Penn State Sex Abuse Scandal (Indictment Post #144, "Pimping" Allegations Post #442)

[WV Cowboy]

The question is, why wouldn't you defend people that had nothing to do with the crime or the coverup?

I would, as soon as I knew who had nothing to do with this, or knew anything about it. Right now I don't know.

My opinion of Joe Paterno was so high prior to this that I could never have dreamed he would be involved in something like this. So if he was, then I don't know who to defend right now.

I don't think anyone does.

I have tried to imagine how I would feel if this had happened at WVU, .. and what I would do, or how I might handle it.

I would be very embarassed if this were us. I think I would be so embarassed that I would just lay low, and not spout things about WVU that I was not sure of.

I would be very humbled by this.

 

[TheDude]

And the two who have been proven to know something acted lawfully in dealing with what they knew, so im still failing to see how this is the football program's fault.

If anyone has a rational reason as to why its the football program that we should be blaming, please speak up.. haven't heard one so far.

lawfully and morally are not synonymous. Ramifications happen based on moral or ethical actions all the time. Simply hiding behind the law is shameful.

As far as "Program", you can excuse all infractions if the majority of all coaches, players, AD, pres, secretary, etc., etc. weren't involved. If you read the USA Today article, you see that Paterno viewed himself controller of all the Program and the AD and preseident were complicit with him solely disciplining players. No honest person is saying the "program" is raping boys, but the operations of the program allowed and/or suppressed this - maybe not intentionally, but when any organization begins to dictate its own rules, we all should be scared. From Colleges, political parties, religion, businesses, etc.

As far as a long-lasting teaching or message point... the question "In 5 years, who did Penn State play the week after Paterno was fired?" will likely only be answered by staunchest PSU alum. if you ask "Why did PSU cancel a game/bowl/etc. in 2011?" Many people will reflect on the underlying reason which is much more poignant than just status quo or losing the last home game in 2011.

 

[Stautner]

I would, as soon as I knew who had nothing to do with this, or knew anything about it. Right now I don't know.

My opinion of Joe Paterno was so high prior to this that I could never have dreamed he would be involved in something like this. So if he was, then I don't know who to defend right now.

I don't think anyone does.

I have tried to imagine how I would feel if this had happened at WVU, .. and what I would do, or how I might handle it.

I would be very embarassed if this were us. I think I would be so embarassed that I would just lay low, and not spout things about WVU that I was not sure of.

I would be very humbled by this.

So your standard is guilty until proven innocent. Sorry, that doesn't work for me.

What I'm defending is the right of people to be treated as innocent until proven otherwise. That's not only how our legal system works, it's the moral and just way for things to work.

If anyone thinks it's fair to drag people through the mud based only on the notion that we don't know for sure they didn't do something then I will argue on that point all day long.

I gave you an example yesterday - I notice you avoid discussing these examples by the way. But the example was, suppose you coach in a youth sports league. A couple of the coaches wer found to have abused kids. Because a couple of coaches were involved, there are rumors that all coaches in the league were either doing the same thing or covering up for the other coaches. Would it be fair and just to assume you were involved too, or would you expect that it would have to be proven before you are condemned, considered a child molester around town, possibly lose your job, and banned from working with kids in a sport you love?

 

[WV Cowboy]

So your standard is guilty until proven innocent. Sorry, that doesn't work for me.

What I am defending is the right of people to be treated as innocent until proven otherwise. That's not only the way our legal system works, that is the moral and just way for things to work.

If anyone thinks it is fair and just to drag people through the mud based on the notion that we don't know for sure they didn't do something wrong then I will argue with them on that point all day long.

I gave you an example yesterday - I notice you avoid discussing these examples by the way. But the example was, suppose you coach in a youth sports league. A couple of the coaches wer found to have abused kids. Because a couple of coaches were involved, there are rumors that all the coaches were either doing the same thing of covering up what was going on. Would it be fair and just, based on what actually happened and on that rumor, for you to be condemned, considered a child molester around town, possibly lose your job, and be banned from working with kids in a sport you love?

Did I say guilty until proven innocent? No.

My gosh Ernie, lately if I said the sky is blue, you would quote my post and question me on it. :laugh2:

I'm not saying anyone is guilty or innocent, or they should be dragged through the mud. I was not there, I have no idea who did what, or who knew what, or when they knew it. I don't know.

I'm not condeming anyone.

I'll wait and find out like everyone else.

And you say you noticed that I avoid jumping in with both feet into some hypothetical foolishness you concocted, .. thanks for noticing.

 

[Stautner]

Did I say guilty until proven innocent? No.

My gosh Ernie, lately if I said the sky is blue, you would quote my post and question me on it. :laugh2:

I'm not saying anyone is guilty or innocent, or they should be dragged through the mud. I was not there, I have no idea who did what, or who knew what, or when they knew it. I don't know.

I'm not condeming anyone.

I'll wait and find out like everyone else.

And you say you noticed that I avoid jumping in with both feet into some hypothetical foolishness you concocted, .. thanks for noticing.

You said you wouldn't defend people against accusations or punishment until you had proof they didn't do anything. Sorry buddy, but that IS treating them as guilty until proven innocent.

Now, here's a key question. All I have been saying all along, and the same for goes for RoytheHammer, is that the only ones that should be punished are those that have been proven to have done something wrong. Are you now telling us you believe exactly the same and you have been arguing against us all this time even though you agree with us? Seems pretty odd to me.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

lawfully and morally are not synonymous. Ramifications happen based on moral or ethical actions all the time. Simply hiding behind the law is shameful.

As far as "Program", you can excuse all infractions if the majority of all coaches, players, AD, pres, secretary, etc., etc. weren't involved. If you read the USA Today article, you see that Paterno viewed himself controller of all the Program and the AD and preseident were complicit with him solely disciplining players. No honest person is saying the "program" is raping boys, but the operations of the program allowed and/or suppressed this - maybe not intentionally, but when any organization begins to dictate its own rules, we all should be scared. From Colleges, political parties, religion, businesses, etc.

As far as a long-lasting teaching or message point... the question "In 5 years, who did Penn State play the week after Paterno was fired?" will likely only be answered by staunchest PSU alum. if you ask "Why did PSU cancel a game/bowl/etc. in 2011?" Many people will reflect on the underlying reason which is much more poignant than just status quo or losing the last home game in 2011.

First of all, the point was that the majority of people involved in the football program at PSU haven't been shown to either know about this or doing anything illegal. Therefore, all this crap blaming the football program is complete hogwash that people with no clue just read about and go along with.

Second, if we start firing people because of immorality, maybe 1 percent of people in this country would still have a job, and hypocrisy would rule the day.

 

[Stautner]

First of all, the point was that the majority of people involved in the football program at PSU haven't been shown to either know about this or doing anything illegal. Therefore, all this crap blaming the football program is complete hogwash that people with no clue just read about and go along with.

Second, if we start firing people because of immorality, maybe 1 percent of people in this country would still have a job, and hypocrisy would rule the day.

I wonder if these people have any concept of how big the football program is at a big time university. 85 scholorship players, plus walkons that include both active players and practice team players, plus coaches at every position and area, plus trainers and water boys and lockerroom guys and guys to film and do stats ..... a football program at a major school is huge. Paterno is the head guy, but there is no indication that what he did in any way involved any of the other maybe 150 people or more that are part of the football program.

 

[TheDude]

First of all, the point was that the majority of people involved in the football program at PSU haven't been shown to either know about this or doing anything illegal. Therefore, all this crap blaming the football program is complete hogwash that people with no clue just read about and go along with.

Second, if we start firing people because of immorality, maybe 1 percent of people in this country would still have a job, and hypocrisy would rule the day.

Only an idiot would think all, 51%, etc were actively involved and no one is saying any such thing. The issue is perhaps looking at NOT continuing as business as usual .01 seconds after it happens. Bo Pelini put best from a coach, teacher and subject perspective. Its not about a "Program", but in this case the "program" was defined by a figurehead. Stopping a game or contributing revenue is a gesture or a teaching moment. acting like this was "an odd week" is not.

If you think there are no ramifications for ethics or morality then I don't know what to say. Are you a congressman?

 

[RoyTheHammer]

Only an idiot would think all, 51%, etc were actively involved and no one is saying any such thing. The issue is perhaps looking at NOT continuing as business as usual .01 seconds after it happens. Bo Pelini put best from a coach, teacher and subject perspective. Its not about a "Program", but in this case the "program" was defined by a figurehead. Stopping a game or contributing revenue is a gesture or a teaching moment. acting like this was "an odd week" is not.

If you think there are no ramifications for ethics or morality then I don't know what to say. Are you a congressman?

Is it business as usual to fire the head coach who has been an icon and the symbol of your university for decades? A guy who is a living legend?

The lead dogs at the university did not treat it as "business as usual", now as for the players, students at the university who had nothing to do with this, yes.. they went on practicing and played their game. I can understand wanting to keep it business as usual for the kids, the students.

But saying there were no ramnifications for those involved is just silly. They still may contribute revenue or something of that nature, but its wrong to punish the students and the players who had nothing to do with this. You punish the people involved, and that is what happened.


Also, i didn't say there shouldn't be any consequences for morality.. only that if everyone in this country was judged fairly and was told their job would be taken away for any immoral acts they have committed, regardless of how much good they had done, very few would be left with a job.

There are people in business all over the country doing illegal things, and they are pushing their companies ahead and gaining an edge and being commended for it. That's not even talking morals, that's legality.. and its happening all over. Yet when Joe Paterno follows the law, but makes a moral mistake.. we all condemn him for it and it costs him his job.

Who the hell are any of us to judge the moral fortitude of another human being? We're all sinners, and I feel Joe made a mistake, but we shouldn't be taking away people's jobs if they didn't do anything illegal. Judge others based on morality is something no human being on earth is qualified to do.

 

[TheDude]

I wonder if these people have any concept of how big the football program is at a big time university. 85 scholorship players, plus walkons that include both active players and practice team players, plus coaches at every position and area, plus trainers and water boys and lockerroom guys and guys to film and do stats ..... a football program at a major school is huge. Paterno is the head guy, but there is no indication that what he did in any way involved any of the other maybe 150 people or more that are part of the football program.

I don't know what "these people" is reffering, but I did go to the Unioversity of Tennessee in the mid-late 1990s and knew many players then and now, some of whom ended up in the NFL.

I also know there are eye popping lengths that are taken to treat atheletics with kid gloves. The usaToday article just shows Penn State was no different. It doesn't take 150 people, it takes about 2-5 well placed ones.

That said, all coaches and players are not bad. Actually the vast majority are solid people. But things are kept in house. I can share many stories

 

[burmafrd]

Is it business as usual to fire the head coach who has been an icon and the symbol of your university for decades? A guy who is a living legend?

The lead dogs at the university did not treat it as "business as usual", now as for the players, students at the university who had nothing to do with this, yes.. they went on practicing and played their game. I can understand wanting to keep it business as usual for the kids, the students.

But saying there were no ramnifications for those involved is just silly. They still may contribute revenue or something of that nature, but its wrong to punish the students and the players who had nothing to do with this. You punish the people involved, and that is what happened.


Also, i didn't say there shouldn't be any consequences for morality.. only that if everyone in this country was judged fairly and was told their job would be taken away for any immoral acts they have committed, regardless of how much good they had done, very few would be left with a job.

There are people in business all over the country doing illegal things, and they are pushing their companies ahead and gaining an edge and being commended for it. That's not even talking morals, that's legality.. and its happening all over. Yet when Joe Paterno follows the law, but makes a moral mistake.. we all condemn him for it and it costs him his job.

Who the hell are any of us to judge the moral fortitude of another human being? We're all sinners, and I feel Joe made a mistake, but we shouldn't be taking away people's jobs if they didn't do anything illegal. Judge others based on morality is something no human being on earth is qualified to do.

the old chestnut no one should judge another is always used to slip away from personal responsibility and doing the right thing. You seem to think that no one should ever be criticised as long as it is not illegal. Pretty sad.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

the old chestnut no one should judge another is always used to slip away from personal responsibility and doing the right thing. You seem to think that no one should ever be criticised as long as it is not illegal. Pretty sad.

Actually, what i said was, no one should lose their job if they didn't do something illegal. We have laws set up that clearly define how people are expected to behave. That's how we judge people in this country the last time i checked.

As i also said, if we want to change that, and start judging people the other way, lets sit every single person down, find out their entire life story, and tell them if you've done something immoral in your life, no matter how much good you have brought to this world, its your job buddy.. then pretty much no one would have a job left.

 

[TheDude]

Is it business as usual to fire the head coach who has been an icon and the symbol of your university for decades? A guy who is a living legend?

The lead dogs at the university did not treat it as "business as usual", now as for the players, students at the university who had nothing to do with this, yes.. they went on practicing and played their game. I can understand wanting to keep it business as usual for the kids, the students.

But saying there were no ramnifications for those involved is just silly. They still may contribute revenue or something of that nature, but its wrong to punish the students and the players who had nothing to do with this. You punish the people involved, and that is what happened.

Paterno and a couple of others were punished. Again, punishment is not really this issue. Bo Pelini said it best.

Also, i didn't say there shouldn't be any consequences for morality.. only that if everyone in this country was judged fairly and was told their job would be taken away for any immoral acts they have committed, regardless of how much good they had done, very few would be left with a job.

There are people in business all over the country doing illegal things, and they are pushing their companies ahead and gaining an edge and being commended for it. That's not even talking morals, that's legality.. and its happening all over. Yet when Joe Paterno follows the law, but makes a moral mistake.. we all condemn him for it and it costs him his job.

Exactly, he is in the business of modeling young men, education, integrity, honestly, etc. He is not in "business." He is in charge of leading 18-21 year olds, not graduates. He SHOULD be held to a higher standard.

Who the hell are any of us to judge the moral fortitude of another human being? We're all sinners, and I feel Joe made a mistake, but we shouldn't be taking away people's jobs if they didn't do anything illegal. Judge others based on morality is something no human being on earth is qualified to do.

Laws are created by men. Law or not I believe I can judge the MORAL fortitude of Jerry Sandusky. In fact, had this been girls in India or other parts of the world, little would have been said. Doesn't make it any more moral when you take "legal" out of it.

We just had a teacher here at the Occupy Wall Street LA state that all of the problems revert back to Jewish bankers, Zionist, blah, blah,blah.

She got her *** fired, surprisingly, and I am ALL for it. She broke no Law and will not serve jail time or fines, but she also is now away from young minds.

I know right from wrong and people should pay for their mistakes, as JoePa so far has.

 

[TheDude]

Actually, what i said was, no one should lose their job if they didn't do something illegal. We have laws set up that clearly define how people are expected to behave. That's how we judge people in this country the last time i checked.

As i also said, if we want to change that, and start judging people the other way, lets sit every single person down, find out their entire life story, and tell them if you've done something immoral in your life, no matter how much good you have brought to this world, its your job buddy.. then pretty much no one would have a job left.

I just ended a thread about this ridiculous thought. People lose jobs, customers and careers all the time for immoral, unethical, and dumb acts. Thank God. Life isn't fair, if you are not a moron and have decent prinicples, you'll do just fine.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

I just ended a thread about this ridiculous thought. People lose jobs, customers and careers all the time for immoral, unethical, and dumb acts. Thank God. Life isn't fair, if you are not a moron and have decent prinicples, you'll do just fine.

Whether you have idealistic principles or not.. we all make mistakes now and then. Like i said, and its not ridiculous at all, if we all had our entire life put out into the public and we were all told that if we had ever committed an immoral act, we would lose our job.. very very few of us would still be employed.

You disagree with this?

 

[TheDude]

Whether you have idealistic principles or not.. we all make mistakes now and then. Like i said, and its not ridiculous at all, if we all had our entire life put out into the public and we were all told that if we had ever committed an immoral act, we would lose our job.. very very few of us would still be employed.

You disagree with this?

Yes I disagree. Immoral acts are judged as to relevance and perception. there is a hierarchy. Adultery would not be the same as lying to your wife when she asks if she looks fat. However, both would cause little issue for employment (save for a "moral" job). The more visibility the job has, the less leeway employers have for negative publicity and association.

Not following up on child rape, or perhaps ignoring it for the sake of reputation is just about as bad as it gets. I really struggle if you are being serious trying to say all "immoral" acts are exactly the same and should be looked at the same with the same ramifications.

The legal system, flawed as it is, doesn't even go that far, hence misdemeanor/felony, civil/criminal, fine vs prison, etc. Most people can tell a difference.

 

[RoyTheHammer]

.

Not following up on child rape, or perhaps ignoring it for the sake of reputation is just about as bad as it gets. I really struggle if you are being serious trying to say all "immoral" acts are exactly the same and should be looked at the same with the same ramifications.

Is it as bad as it gets, because i've heard plenty about child slavery or child prostitution rings in other countries and i don't hear near as much public outrage over those things that are ongoing.

As for the bolded statement, i'll ignore the second part of it, since its simply an assumption, but the first part of the statement is still in doubt as well.

As for not following up after reporting an incident that you were told of being "as bad as it gets".. i think that's silly. Committing the act of raping a child is as bad as it gets maybe.. but not following up on information given to you about a possible incident, which it hasn't been made clear if he did or not yet, isn't near as bad as it gets.

Hell, there are children in other countries starving every single day, and if everyone in this country gave just pennies a day to help, some of them wouldn't starve and wouldn't die. Yet how many of us get involved to help regularly? We know children are starving and dying everyday.. yet most of us do absolutely nothing to help. How is that any better than not following up on a report of an incident you were told about?

Imo, its far worse.. you know children are suffering and dying, and you choose not to act.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Actually, what i said was, no one should lose their job if they didn't do something illegal.

So you think it's acceptable that a public figure, whose salary is paid by tax dollars, can keep his job aslong as he doesn't do anything illegal? So if anyone comes out tommorrow and says the world would've been a better place had Germany won world war 2, you'd be okay with them keeping a job at a university? If someone came out tommorrow and said, while I'm personally not attracted to children, I don't see what the big deal is, you'd be okay with them leading a football team?

While I don't think we should condem anyone (actual meaning, not what you're using), especially those that did not break the law, you cannot allow someone in Joe Pa's position to continue after what he did (or failed to do).

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Is it as bad as it gets, because i've heard plenty about child slavery or child prostitution rings in other countries and i don't hear near as much public outrage over those things that are ongoing.

Because people don't have the direct knowledge that those involved in the Penn State scandal had. I know it goes on, probably in my state, maybe in my city, but I assume law enforcement is doing whatever they can to prevent it and I have no usefull knowledge that would help them

 

[TheDude]

Is it as bad as it gets, because i've heard plenty about child slavery or child prostitution rings in other countries and i don't hear near as much public outrage over those things that are ongoing.

We are talking moral vs legal...those are pretty much illegal especially in this country where there are federal task forces and other groups dedicated to breaking those.

As for the bolded statement, i'll ignore the second part of it, since its simply an assumption, but the first part of the statement is still in doubt as well.

seems pretty objective, but if it doesn't rank in your top 3, that's your prerogative

As for not following up after reporting an incident that you were told of being "as bad as it gets".. i think that's silly. Committing the act of raping a child is as bad as it gets maybe..

...uhh, ok

but not following up on information given to you about a possible incident, which it hasn't been made clear if he did or not yet, isn't near as bad as it gets.

from a moral perspective, for a teacher, educator, coach, etc. i disagree

Hell, there are children in other countries starving every single day, and if everyone in this country gave just pennies a day to help, some of them wouldn't starve and wouldn't die. Yet how many of us get involved to help regularly? We know children are starving and dying everyday.. yet most of us do absolutely nothing to help. How is that any better than not following up on a report of an incident you were told about? Imo, its far worse.. you know children are suffering and dying, and you choose not to act.

Again, I struggle with how you can seriously pose a question like this.

World Hunger = Jerry Sandusky.

I have to assume you are stepping on a soapbox to try to save face. Setting aside the sovereign responsibility, the 1000s of charities actively working the issues, using your logic, no one who doesn't spend 100% of their earnings and 100% of their time addressing foreign child hunger is as immoral as Paterno, the AD, or McQuery.

Still if you are saying that if in 1998 a child allegedly starved to death after being in the Penn State shower, cafeteria or whatever and a person involved in the starvation suddenly retired yet held on to university access, offices, etc. Then 4 years later an employee comes and says "I see a kid starving with flies buzzing his head in the shower." And the only response is to call the AD...come on.

Where there is smoke there's fire and playing Bagdad Bob to protect a reputation is unconscionable