The students who took to the streets here have overwhelmingly backed the 84-year-old Paterno in the sex-abuse scandal involving former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky. Ironically, many of those students would have been about the same age as Sandusky's alleged victim was in 2002.
Kant spent his whole life on a university campus, never traveled more than ten miles from where he was born, and died a virgin. Calling him an authority on real-life human morality is like hiring an Xbox champion to coach an NFL football team.
1. Paterno did not cover it up. He reported it. There is nothing in the Grand Jury report that says otherwise.
2. The analogy being made by many in here is that if one has the knowledge (which, according to everyone in here only consists in a report) and the ability to put an end to atrocious conduct, then one is morally obliged to do so. So, either America and Paterno are morally bankrupt or they are not (or, persons in here have some kind of moral double-standard, which goes against the concept of morality (universal)).
Splitting hairs between what is moral, legal and ethical doesn't help the kids.
Splitting hairs between what is moral, legal and ethical doesn't help the kids.
read something I found interesting on ESPN:
would these students be backing JoePa so strongly if they had been the ones in the shower?
If you guys have took any business classes you would know.(you guys probably have) Ethically he did everything he is suppose too. Morally he did not, but this is my problem with people who all of the sudden want to stand on morals when a kid gets hurt. They want to stand by their morals for kids, but when money or something is in question they throw everything out.(this is what you see a lot of in America)
Since everyone is comparing this to a business and what they would do.(for the above paragraph)
L
You think the people on the board are not trying to cover their ass on this? This falls on the perpetrator and the AD.
"I think you'll find out that Jerry Sandusky was told he had to retire in exchange for a cover up."
Penn State was having their players volunteer with Sandusky's program until just recently. Not only did they do nothing to stop Sandusky, they were actively supporting the charity that he was using to prey on children.
This has nothing to do with the fact that his philosophy is grounded in A Priori premises and that his arguments are valid.
You can argue for empiricism all you want; I do not.
.If you guys have took any business classes you would know.(you guys probably have) Ethically he did everything he is suppose too. Morally he did not, but this is my problem with people who all of the sudden want to stand on morals when a kid gets hurt. They want to stand by their morals for kids, but when money or something is in question they throw everything out.(this is what you see a lot of in America)
Since everyone is comparing this to a business and what they would do.(for the above paragraph)
You think the people on the board are not trying to cover their ass on this? This falls on the perpetrator and the AD.