheater. This guys wife caught him, and that was the end of it. He'll do it again, probably elsewhere, but he will.

How is penalizing others for your mistakes promoting any type of integrity? He's saying she was fired for her inappropriate behavior, but all we really see is the behavior he was doing. What was inappropriate that she did?

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/dental-assistant-fired-being-irresistible-devastated-151724600--abc-news-topstories.html

adamt
12-24-2012, 09:05 PM
why would he need ANY reason to fire her?? Was she under contract?? what's it the supreme courts business anyway. he is a private person, he can hire and fire who he wants for whatever reason he wants. he should be able to fire her if she is a woman as long as he is not breaking a contract with her.


if i hire a drug dealer for 10 years then all of a sudden i get the urge to do drugs, i should be able to fire him to distance myself from my new temptation

F34R
12-24-2012, 09:25 PM
Honestly, HE didn't need any reason. His at home boss, the wife he was cheating on, told him to fire the woman. He wasn't going to fire her at all.

NateR
12-25-2012, 12:51 AM
I don't think he has any integrity at all. If he did, he wouldn't have been "cheating" on his wife. He's a cheater. This guys wife caught him, and that was the end of it. He'll do it again, probably elsewhere, but he will.

How is penalizing others for your mistakes promoting any type of integrity? He's saying she was fired for her inappropriate behavior, but all we really see is the behavior he was doing. What was inappropriate that she did?

http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/dental-assistant-fired-being-irresistible-devastated-151724600--abc-news-topstories.html

If he cheated on his wife with her (which is something that I did not know), the he definitely needs to distance himself from her as much as possible.

Again, she's married too, so she would have cheated on her husband. Did she really want to continue to work for a man that she had committed adultery with?

However, as far as I knew, their relationship had never reached a physical level. It was only at the flirting stage.

Also, if this man's wife was uncomfortable with the woman working for her husband, then it was his duty as a husband to terminate her employment.

F34R
12-25-2012, 01:24 AM
If he cheated on his wife with her (which is something that I did not know), the he definitely needs to distance himself from her as much as possible.

Again, she's married too, so she would have cheated on her husband. Did she really want to continue to work for a man that she had committed adultery with?

However, as far as I knew, their relationship had never reached a physical level. It was only at the flirting stage.

Also, if this man's wife was uncomfortable with the woman working for her husband, then it was his duty as a husband to terminate her employment.
No, they didn't have sex.. but what he was doing was considered cheating in my book. Making advances to her they way that he reported it going. Why does he have to get her away? Why can't he control himself? I mean, really... if he gets her out of the picture, it's just a matter of time before it's someone else. Also, remember, he ONLY fired her because the wife caught him. So, he has no respect, or integrity. That woman says she never had anything to do with the progress he says that he has going towards an affair.

Basically, the wife of this guy is going to have to keep him in the house to try and keep him from doing what he was already trying to do.
I don't consider flirting as cheating. He was beyond flirting. If hes asking her about sex, her orgasms, talking about his "bulging pants", that's not flirting.

rearnakedchoke
12-25-2012, 01:35 AM
He can fire her I guess ... But she can also sue for wrongful dismissal .... And she'll win ... And I hope she wins big ... Which she probably will ... So when she gets a few years salary and will probably get another job ... She'll be laughing! He'll still be scum

County Mike
12-25-2012, 09:53 AM
I agree with F34R. He only fired her because his wife saw his inappropriate texts and ordered him to fire her. If she never caught him, he'd still be flirting and hoping to get some.

Now, as a private business owner, I do agree he has the right to fire someone if he wants to. Just saying, she didn't deserve it.

adamt
12-25-2012, 01:26 PM
He can fire her I guess ... But she can also sue for wrongful dismissal .... And she'll win ... And I hope she wins big ... Which she probably will ... So when she gets a few years salary and will probably get another job ... She'll be laughing! He'll still be scum

did you read the article at all?

rearnakedchoke
12-25-2012, 07:02 PM
Sure I did ... As the employer he shouldn't have started with the inappropriate text messages .... If he wants to run a business, he should abide by employment standards ... U think she got a raw deal ... As a business owner he can hire and fire as he pleases ... But he should have to pay proper severance ... He gave the excuse for firing her that he would cheat on his wife with her ... Not a good excuse and she should get duly compensated .... Especially since she worked there 10 years ... Hope she wins an appeal and gets a fair deal

NateR
12-25-2012, 09:49 PM
She probably would have won the case if she had pursued it as a sexual harassment case. Why they chose to go with gender bias instead of sexual harassment is beyond me.

However, if she never complained about his behavior, then it probably didn't qualify as sexual harassment. Especially if she was participating in the flirting.

I'm not saying she would have won a sexual harassment case because she had a valid complaint, however. I just know she would have won because she's a woman charging a man with sexual misconduct, so the rule of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply. If you're a man charged with any sort of harassment, misconduct or abuse by a woman, then you're guilty until proven guilty. That's how backwards our judicial system has become.

NateR
12-25-2012, 09:54 PM
No, they didn't have sex.. but what he was doing was considered cheating in my book. Making advances to her they way that he reported it going. Why does he have to get her away? Why can't he control himself? I mean, really... if he gets her out of the picture, it's just a matter of time before it's someone else. Also, remember, he ONLY fired her because the wife caught him. So, he has no respect, or integrity. That woman says she never had anything to do with the progress he says that he has going towards an affair.

Basically, the wife of this guy is going to have to keep him in the house to try and keep him from doing what he was already trying to do.
I don't consider flirting as cheating. He was beyond flirting. If hes asking her about sex, her orgasms, talking about his "bulging pants", that's not flirting.

I agree that a married man flirting with another woman counts as adultery.

But at least he's a dirtbag who recognizes the fact that he's a dirtbag and he went to his church for guidance on the matter. The worst thing would be a dirtbag who is somehow under the illusion that he is a decent person and doesn't think that he needs any help.

I'm not going to claim that this guy is a true Christian, but all signs indicate that he might be. Being a Christian doesn't mean that you never sin. Being a Christian means that you understand that you are incapable of NOT sinning. Thus you need to identify areas of temptation in your life and distance yourself from those areas as much as possible.

rearnakedchoke
12-26-2012, 03:14 AM
She probably would have won the case if she had pursued it as a sexual harassment case. Why they chose to go with gender bias instead of sexual harassment is beyond me.

However, if she never complained about his behavior, then it probably didn't qualify as sexual harassment. Especially if she was participating in the flirting.

I'm not saying she would have won a sexual harassment case because she had a valid complaint, however. I just know she would have won because she's a woman charging a man with sexual misconduct, so the rule of "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't apply. If you're a man charged with any sort of harassment, misconduct or abuse by a woman, then you're guilty until proven guilty. That's how backwards our judicial system has become.
I don't think this was a criminal case, so innocent until proven guilty may not apply .... And really? The judicial system is backwards when it comes to dealing with men being accused of sexual misconduct??? Sure some men have been falsely accused and persecuted ... But many have gotten off because the women have also refused to be questioned and subjected to rape kits etc ..... So I think its pretty even on that level .... Guys like this are scum and he's made to look like the good guy cuz he went to his church ... Lol ... His wife is dumb for staying with him

F34R
12-26-2012, 04:05 AM
I agree that a married man flirting with another woman counts as adultery.

But at least he's a dirtbag who recognizes the fact that he's a dirtbag and he went to his church for guidance on the matter. The worst thing would be a dirtbag who is somehow under the illusion that he is a decent person and doesn't think that he needs any help.

I'm not going to claim that this guy is a true Christian, but all signs indicate that he might be. Being a Christian doesn't mean that you never sin. Being a Christian means that you understand that you are incapable of NOT sinning. Thus you need to identify areas of temptation in your life and distance yourself from those areas as much as possible.

Yeah, I'm ok with the concept of this, BUT he only did the distance himself from the temptation after he was caught. If his wife wasn't in the equation here, and this lady was initiating the temptation, and he wasn't participating to the point he already admits to, then I wouldn't necessarily have a negative outlook on this guy.

After ten years with this woman and a co-worker, he is "tempted" now? Yeah.. I believe he was caught, and the woman wasn't participating like he was. She said her text messages were completely innocent. While, we already know his weren't; he admitted to it. Also, he's asked her about her sex life, orgasms, sent very "dirty" messages to her. Either said, or text messaged about this bulge should let her know he's into her... ugh. If she was tempting him NOW, why wasn't it for the past 10 years? I dunno, I can't find any rational ideas here that this woman participated, and he is doing the right thing.

County Mike
12-26-2012, 12:56 PM
Once again, agree with F34R. From what's in the article, the woman didn't do anything wrong except for not complain about the man's conduct. She was probably afraid of losing her job if she complained. Instead, she loses her job for not complaining, which they twist into "participating".

I also don't think the guy was seeking out his pastor's advice. His wife made him go to the church and he used the pastor to hide behind with his crappy excuse to fire her.

From my interpretation of the article, dude's a scumbag and the chick got a raw deal.

And the wife's not keeping her man happy.

adamt
12-26-2012, 02:05 PM
you guys might be right that he's a scum bag, but the fact remains, it is his business he should be able to hire and fire who he wants without reprucussion unless it breaks a contract with them. I HIGHLY doubt she is innocent in the matter but that is the issue here. the issue is should an employer have the right to fire someone?

F34R
12-26-2012, 04:06 PM
you guys might be right that he's a scum bag, but the fact remains, it is his business he should be able to hire and fire who he wants without reprucussion unless it breaks a contract with them. I HIGHLY doubt she is innocent in the matter but that is the issue here. the issue is should an employer have the right to fire someone?

If she wasn't innocent, then what wasn't innocent would be known to the public by now; like his inappropriate behavior is known already.

I don't have a problem with people being fired for legitimate reasons. However, this is more sexual harassment vs legitimate reasoning. He shouldn't have done what he did do, and his wife wouldn't have caught him, and his wife wouldn't have made him fire the girl, and the girl wouldn't be suffering.

rearnakedchoke
12-26-2012, 04:28 PM
you guys might be right that he's a scum bag, but the fact remains, it is his business he should be able to hire and fire who he wants without reprucussion unless it breaks a contract with them. I HIGHLY doubt she is innocent in the matter but that is the issue here. the issue is should an employer have the right to fire someone?

If someone wants to have their own company .. That is fine ... They still need to abide by employment standards ... So he shouldn't have the right to fire without reprucussion ... He should have to abide by employment laws ...

NateR
12-26-2012, 04:58 PM
you guys might be right that he's a scum bag, but the fact remains, it is his business he should be able to hire and fire who he wants without reprucussion unless it breaks a contract with them. I HIGHLY doubt she is innocent in the matter but that is the issue here. the issue is should an employer have the right to fire someone?

I absolutely agree. If she never signed a contract, then he should be allowed to fire her for whatever reason without any consequences. If you penalize small businesses too much when they have to let their employees go, then small businesses will simply stop hiring employees.

If I owned a small business and was considering whether or not I needed an employee to help me with the workload, but the laws of my state were set up in such a way that if I hired somebody I would basically be stuck with that person for the next 20 years, then I would have to seriously consider whether I really needed an employee after all. So that's one potential job lost because the laws are set up to protect the employee over the small-business owner.

Bonnie
12-26-2012, 08:45 PM
James (F34R) and Mike, I agree with both of you about this situation and this scumbag. However, I don't agree with the thinking that flirting is not cheating, and, I really don't like when the wife is used as the reason for why her husband is cheating!

I know a lot of people don't consider flirting as cheating, but I'll argue, why is a married person flirting if they haven't already crossed that cheating line in their head, thinking of taking things further? To my thinking, if you're married and flirting, you're flirting with cheating.

And, Mike, it sounds like you're blaming the wife for her husband's wrongdoing.

They said in the news video that, "even the court said her firing was unfair, but ultimately, decided it wasn't illegal." What's troubling is the precedent set with ruling that "employers can fire employees that they see as an irresistible attraction." I think this is leaving a big opening for abuse by employers, and for good employees, through no fault of their own, to be unfairly fired. I hope that someone can find a way to get this overturned the way it stands now.

Amy, Nate and Adamt, I didn't see anything in the article or video where it said this young woman did or said anything inappropriate in this whole thing. I think the court would have mentioned that if she had. It sounds to me like she was probably trying to handle this situation by just ignoring the inappropriate comments and behavior hoping he would get the message with her nonresponse. I could see where she might try to take that route first, but obviously, he was too blinded by his lust or just too thick in the head to get the silent message.

This guy is a louse. :loser:

The two never had a sexual relationship or sought one, according to court documents, however in the final year and a half of Nelson’s employment, Knight began to make comments about her clothing being too tight or distracting.

“Dr. Knight acknowledges he once told Nelson that if she saw his pants bulging, she would know her clothing was too revealing,” the justices wrote.

Six months before Nelson was fired, she and her boss began exchanging text messages about work and personal matters, such as updates about each of their children’s activities, the justices wrote.

The messages were mostly mundane, but Nelson recalled one text she received from her boss asking “how often she experienced an orgasm.”

Nelson did not respond to the text and never indicated that she was uncomfortable with Knight’s question, according to court documents.

Soon after, Knight’s wife, Jeanne, who also works at the practice, found out about the text messaging and ordered her husband to fire Nelson.

NateR
12-26-2012, 10:04 PM
Amy, Nate and Adamt, I didn't see anything in the article or video where it said this young woman did or said anything inappropriate in this whole thing. I think the court would have mentioned that if she had. It sounds to me like she was probably trying to handle this situation by just ignoring the inappropriate comments and behavior hoping he would get the message with her nonresponse. I could see where she might try to take that route first, but obviously, he was too blinded by his lust or just too thick in the head to get the silent message.

Yeah, but that could just be because the writer of the article is trying to skew public opinion in a certain direction. Even the way the title is worded seems to indicate that the writer wants us to choose the woman's side over the man's. Just because a statement from the court is not included in the article doesn't mean it's not there, that would imply that reporters are always impartial and never impose their own worldview onto how they present their stories.

This guy is a louse. :loser:

But at least he's a louse who recognizes that he's a louse. That's the first positive step for any guy towards delousing. :laugh:

adamt
12-27-2012, 02:10 AM
if she was as innocent as she is claiming to be she would be happy she is out of that situation, who in their right mind would be wanting a job like that???

Bonnie
12-27-2012, 04:05 AM
Yeah, but that could just be because the writer of the article is trying to skew public opinion in a certain direction. Even the way the title is worded seems to indicate that the writer wants us to choose the woman's side over the man's. Just because a statement from the court is not included in the article doesn't mean it's not there, that would imply that reporters are always impartial and never impose their own worldview onto how they present their stories.

I can't argue that reporters aren't biased and will skew their reporting. As for the title...she is on the video saying she's "devastated", and "being irresistible" is what she was fired for, or so the dentist claims. I think he did his wife's bidding and fired her because he knew his wife had seen the inappropriate things he had texted, and he was doing emergency damage control.

But at least he's a louse who recognizes that he's a louse. That's the first positive step for any guy towards delousing. :laugh:

I have a feeling it was probably his wife's idea for them to go to their church pastor too so I'm not giving him any credit or brownie points. It's not like he grew a conscious and stopped and confessed on his own, and I think he'd still be doing it if he hadn't been caught.

if she was as innocent as she is claiming to be she would be happy she is out of that situation, who in their right mind would be wanting a job like that???

Some of this is puzzling to me, for instance, why would her husband plead for her job back after finding out how inappropriate the guy was with his wife? :unsure:

As to her being as innocent as she is claiming, guys can do these things completely on their own with no provocation or encouragement from a woman, stalking is a perfect example.

adamt
12-27-2012, 05:18 AM
I can't argue that reporters aren't biased and will skew their reporting. As for the title...she is on the video saying she's "devastated", and "being irresistible" is what she was fired for, or so the dentist claims. I think he did his wife's bidding and fired her because he knew his wife had seen the inappropriate things he had texted, and he was doing emergency damage control.



I have a feeling it was probably his wife's idea for them to go to their church pastor too so I'm not giving him any credit or brownie points. It's not like he grew a conscious and stopped and confessed on his own, and I think he'd still be doing it if he hadn't been caught.



Some of this is puzzling to me, for instance, why would her husband plead for her job back after finding out how inappropriate the guy was with his wife? :unsure:

As to her being as innocent as she is claiming, guys can do these things completely on their own with no provocation or encouragement from a woman, stalking is a perfect example.

yes tis puzzling



i understand men can do it without any provocation, but i find it hard to believe that she would let it go on and on and on, i mean she has enough huspaa to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, i am sure she could have managed to stop the flirting or if need be file a sexual harassment lawsuit


she did text him back in most cases, and she says she viewed him as a father figure.... it's just weird

Bonnie
12-27-2012, 06:52 AM
yes tis puzzling



i understand men can do it without any provocation, but i find it hard to believe that she would let it go on and on and on, i mean she has enough huspaa to file a wrongful termination lawsuit, i am sure she could have managed to stop the flirting or if need be file a sexual harassment lawsuit


she did text him back in most cases, and she says she viewed him as a father figure.... it's just weird

They showed a picture of him on tv earlier, he looks like he's quite a bit older than her. She's 32 now so she would have been 22 when she started working for him so that might explain why she viewed him in a father figure light.

A lot doesn't make sense to me. I need more answers! :laugh:

County Mike
12-27-2012, 01:20 PM
And, Mike, it sounds like you're blaming the wife for her husband's wrongdoing.


The part about the wife not keeping her man happy was my idea of a joke. Have to stay in character on the boards you know. :)

Bonnie
12-27-2012, 07:19 PM
The part about the wife not keeping her man happy was my idea of a joke. Have to stay in character on the boards you know. :)

Ooops! :laugh: I guess I should have known that, but the red I was seeing blinded me! :laugh:

NateR
12-27-2012, 09:18 PM
I think he did his wife's bidding and fired her because he knew his wife had seen the inappropriate things he had texted, and he was doing emergency damage control.

I think this really just goes to show that we will fill in the gaps for stories like this one based on our personal biases. Which is why it's so important for reporters to be thorough and not just report the facts that will support their own personal biases.

I'm saying that having biases are a bad thing. If you are an intelligent, thinking person, then you will have biases. Anybody who claims to be completely unbiased is either too unintelligent to form their own opinions or a liar.

F34R
12-28-2012, 12:24 AM
I think this really just goes to show that we will fill in the gaps for stories like this one based on our personal biases. Which is why it's so important for reporters to be thorough and not just report the facts that will support their own personal biases.

I'm saying that having biases are a bad thing. If you are an intelligent, thinking person, then you will have biases. Anybody who claims to be completely unbiased is either too unintelligent to form their own opinions or a liar.

I disagree. I'm not biased, but I'm not unintelligent either. I don't treat people unfairly, or form opinions unfairly.

NateR
12-28-2012, 12:59 AM
I disagree. I'm not biased, but I'm not unintelligent either. I don't treat people unfairly, or form opinions unfairly.

Everybody is biased and it's not a negative thing, it's just been given a negative stigma in recent times. You can't get rid of your biases, you can simply identify them and learn to take them into account.

For instance, I'm biased to prefer a Christian worldview over a Muslim, Hindu or Atheist worldview. If you are married, then you are biased to prefer your wife over every other woman on the planet. If you have children, then you are biased towards your children's welfare over the welfare of other children. If you want to see a murderer convicted for his crimes, then you are biased to prefer law over anarchy. If you want to live, then you are biased to prefer life over death.

Biases exist in every part of our lives and they can be very good things.

adamt
12-28-2012, 02:00 AM
Everybody is biased and it's not a negative thing, it's just been given a negative stigma in recent times. You can't get rid of your biases, you can simply identify them and learn to take them into account.

For instance, I'm biased to prefer a Christian worldview over a Muslim, Hindu or Atheist worldview. If you are married, then you are biased to prefer your wife over every other woman on the planet. If you have children, then you are biased towards your children's welfare over the welfare of other children. If you want to see a murderer convicted for his crimes, then you are biased to prefer law over anarchy. If you want to live, then you are biased to prefer life over death.

Biases exist in every part of our lives and they can be very good things.

i agree.... bias is one of those things that people think they "know" but in reality they don't understand. I think you are right. An example of something else that people think they know would be our senses. How many sense do you have? Five. Right? Wrong. There are many senses that a person has.Humans have more than five senses. Although definitions vary, the actual number ranges from 9 to more than 20. In addition to sight, smell, taste, touch, and hearing, which were the senses identified by Aristotle, humans can sense balance and acceleration (equilibrioception), pain (nociception), body and limb position (proprioception or kinesthetic sense), and relative temperature (thermoception).[249] Other senses sometimes identified are the sense of time, itching, pressure, hunger, thirst, fullness of the stomach, need to urinate, need to defecate, and blood carbon dioxide levels. Quoted partially from this wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions

i am mega biased and am fully aware of it

Bonnie
12-28-2012, 04:27 AM
I think this really just goes to show that we will fill in the gaps for stories like this one based on our personal biases. Which is why it's so important for reporters to be thorough and not just report the facts that will support their own personal biases.

I'm saying that having biases are a bad thing. If you are an intelligent, thinking person, then you will have biases. Anybody who claims to be completely unbiased is either too unintelligent to form their own opinions or a liar.

I agree we all have biases even if we don't realize it. When it comes to reporters, they should be professional and simply report the story whatever the facts may be, and keep their personal biases and opinions out of the story.

F34R
12-28-2012, 07:31 AM
Everybody is biased and it's not a negative thing, it's just been given a negative stigma in recent times. You can't get rid of your biases, you can simply identify them and learn to take them into account.

For instance, I'm biased to prefer a Christian worldview over a Muslim, Hindu or Atheist worldview. If you are married, then you are biased to prefer your wife over every other woman on the planet. If you have children, then you are biased towards your children's welfare over the welfare of other children. If you want to see a murderer convicted for his crimes, then you are biased to prefer law over anarchy. If you want to live, then you are biased to prefer life over death.

Biases exist in every part of our lives and they can be very good things.
I just take the word and meaning for what it is. It's based on unfairness. That is just something I don't have in my soul. If I prefer my wife over any other woman, it's completely a fair decision based on our relation ship and vows taken under God. The same goes for my children. Their welfare isn't associated with me based on unfair preferences I give them.

TexasRN
12-28-2012, 10:35 AM
James (F34R) and Mike, I agree with both of you about this situation and this scumbag. However, I don't agree with the thinking that flirting is not cheating, and, I really don't like when the wife is used as the reason for why her husband is cheating!

I know a lot of people don't consider flirting as cheating, but I'll argue, why is a married person flirting if they haven't already crossed that cheating line in their head, thinking of taking things further? To my thinking, if you're married and flirting, you're flirting with cheating.

And, Mike, it sounds like you're blaming the wife for her husband's wrongdoing.

They said in the news video that, "even the court said her firing was unfair, but ultimately, decided it wasn't illegal." What's troubling is the precedent set with ruling that "employers can fire employees that they see as an irresistible attraction." I think this is leaving a big opening for abuse by employers, and for good employees, through no fault of their own, to be unfairly fired. I hope that someone can find a way to get this overturned the way it stands now.

Amy, Nate and Adamt, I didn't see anything in the article or video where it said this young woman did or said anything inappropriate in this whole thing. I think the court would have mentioned that if she had. It sounds to me like she was probably trying to handle this situation by just ignoring the inappropriate comments and behavior hoping he would get the message with her nonresponse. I could see where she might try to take that route first, but obviously, he was too blinded by his lust or just too thick in the head to get the silent message.

This guy is a louse. :loser:

I guess I just don't buy that the woman was completely innocent. By her texting him back and answered questions about her sex life, or lack thereof, she helped the dentist feel like the flirting relationship was ok. She may have been worried that she would lose her job if she spoke up, but then why keep the job? My soon to be husband would be super ticked off if one of the docs I work with asked me about our sex life. If one of the men I work with talked to me about a bulge in his pants over what I was wearing, I would take that as him flirting with me. I know that some feel that flirting can be harmless but it's too easy for that flirting to be taken farther and for emotions to get involved. It's a very slippery slope.
I'll agree that the dentist is a louse and he went to the pastor with his wife only after the wife caught him. However, I also think it's his right to fire her if that will save his marriage. He had to get out of the situation.


~Amy

NateR
12-28-2012, 11:50 AM
I just take the word and meaning for what it is. It's based on unfairness. That is just something I don't have in my soul. If I prefer my wife over any other woman, it's completely a fair decision based on our relation ship and vows taken under God. The same goes for my children. Their welfare isn't associated with me based on unfair preferences I give them.

Of course a bias is based on unfairness. Did you try out every woman on the planet before you decided that your wife was the right one for you? I would assume the answer to that is no, so isn't your decision to prefer your wife over any other woman an unfair one?

Also you don't really choose your children, you just kind of get stuck with whatever you get. So, how do you know that there aren't other children out in the world more worthy of your care than the ones that you just happen to share DNA with? Doesn't seem fair to me. (In case you can't tell, I'm being more than a little tongue-in-cheek with these responses. No offense is intended.)

As Christians we are actually required to be biased, because GOD Himself is biased (Malachi 1:2-3; Exodus 33:19; Romans 9:18). It's not fair, but then again was it fair that Jesus Christ had to suffer and die for the rest of us when He never did anything wrong? But I digress, because I don't think we, as sinful human beings, want to travel too far down that road of fair vs. unfair when it comes to GOD. Because if we got what was fair, then we would all be in Hell right now.

Bonnie
12-28-2012, 07:03 PM
I guess I just don't buy that the woman was completely innocent. By her texting him back and answered questions about her sex life, or lack thereof, she helped the dentist feel like the flirting relationship was ok. She may have been worried that she would lose her job if she spoke up, but then why keep the job? My soon to be husband would be super ticked off if one of the docs I work with asked me about our sex life. If one of the men I work with talked to me about a bulge in his pants over what I was wearing, I would take that as him flirting with me. I know that some feel that flirting can be harmless but it's too easy for that flirting to be taken farther and for emotions to get involved. It's a very slippery slope.
I'll agree that the dentist is a louse and he went to the pastor with his wife only after the wife caught him. However, I also think it's his right to fire her if that will save his marriage. He had to get out of the situation.


~Amy

Yeah. :unsure: I was going by what was said in the article, about what the court found regarding the texts, but as Nathan pointed out to me, we may not be getting all the facts.

Bonnie
12-28-2012, 07:13 PM
Also you don't really choose your children, you just kind of get stuck with whatever you get.

:laugh:

F34R
12-29-2012, 04:57 AM
Of course a bias is based on unfairness. Did you try out every woman on the planet before you decided that your wife was the right one for you? I would assume the answer to that is no, so isn't your decision to prefer your wife over any other woman an unfair one?

Also you don't really choose your children, you just kind of get stuck with whatever you get. So, how do you know that there aren't other children out in the world more worthy of your care than the ones that you just happen to share DNA with? Doesn't seem fair to me. (In case you can't tell, I'm being more than a little tongue-in-cheek with these responses. No offense is intended.)

As Christians we are actually required to be biased, because GOD Himself is biased (Malachi 1:2-3; Exodus 33:19; Romans 9:18). It's not fair, but then again was it fair that Jesus Christ had to suffer and die for the rest of us when He never did anything wrong? But I digress, because I don't think we, as sinful human beings, want to travel too far down that road of fair vs. unfair when it comes to GOD. Because if we got what was fair, then we would all be in Hell right now.
No offense taken Nate. I always appreciate your replies.

County Mike
12-29-2012, 11:10 PM
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nMYUdu0gFiU/ToTr86SJk7I/AAAAAAAAAhk/MXQzV1k7uDI/s1600/robertpalmer.jpg