Do you think that the people who protect pedophiles like in the case with Jerry Sandusky are guilty of a crime, too? Or what about teachers unions who fight for those individuals to keep their jobs?
In a recent article, The Wall Street Journal writer, Campbell Brown, writes that teachers unions in New York City don't do enough, that "believing that they are helping the cause of teachers by being weak on sexual predators--[the unions] prefer suspensions and fines, and not dismissal." Compare this same behavior in the business workplace she writes and "there would be zero tolerance."
Jerry Sandusky abused children for decades. The leaders at Penn State hid Sandusky's crime. Now the school and those individuals are facing consequences for their failure to protect children.
Isn't this the same thing as teachers who are protected by anyone - union or other leaders?
Just like the Sandusky case, I believe that failure to protect children because you're trying to keep adults safe and employed, is a crime and should be punished. After all, school counselors and teachers are already required by law to report suspected abuse if a child tells them about it.
At the very least, the pedophiles themselves should be held responsible immediately and severely. But, that isn't happening. And it didn't happen in this story reported in the NY Post and in this horrific story from California. Years of abuse could have been prevented if people around, and in leadership, had acted to protect the children and not the adults.
I believe it's our moral obligation as citizens of the world to protect children. (Whether you're a big football school or a teacher's union in New York City.)
Isn't it our responsibility as citizens of this country?