Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Salty, Aug 19, 2011.
click for link
Or should she go thur proper channels?
While it may not be politically correct in some peoples minds I find her decision a blessing and yes she has the right to do it in my opinion. More people need to take a stand against evil. One more thing. She is the proper channel as it is her business and bank account that takes the hit.
I have a MySpace account and I refuse to allow anyone be in my friends list who has anything on their site that links to anything contrary to godliness and that includes their friends list and the pictures of them in scanty clothing. I post my requirements, but still get requests, I assume they think I am joking, but I write them and explain exactly what the problem is with their page. Most are just angry even with a clear and simple explanation while some just offer excuses. I tell them to clean up their account and then ask again and I will consider them.
How does know that the girls on FB are the very same girls that were on her list? One of my daughter's has 15 namesakes, girls/ladies with the very same first and last name. So, is my daughter going to miss her senior portrait because someone has decided that one of the 15 is being a bully? How does she know which one is which?
Two, what business does she have on my DD's facebook page? Is she a creepy stalker?
Three: Who put her in the position of disciplining my child? If she thought my child was doing something naughty, she should have contacted *ME* and told me of her suspicions. It is up to *ME* to discipline my own kid.
Four: if she was contracted by the school to take pictures of all the seniors, SHE needs to uphold her contract. She's being well paid for what she does. (if not find another job)
Two reasons she should refuse to take a photo: if she believes her own life to be in danger. And that doesn't appear to be the case. 2nd if she is working out of a private studio and not contracted with the school. In that case she can do whatever she pleases. I simply won't do business with someone who thinks its their job to police my child's FB page and we'll both be happy.
And that brings up the point. The kids' parents should have been aware that their kids pages were wide open to the world. Honestly, there is no reason for that. Lock their pages down to "friends only" and 3/4th of the drama will end. It's such an easy solution.
That kind of rebellious response is why so many children today are doing the things they do. When poor parenting spawns irresponsible children what is left is for others to straighten them out.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
It's her business, her money, her reputation, and her choice. I support her decision, and think it was wise and principled.
Good for her! And at least 2 of the mothers involved appreciated the details she unveiled.
It's her business. She can do what she wants.
Actually, I agree 100% with menageriekeepe.
It might be her business, but if she has a contract, she is required to fullit - unless there is a moral clause.
Also, here in NY, after the Homsexual bill was passed - there was concern that Christian photograpers, caters, ect would be required to provide service to these inmmoral activiteis. If they didnt, they could be sued.
I dont see a difference.
From USA Today
A Methodist church lost tax exemption because they refused to host a homsexual marriage reception - and for other cases, click here
She should be able to do what she wants, but her reaction strikes me as—well—womanish. Rather petty at that. If she had simply informed their parents, that would be one thing, but to make a scene like this. I think she's compensating.
Like I said. Womanish.
BTW. I have social network monitoring installed on the computers in my home. If anyone logs onto a social network on one of my computers, I have full access to their account even after they log off. Plus, I get email notifications based on key words.