Would you have the same laissez faire attitude if instead of proven jihadists these were radical christian supremacists that just came back from a modern crusade war?
Probably, the operative word in the headline is former
If they’re conducting themselves professionally I don’t see any issues aside from any possible debts to society yet to be paid, which could frankly just as well be covered by them providing a professional education for the next generation.
I would have the same opinion in both cases as well: I don’t want (former?) violent fundamentalists teaching my children, any more than I would like e.g. (former?) sex offenders.
Would you have the same laissez faire attitude if instead of proven jihadists these were radical christian supremacists that just came back from a modern crusade war?
If they had reformed, like ex kkk members helping to get others out of a cult
That sounds reasonable.
Have these particular jihadists reformed?
No idea, was not asked or reported on in article.
In the absence of further information, do you think it is fair to be wary of them being involved in the education of children?
Yeah, education in any since, hell if they fought for isis and still are not remorseful I wouldn’t want them just walking around free.
Probably, the operative word in the headline is former
If they’re conducting themselves professionally I don’t see any issues aside from any possible debts to society yet to be paid, which could frankly just as well be covered by them providing a professional education for the next generation.
deleted by creator
I’d be more-inclined to take issue with Muslim extremists than Christian extremists, if anything. So, yeah, probably have pretty much the same take.
I would have the same opinion in both cases as well: I don’t want (former?) violent fundamentalists teaching my children, any more than I would like e.g. (former?) sex offenders.