Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on July 07, 2009, 11:55:25 AM
-
Seventh Grader Sues School Over Right to Wear Pro-Life T-Shirt
Monday, July 06, 2009
By Maxim Lott
(http://www.foxnews.com/images/543335/0_61_070609_abortion2.jpg)
A California mom says her public school administrators violated her daughter's First Amendment rights when they ordered the seventh-grader to take off her pro-life T-shirt.
Anna Amador has gone to court on behalf of her daughter, who she says was ordered by her principal to change her shirt on "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day." The shirt the girl was wearing displays two graphic pictures of a fetus growing in the womb.
The incident occurred in April 2008 at McSwain Elementary School, a K-8 school in Merced, Calif. Amador alleges in her legal complaint that school Principal Terrie Rohrer, Assistant Principal C.W. Smith and office clerk Martha Hernandez mistreated her daughter and denied the girl her First Amendment rights when they ordered her to leave the cafeteria and change her shirt.
"Before Plaintiff could eat [breakfast] she was ordered by a school staff member to throw her food out and report immediately to Defendant Smith's office, located in the main office of McSwain Elementary School," the complaint reads.
"Upon arriving at the main office, Defendant Hernandez, intentionally and without Plaintiff's consent, grabbed Plaintiff's arm and forcibly escorted her toward Smith's office, at all times maintaining a vice-like grip on Plaintiff's arm. Hernandez only released Plaintiff's arm after physically locating her in front of Smith and Defendant Rohrer...
"Smith and Rohrer ordered Plaintiff to remove her pro-life T-shirt and instructed Plaintiff to never wear her pro-life T-shirt at McSwain Elementary School ever again...
"Completely humiliated and held out for ridicule, Plaintiff complied with Defendants' directives and removed her pro-life T-shirt, whereupon, Defendants seized and confiscated it. Defendants did not return Plaintiff's property until the end of the school day."
The school administrators dispute some of the allegations, said Anthony N. DeMaria, attorney for the McSwain Union Elementary School District.
"I think the school district has a very strong defense," DeMaria said. "The complaint does not properly characterize the events that happened. Certainly we dispute some of the events."
He said he was unable to reach the administrators to determine which parts they say are incorrect, because school is out for the summer. Rohrer, the principal, told FOXNews.com on Monday that she could not issue a statement without consulting with the school superintendent and their attorney. The other defendants and school district employees did not respond to calls and e-mails from FOXNews.com.
The school district sought to get the case thrown out due to "failure to state a cognizable claim," but a U.S. Eastern District Court judge ruled last month that all but one of Amador's claims could go forward.
The complaint quotes school district officials saying that they ordered Amador's daughter to remove the shirt because it constituted "inappropriate subject matter" in violation of the school's dress code, which bans clothing with "suggestion of tobacco, drug or alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, profanity, vulgarity, or other inappropriate subject matter."
Amador claims in the legal complaint that other students at the school have been allowed to wear expressive shirts, and she blames the school for “inconsistently applying their Dress Code based upon subjective determinations as to which messages are acceptable and which messages are not.”
One of the girl's lawyers, Mark A. Thiel, said that the images on her shirt of a fetus in the womb were same as those in her science textbooks. He said no student had complained about the shirt, and he said the girl's parents were not called when the incident took place.
"This was a young girl, not even in high school. But they didn't call," he said.
A spokeswoman for the local Planned Parenthood chapter declined to take sides in the case.
"Even offensive speech is protected as long as it doesn’t impinge upon the rights of others," said Deborah Ortiz, vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte.
"School administrators have a mission to educate, and the student’s right to political speech should be protected in balance with this education mission."
UCLA law professor and First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh said Supreme Court precedent appears to support the girl's case.
"During the Vietnam War, the Supreme Court ruled that wearing black arm bands [at school, to protest the war] was OK,” Volokh said. “If students can wear armbands in protest, why can't they wear a pro-life shirt?"
He said the case would be different if there was evidence that the shirt could have led to disruption or fighting.
"Schools have a lot more authority than the government does in regulating speech,” he said. “If someone is speaking on a street corner and it looks like other people are going to start a fight over it, the government's job is to protect the speaker. That is not the case in schools. We need to make sure students learn. So if speech is highly disruptive, well … in that case we can suppress it.
"But the school's position that they can restrict speech just because they find it inappropriate is not correct."
But the fact that it's a K-8 school with very young children could change things, said Brooklyn Law School professor William Araiza. He pointed to the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Morse v. Frederick, where the court allowed a high school to suspend students in Juneau, Alaska, who waved a banner that read “Bong hits 4 Jesus” from across the street during an Olympic torch relay, because it was seen as promoting illegal drug use.
“[The school] could almost use a “bong hits” kind of rationale about protecting students from inappropriate messages,” Araiza said. “For instance, would you allow a 4th grader to wear a gruesome picture of a bomb scene? You probably wouldn't.”
First Amendment attorney William Becker, who represents Amador, disagreed that the shirt could be seen as containing inappropriate messages.
"The message of the T-shirt is that life is sacred," he said. "One would be very hard pressed to find anything wrong with that particular idea, except that some people do object to the political message.”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530284,00.html?test=latestnews
-
I just love it when people use their kids to push their agendas. Using a 7th grader really adds that little push, doesn't it? ::)
-
I just love it when people use their kids to push their agendas. Using a 7th grader really adds that little push, doesn't it? ::)
agreed, I didnt like it when those parents and teachers got their kids to sing the obama song or whatever during the campaign and I dont like this, they are kids let them be kids...
-
What right does a school have to dictate what kids where as long as it isnt vulgar.Think they would tell a black kid to take off his "100% black shirt",I doubt it.If it was my kid,he would still be wearing the shirt and there wouldnt be a fucking thing and teacher or principal could do to stop it.
-
What right does a school have to dictate what kids where as long as it isnt vulgar.Think they would tell a black kid to take off his "100% black shirt",I doubt it.If it was my kid,he would still be wearing the shirt and there wouldnt be a fucking thing and teacher or principal could do to stop it.
So if my kid wore a shirt to your kids school that said "FUCK CHRISTIANS" or "Jesus was a homosexual" you'd be ok with that?
-
So if my kid wore a shirt to your kids school that said "FUCK CHRISTIANS" or "Jesus was a homosexual" you'd be ok with that?
I love you Hereford.
-
So if my kid wore a shirt to your kids school that said "FUCK CHRISTIANS" or "Jesus was a homosexual" you'd be ok with that?
CAN YOU READ DUMBFUCK!!I said it couldnt be vulgar!!Or are you too dumb to understand vulgar.HOWEVER,I wouldnt give two shits what your kid had on his shirt ,Im sure if he would even look at my kid crosseyed he would get laid out in front of all the other kids.
By the way,once again,the retards on here think that because your pro-life your pro religion.Simple minded fools.Jesus was a jew,I think Ive ,made my position on jews fairly well known.I wouldnt care if he had a picture of Jesus hanging upside down on a cross.I dont get offended easily.
-
Oh dear.
Billy, you stupid fuck. You are the fuckstick low-life parent who sends their kid to school dirty with a mohawk and gangland outfit, then acts like a tough guy when the school tell you 'no', aren't you?
Just to be clear, I would tell my son to fucking cold-cock your little bastard the first time he ran his mouth.. blabbering in spanish or somali or what-the-fuck-ever they speak in your little trailer park. I think you wouldn't do shit about it. I think you are the kind of guy who would go run and crying like a little bitch for protection to the same principle or teachers that you just told to go fuck themselves.
You're all mouth Mr. BM. All mouth.
-
Oh dear.
Billy, you stupid fuck. You are the fuckstick low-life parent who sends their kid to school dirty with a mohawk and gangland outfit, then acts like a tough guy when the school tell you 'no', aren't you?
Just to be clear, I would tell my son to fucking cold-cock your little bastard the first time he ran his mouth.. blabbering in spanish or somali or what-the-fuck-ever they speak in your little trailer park. I think you wouldn't do shit about it. I think you are the kind of guy who would go run and crying like a little bitch for protection to the same principle or teachers that you just told to go fuck themselves.
You're all mouth Mr. BM. All mouth.
I love you Hereford.
-
is this really turning into a "my kid can beat up your kid" argument? ???
-
CAN YOU READ DUMBFUCK!!I said it couldnt be vulgar!!Or are you too dumb to understand vulgar.HOWEVER,I wouldnt give two shits what your kid had on his shirt ,Im sure if he would even look at my kid crosseyed he would get laid out in front of all the other kids.
By the way,once again,the retards on here think that because your pro-life your pro religion.Simple minded fools.Jesus was a jew,I think Ive ,made my position on jews fairly well known.I wouldnt care if he had a picture of Jesus hanging upside down on a cross.I dont get offended easily.
Judging by the way you write, your kid is "laying out" other kids because he's been held back 7 times.
At least you never have to worry about a teacher finding out if you help your child on their homework. Your poor child is going to grow up cheering for our Capitalist government totally oblivious to the fact that the real capitalist are sitting on their yachts laughing their asses off that it's always the poverty line imbeciles arguing hardest for the greatness of a Capitalist society. The morons working for pennies and too dumb not to love every minute of it.
-
Oh dear.
Billy, you stupid fuck. You are the fuckstick low-life parent who sends their kid to school dirty with a mohawk and gangland outfit, then acts like a tough guy when the school tell you 'no', aren't you?
Just to be clear, I would tell my son to fucking cold-cock your little bastard the first time he ran his mouth.. blabbering in spanish or somali or what-the-fuck-ever they speak in your little trailer park. I think you wouldn't do shit about it. I think you are the kind of guy who would go run and crying like a little bitch for protection to the same principle or teachers that you just told to go fuck themselves.
You're all mouth Mr. BM. All mouth.
Here is whats all mouth you coward.I post with my name.Just look uo youtube and see what am.Iam someone who would kick your face right off your head.Unlike the rest of the girls on GETBIG who claim big shit,Iam big shit,I do big shit,Id rip your fucking eyes out of your skull.My kid has national records at 7 years old,at 13 years old and will soon have them at 15 years old.Your kid is a bitch made homo.
Your a typical internet pussy.You would piss in your pants if you were face to face with me.In fact,I doubt your man enough to produce a kid or cleavor enough to con some bitch to fuck you.Now,go bavck to your fantasy world and keep thinking ANYONE is scared of you pussy.
By the way,here is my kid on the cover!!!!![best lifter] of BODYTECHUSA a couple of years ago.Does he look like he has a mohawk idiot.I await your kids pics and his many accomplishments.Somehow I doubt there are any.
http://altarofpain.net/January_08bodytechusa.pdf
-
Holy Shit!!! I didn't know the special olympics had their own magazine these days ??? O'DOYLE RULES!!!!!!!! Just do me a favor and don't tell him that EVERYONE gets a medal...
Jeebus y'all, take a look at this rag! and yes, your kid probably would beat up mine, considering he's probably a 16 year old 7th grader.
And it really didn't take too much convincing... I guess your wife wasn't "cleavor enough" to beat the con. All it took was a 6-pack of Schlitz and a hard pack of Marboro Reds.
-
If it was actually the kids idea to wear the shirt I think she should be allowed, thats not an offensive shirt imho certainly no more offensive then some of the sexually deragotory shirts alot of kids wear these days...but like i said i hate it when parents use their children to help push their views...
-
Here is whats all mouth you coward.I post with my name.Just look uo youtube and see what am.Iam someone who would kick your face right off your head.Unlike the rest of the girls on GETBIG who claim big shit,Iam big shit,I do big shit,Id rip your fucking eyes out of your skull.My kid has national records at 7 years old,at 13 years old and will soon have them at 15 years old.Your kid is a bitch made homo.
Your a typical internet pussy.You would piss in your pants if you were face to face with me.In fact,I doubt your man enough to produce a kid or cleavor enough to con some bitch to fuck you.Now,go bavck to your fantasy world and keep thinking ANYONE is scared of you pussy.
By the way,here is my kid on the cover!!!!![best lifter] of BODYTECHUSA a couple of years ago.Does he look like he has a mohawk idiot.I await your kids pics and his many accomplishments.Somehow I doubt there are any.
http://altarofpain.net/January_08bodytechusa.pdf
We should all hope to be as "cleavor enough" as Billy Mimnaugh and his children. If you google "Jalen Mimnaugh", you see that at least one of the "national records" he holds is in a division in which he was very likely the only competitor. His bench was like 135- which is not weak and I'm not criticizing the kid- but virtually our entire freshman squad could do one plate a side. There were many guys who could do two. I realize thirteen is a bit younger than a highschool freshman, but my point being his "national records" don't make him a bad ass. And you look like you'd have a heart attack if you even thought about throwing a punch.
I have a feeling I would probably piss my pants from laughter if we ever came face to face.
As for the shirt, the school is in the wrong, but I suspect the description of how events went down is , at best, over-dramatized. The girl is in junior high and I would bet that the administrators probably opted to err on the side of caution, probably not even taking the "side" of the t-shirt into account. A pro-choice shirt probably would have elicited the same reaction. I remember my Catholic high school having a lot of policies that seemed contradictory if you really examined them, but at their heart, they were just attempts to make sure things ran smoothly. The school may have over-reacted, but I think the mother is sort of a bitch for trying to politicize a grade school.
-
is this really turning into a "my kid can beat up your kid" argument? ???
Yep. Can you believe it? Amazing! :-\
-
i think that shirt is inappropriate for school. But I also believe that these little shits need to wear uniforms and adhere to a strict dress code. I see some kids that are dressed like thugs and whores and they have no notion of the negativity it portrays. Also wearing a shirt that says "jesus is a homsexual" isn't vulgar.
-
Yep. Can you believe it? Amazing! :-\
Except I'm just playin' ;)
-
Except I'm just playin' ;)
No need to clarify. I think we all know who the nutjob who isn't playing is? :-\
-
I love you Hereford.
>:( Whoa, you've been cheating on me with Hereford >:( You can't love us both, it's Hereford or me. Decide Deicide >:(
-
Deicide's been after my nuts for awhile now.
You may rent him if you would like... :D
-
Whaaaat. This was a good topic. You guys went and gayed it all up. :D
-
We should all hope to be as "cleavor enough" as Billy Mimnaugh and his children. If you google "Jalen Mimnaugh", you see that at least one of the "national records" he holds is in a division in which he was very likely the only competitor. His bench was like 135- which is not weak and I'm not criticizing the kid- but virtually our entire freshman squad could do one plate a side. There were many guys who could do two. I realize thirteen is a bit younger than a highschool freshman, but my point being his "national records" don't make him a bad ass. And you look like you'd have a heart attack if you even thought about throwing a punch.
I have a feeling I would probably piss my pants from laughter if we ever came face to face.
As for the shirt, the school is in the wrong, but I suspect the description of how events went down is , at best, over-dramatized. The girl is in junior high and I would bet that the administrators probably opted to err on the side of caution, probably not even taking the "side" of the t-shirt into account. A pro-choice shirt probably would have elicited the same reaction. I remember my Catholic high school having a lot of policies that seemed contradictory if you really examined them, but at their heart, they were just attempts to make sure things ran smoothly. The school may have over-reacted, but I think the mother is sort of a bitch for trying to politicize a grade school.
http://universalassociates4u.com/Photo_archive.html
pick 3018
That was taken on June 6 this year.Do I look like Im having a heart attack?By the way,Im 46 years old with MASSIVE injuries and multiple surgeries.
By the way,my kid is now getting ready for his freshman year and just benched 225 squatted 315 and pulled 315[only a small belt].All this at 155lbs.
Anyway,none of that is the point.The point is,that unless a school has a policy for uniforms,or is going to pay for a childs clothes,then they have no right to decide who wears what,ESPECIALLY if its not an across the board policy.Some might find ceratin rock groups shirts offensive,some might find wearing an Obama shirt offensive.Unless its vulgar,the school needs to allow it.OR the school can say plain t-shirts only,no writing on them.
-
>:( Whoa, you've been cheating on me with Hereford >:( You can't love us both, it's Hereford or me. Decide Deicide >:(
I have enough love for many.... ;)
-
Good lord this thread took a wrong turn immediately after Billys little meltdown.
-
Good lord this thread took a wrong turn immediately after Billys little meltdown.
How do I get the blame?A guy posts what if his kid wore a "FUCK JESUS" shirt to school[after I said as long as the shirt wasnt vulgar] and directed it to me.Obviously he assumed I was a Christian[how and why I have no idea]and he was intentially trying to get me pissed off so I responded in exactly the same idiotic tone.This the problem here and all over.A lib purposely tries to insult or incite,then when anyone responds to it in exactly the same way,the lib says "meltdown".Gayest thing Ive ever seen.
-
How do I get the blame?A guy posts what if his kid wore a "FUCK JESUS" shirt to school[after I said as long as the shirt wasnt vulgar] and directed it to me.Obviously he assumed I was a Christian[how and why I have no idea]and he was intentially trying to get me pissed off so I responded in exactly the same idiotic tone.This the problem here and all over.A lib purposely tries to insult or incite,then when anyone responds to it in exactly the same way,the lib says "meltdown".Gayest thing Ive ever seen.
Your way or reasoning has an interesting way to it.
-
Your way or reasoning has an interesting way to it.
Was that not EXACTLY the way it happened?
-
Was that not EXACTLY the way it happened?
Debussey's comment was made after getting an impression from reading a few of your posts.
-
Debussey's comment was made after getting an impression from reading a few of your posts.
So,your agreeing that he posted the "FUCK JESUS" thing because he assumed I was a Christian.So,he was purposely trying to insult me to make his point,EXACTLY the way I insulted him back by saying my kid would knock his kid out[which is funny,because his kid could be 18 and weigh 280 for all I know].
Again,I posted that as long as the shirt isnt vulgar the school has no right to dictate what a kid can wear.He responded by saying the Jesus thing to insult me[which didnt insult me because I couldnt care less about Jesus].It seems my memory and recall is correct then.
-
So,your agreeing that he posted the "FUCK JESUS" thing because he assumed I was a Christian.So,he was purposely trying to insult me to make his point,EXACTLY the way I insulted him back by saying my kid would knock his kid out[which is funny,because his kid could be 18 and weigh 280 for all I know].
Again,I posted that as long as the shirt isnt vulgar the school has no right to dictate what a kid can wear.He responded by saying the Jesus thing to insult me[which didnt insult me because I couldnt care less about Jesus].It seems my memory and recall is correct then.
Debusseys comment had nothing to do with this specific case.
-
If all kids wore uniforms this wouldn't be an issue.
-
If all kids wore uniforms this wouldn't be an issue.
Agree BUT who will pay for them?
-
Agree BUT who will pay for them?
Private school the parents pay. But re public schools? Good question. Didn't think about the tax implications of public school uniforms.
-
I saw a story years back about some public ghetto school in NY that was forcing kids to wear uniforms due to the gang issues. They had some blacks hop up there and bitch and moan about how the school was forcing a hardship on them by making them buy uniforms for their little gangsta brats... but nothing said about the $140 Air Jordans or designer jeans they would wear otherwise.
-
Agree BUT who will pay for them?
In all honesty it would end up being cheaper then buying school clothes for the vast majority of ppl. Kids only need 2 or so sets of school clothes as opposed to numerous shirts, shorts, shoes, and pants if they dont wear a uniform...
-
In all honesty it would end up being cheaper then buying school clothes for the vast majority of ppl. Kids only need 2 or so sets of school clothes as opposed to numerous shirts, shorts, shoes, and pants if they dont wear a uniform...
Uniforms are definitely cheaper in the long run. I love them. My kids hate them. :)
-
In all honesty it would end up being cheaper then buying school clothes for the vast majority of ppl. Kids only need 2 or so sets of school clothes as opposed to numerous shirts, shorts, shoes, and pants if they dont wear a uniform...
Again,I agree,however,how do you think groups like the ACLU and other civil rights groups will react to it?How long before you have groups claiming the new uniforms are racist and designed to end individuality.Id love school uniforms,but I think you would have MASSIVE legal costs getting it through.
For me,it would be more expensive as my kid only wears sweats and t-shirts to school.I might save some bucks on sneakers though.
-
Uniforms are definitely cheaper in the long run. I love them. My kids hate them. :)
I honestly was in favor of them growing up i never had them but i was one of those kids that rolled out of bed picked some shit off the floor and tried to make it look semi decent. I always thought it would be nice to not have to worry about what i was gonna wear... :-\ maybe that was just me...
Again,I agree,however,how do you think groups like the ACLU and other civil rights groups will react to it?How long before you have groups claiming the new uniforms are racist and designed to end individuality.Id love school uniforms,but I think you would have MASSIVE legal costs getting it through.
For me,it would be more expensive as my kid only wears sweats and t-shirts to school.I might save some bucks on sneakers though.
Ya I agree i think the ppl on the very low end of the economic scale might have problems but for most you would save money either on clothes or shoes etc...
-
How do I get the blame?
Where did I blame you?
I said the thread took a wrong turn after you did your Daily Melting Trick. That was simply observing WHAT happened, not WHO was to blame.
-
I honestly was in favor of them growing up i never had them but i was one of those kids that rolled out of bed picked some shit off the floor and tried to make it look semi decent. I always thought it would be nice to not have to worry about what i was gonna wear... :-\ maybe that was just me...
Ya I agree i think the ppl on the very low end of the economic scale might have problems but for most you would save money either on clothes or shoes etc...
As I think about this, it really wouldn't be that much of a financial burden, because the parents have to buy clothes for their kids anyway.
-
As I think about this, it really wouldn't be that much of a financial burden, because the parents have to buy clothes for their kids anyway.
Thats true,BUT have you ever noticed that when your doing something because you want to as opposed to doing something because your forced to,expense seems to not matter.If they forced that on "the poor" you know there would be protests.Costs would matter little.I do think it would be a great thing,this way you would never know who has money and who doesnt and the kid without much,would look the same as the kid with a lot.Thats a far better environment for learning.
-
Thats true,BUT have you ever noticed that when your doing something because you want to as opposed to doing something because your forced to,expense seems to not matter.If they forced that on "the poor" you know there would be protests.Costs would matter little.I do think it would be a great thing,this way you would never know who has money and who doesnt and the kid without much,would look the same as the kid with a lot.Thats a far better environment for learning.
Yep. True. People don't like to be forced to do anything. But would definitely be a good idea.
-
Good lord this thread took a wrong turn immediately after Billys little meltdown.
Ahh shut up... or billy will pound your face in, ...then his kid will stomp your kid on the playground,
...and don't think nanna's all safe in that nursing home neither. His grandma will slap the prune juice out of your grandma's arthritic fingers.
-
It's interesting that so many of the conservatives on the board are essentially co-signing mandatory school uniforms.
As I've already mentioned in this thread, I went to a parochial high school, as well as a parochial grammar school. Even within our relatively tight dress code, we always managed to find a great deal of wiggle room. That's just going to happen with kids... hell, people in general. You just have to fucking deal with that shit. This t-shirt mess is hardly an indication of why dress codes would be a good idea. This is coming from someone who isn't even a clothes horse. My main criteria in choosing clothing to purchase
is how similar it looks to stuff I already have. And to be honest, I liked our dress code. I thought we looked so much neater than the public school kids. And Catholic school girls are just fucking hot.
I'm just kinda blown away (except, I'm not even a little surprised) that so many people who go on and on about our nanny states and state's rights see the solution to what is ABSOLUTELY a non-issue as giving up choice.
-
It's interesting that so many of the conservatives on the board are essentially co-signing mandatory school uniforms.
As I've already mentioned in this thread, I went to a parochial high school, as well as a parochial grammar school. Even within our relatively tight dress code, we always managed to find a great deal of wiggle room. That's just going to happen with kids... hell, people in general. You just have to fucking deal with that shit. This t-shirt mess is hardly an indication of why dress codes would be a good idea. This is coming from someone who isn't even a clothes horse. My main criteria in choosing clothing to purchase
is how similar it looks to stuff I already have. And to be honest, I liked our dress code. I thought we looked so much neater than the public school kids. And Catholic school girls are just fucking hot.
I'm just kinda blown away (except, I'm not even a little surprised) that so many people who go on and on about our nanny states and state's rights see the solution to what is ABSOLUTELY a non-issue as giving up choice.
This isn't a liberal/conservative issue. At least not for me.
Did your school ever have a problem with messages on t-shirts?
-
This isn't a liberal/conservative issue. At least not for me.
Did your school ever have a problem with messages on t-shirts?
Absolutely agree with you BB...also agree with you on the uniform issue, in Britain almost every schoolchild under 16 has to wear uniform, whether private or state. I dont see why people on here have a problem with uniforms, they make perfect sense, you're going to school not to a playpark.
left or right, its simply wrong to put your kid in a t-shirt with any sort of political slogan on it. Children can't understand the depth and complexity of an issue like abortion, or gay rights, or whatever, let them make their own damn minds up.
-
This isn't a liberal/conservative issue. At least not for me.
Did your school ever have a problem with messages on t-shirts?
Message t-shirts? No. We weren't allowed to wear t-shirts. Message hats, bracelets, necklaces, ink or marker tattoos on hands or arms, dyed hair, etc. ? Yep.
This is the POLITICAL board. You've made your political leanings known here. Your posts in this particular thread seem to contradict posts you've made in the past along with others who fall into your camp. That is what I was pointing out.
That is beside the point, however. My point is that whatever problems arise from kids wearing whatever they want to wear within reason are rare enough, minimal enough and reasonable enough that mandatory uniforms aren't an across the board good idea.
-
Absolutely agree with you BB...also agree with you on the uniform issue, in Britain almost every schoolchild under 16 has to wear uniform, whether private or state. I dont see why people on here have a problem with uniforms, they make perfect sense, you're going to school not to a playpark.
left or right, its simply wrong to put your kid in a t-shirt with any sort of political slogan on it. Children can't understand the depth and complexity of an issue like abortion, or gay rights, or whatever, let them make their own damn minds up.
Yep. Agree.
-
Message t-shirts? No. We weren't allowed to wear t-shirts. Message hats, bracelets, necklaces, ink or marker tattoos on hands or arms, dyed hair, etc. ? Yep.
This is the POLITICAL board. You've made your political leanings known here. Your posts in this particular thread seem to contradict posts you've made in the past along with others who fall into your camp. That is what I was pointing out.
That is beside the point, however. My point is that whatever problems arise from kids wearing whatever they want to wear within reason are rare enough, minimal enough and reasonable enough that mandatory uniforms aren't an across the board good idea.
Did you have a problem with "message hats" etc. at your school? My kids wear uniforms to school and they're not permitted to wear "message hats," etc. and there is never a problem with kids trying to make political points with their clothes.
This is a political board. Thanks for clearing that up. All I've said in this thread is I'm in favor of school uniforms. How does that "contradict" posts I've made in the past?
I agree with steevo's comments about uniforms.
-
If they made uniforms mandatory in public schools it would solve a slew of problems
-
Did you have a problem with "message hats" etc. at your school? My kids wear uniforms to school and they're not permitted to wear "message hats," etc. and there is never a problem with kids trying to make political points with their clothes.
Yes. A few specific examples:
When I was in grade school, "The Simpsons" was incredibly popular. Because it was considered vulgar by some, the banning of "Simpsons'" apparel became a mild controversy. At the high school I attended, Toronto Maple Leaves' apparel became ridiculously popular a few years before I started going there. When the staff realized why, ML gear became a violation of school dress code. We had an openly gay student in our class. He was picked on a lot and eventually started painting a pink triangle on his hand. A guidance counselor spoke with him about it and eventually a lawsuit came out of it. These are just a few instances that immediately come to mind.
This is a political board. Thanks for clearing that up. All I've said in this thread is I'm in favor of school uniforms. How does that "contradict" posts I've made in the past?
I've already stated how I see this as contradictory. It really is not rocket science.
I agree with steevo's comments about uniforms.
I don't agree at all with steevo's ideas on uniforms, but I do agree with his position on parents dressing their kids up in political t-shirts. It echoes one of my earlier posts.
-
If they made uniforms mandatory in public schools it would solve a slew of problems
Like what?
-
Yes. A few specific examples:
When I was in grade school, "The Simpsons" was incredibly popular. Because it was considered vulgar by some, the banning of "Simpsons'" apparel became a mild controversy. At the high school I attended, Toronto Maple Leaves' apparel became ridiculously popular a few years before I started going there. When the staff realized why, ML gear became a violation of school dress code. We had an openly gay student in our class. He was picked on a lot and eventually started painting a pink triangle on his hand. A guidance counselor spoke with him about it and eventually a lawsuit came out of it. These are just a few instances that immediately come to mind.
I've already stated how I see this as contradictory. It really is not rocket science. I don't agree at all with steevo's ideas on uniforms, but I do agree with his position on parents dressing their kids up in political t-shirts. It echoes one of my earlier posts.
Did you have mandatory uniforms or just a dress code?
You didn't state anything specific regarding my "contradictory" comments. Here is what you said:
This is the POLITICAL board. You've made your political leanings known here. Your posts in this particular thread seem to contradict posts you've made in the past along with others who fall into your camp. That is what I was pointing out.
I'm asking how my posts contradict anything I've said in the past. I really have no idea what you're talking about. Sounds like you don't either.
-
Like what?
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/355951/the_benefits_of_school_uniforms.html?cat=4 (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/355951/the_benefits_of_school_uniforms.html?cat=4)
http://712educators.about.com/cs/schoolviolence/a/uniforms.htm (http://712educators.about.com/cs/schoolviolence/a/uniforms.htm)
2. Potential Benefits of School Uniforms
Preventing gang colors, etc. in schools
Decreasing violence and theft because of clothing and shoes
Instilling discipline among students
Reducing need for administrators and teachers to be 'clothes police' (for example, determining whether shorts are too short, etc.)
Reducing distractions for students
Instilling a sense of community
Helping schools recognize those who do not belong on campus
http://www.ed.gov/updates/uniforms.html (http://www.ed.gov/updates/uniforms.html)
School Uniforms: Where They Are and Why They Work
A safe and disciplined learning environment is the first requirement of a good school. Young people who are safe and secure, who learn basic American values and the essentials of good citizenship, are better students. In response to growing levels of violence in our schools, many parents, teachers, and school officials have come to see school uniforms as one positive and creative way to reduce discipline problems and increase school safety.
They observed that the adoption of school uniform policies can promote school safety, improve discipline, and enhance the learning environment. The potential benefits of school uniforms include:
decreasing violence and theft -- even life-threatening situations -- among students over designer clothing or expensive sneakers;
helping prevent gang members from wearing gang colors and insignia at school;
instilling students with discipline;
helping parents and students resist peer pressure;
helping students concentrate on their school work; and
helping school officials recognize intruders who come to the school.
As a result, many local communities are deciding to adopt school uniform policies as part of an overall program to improve school safety and discipline. California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, Tennessee, Utah and Virginia have enacted school uniform regulations. Many large public school systems -- including Baltimore, Cincinnati, Dayton, Detroit, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Miami, Memphis, Milwaukee, Nashville, New Orleans, Phoenix, Seattle and St. Louis -- have schools with either voluntary or mandatory uniform policies, mostly in elementary and middle schools. In addition, many private and parochial schools have required uniforms for a number of years. Still other schools have implemented dress codes to encourage a safe environment by, for example, prohibiting clothes with certain language or gang colors.
-
Did you have mandatory uniforms or just a dress code?
You didn't state anything specific regarding my "contradictory" comments. Here is what you said:
I'm asking how my posts contradict anything I've said in the past. I really have no idea what you're talking about. Sounds like you don't either.
We had mandatory uniforms. Blue or grey pants, matching ties, white shirts, optional vests, blue blazer. Girls- blue and grey plaid skirt, blue blazer.
Earlier:
I'm just kinda blown away (except, I'm not even a little surprised) that so many people who go on and on about our nanny states and state's rights see the solution to what is ABSOLUTELY a non-issue as giving up choice.
-
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/355951/the_benefits_of_school_uniforms.html?cat=4 (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/355951/the_benefits_of_school_uniforms.html?cat=4)
http://712educators.about.com/cs/schoolviolence/a/uniforms.htm (http://712educators.about.com/cs/schoolviolence/a/uniforms.htm)
Preventing gang colors, etc. in schools
Decreasing violence and theft because of clothing and shoes
Instilling discipline among students
Reducing need for administrators and teachers to be 'clothes police' (for example, determining whether shorts are too short, etc.)
Reducing distractions for students
Instilling a sense of community
Helping schools recognize those who do not belong on campus
Gang colors is an extremely limited problem. And trust me, kids can still manage to sneak gang colors in at uniform-wearing schools. I volunteered at a high school here in NY and some of the kids were wearing a New York Yankees cap that was known to be worn by Latin Kings' members. I doubt the kids were actual gang members, but I know they must have been aware of what the hat represented.
Girls constantly challenged administrators with skirt length and various other things: what was considered a radical hair style, when were shoes officially pumps, crap like that.
The third one. I went to a large high school and our dean of discipline was pretty good at recognizing students and proactive in questioning anything he viewed as suspicious. So, uniforms would definitely be better in that regard, but I don't think a well run school necessarily has to be caught with its ass showing.
-
Gang colors is an extremely limited problem. And trust me, kids can still manage to sneak gang colors in at uniform-wearing schools. I volunteered at a high school here in NY and some of the kids were wearing a New York Yankees cap that was known to be worn by Latin Kings' members. I doubt the kids were actual gang members, but I know they must have been aware of what the hat represented.
Girls constantly challenged administrators with skirt length and various other things: what was considered a radical hair style, when were shoes officially pumps, crap like that.
The third one. I went to a large high school and our dean of discipline was pretty good at recognizing students and proactive in questioning anything he viewed as suspicious. So, uniforms would definitely be better in that regard, but I don't think a well run school necessarily has to be caught with its ass showing.
As well as solving some problems, if not completely of course, uniforms also have their benefits.
Uniforms influence conduct, participation, community, etc..
-
As well as solving some problems, if not completely of course, uniforms also have their benefits.
Uniforms influence conduct, participation, community, etc..
I don't believe they do.
Do you think this applies to prison uniforms, as well?
-
We had mandatory uniforms. Blue or grey pants, matching ties, white shirts, optional vests, blue blazer. Girls- blue and grey plaid skirt, blue blazer.
Earlier:
You had mandatory uniforms but you could wear "message hats"?
And where I have gone "on and on about our nanny states and state's rights"? You just going to make it up as you go along? :) Even if I had, that has nothing to do with school uniforms. This thread probably contains the biggest written discussion I've ever had about school uniforms. It's not something I'm going to lose any sleep over.
-
I don't believe they do.
Do you think this applies to prison uniforms, as well?
How long you been out of school? And did you go in a suburb, rural or city?
I think our prisons are so F-ed up that it wouldn't make much of a difference. However, some warden in AZ made his inmates were pink i heard, and the ACLU was all over it and made him stop.
-
You had mandatory uniforms but you could wear "message hats"?
And where I have gone "on and on about our nanny states and state's rights"? You just going to make it up as you go along? :) Even if I had, that has nothing to do with school uniforms. This thread probably contains the biggest written discussion I've ever had about school uniforms. It's not something I'm going to lose any sleep over.
I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure you have referred to Obama as a "socialist". I know you criticized Obama for attaching strings to the bail-out some corps. received. You said they should be able to spend the money any way they wanted. I know tony and mimnaugh have both derided Obama as a socialist. There have been other things, but my point wasn't so much contradictions in specific quotes from you three as it was a contradiction to the general philosophy of the right. Isn't the right supposed to be all about personal choice and responsibility? Isn't that why the Dems suck- because they want to take away all your freedoms and baby you?
As for "message hats", we could wear hats on the school premises, but not in the actual school. Even if a hat is not sitting on your head during school hours, it is still of concern to administrators if it is in your possession when you leave and enter the school.
-
How long you been out of school? And did you go in a suburb, rural or city?
I think our prisons are so F-ed up that it wouldn't make much of a difference. However, some warden in AZ made his inmates were pink i heard, and the ACLU was all over it and made him stop.
I'm 29. I went to high school in a racially mixed- though, predominately white- suburban high school.
-
I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure you have referred to Obama as a "socialist". I know you criticized Obama for attaching strings to the bail-out some corps. received. You said they should be able to spend the money any way they wanted. I know tony and mimnaugh have both derided Obama as a socialist. There have been other things, but my point wasn't so much contradictions in specific quotes from you three as it was a contradiction to the general philosophy of the right. Isn't the right supposed to be all about personal choice and responsibility? Isn't that why the Dems suck- because they want to take away all your freedoms and baby you?
As for "message hats", we could wear hats on the school premises, but not in the actual school. Even if a hat is not sitting on your head during school hours, it is still of concern to administrators if it is in your possession when you leave and enter the school.
Yes you are wrong. I have referred to Obama as a "quasi-socialist." :) But I'm on the verge of calling him an outright socialist.
I don't really have much of a "general philosophy" and I don't belong to any political party. That's why I vote for whomever I want (e.g., Clinton twice, Bush twice). The "Dems suck" is a little too simplistic for me. I do not go on the "state's rights" rants. I don't really care much about the differences between political parties. I do have a problem with much of what liberals stand for these days, and I think the mindset of many liberals is dangerous, but I'm not a big fan of the current Republican party either. Both parties are floundering.
-
Beach, why is HI like 90% lib?
When I lived there, it seemed like 90% didn't care....
-
I remember as a kid I was in the mall getting my name printed on a T-shirt, and their was little guy next to me about 8 yrs old whose mother was buying him a T-shirt. He attened a Catholic elementary school, ...and he wanted the Star Wars poster printed on his shirt. His mom objected. She didn't think the school would approve of his wearing a Star Wars T-shirt ...because of ...believe it or not Princess Leia. She thought the school would deem the Princess Leia as being obscene. I was dumbfounded. She didn't object to the light sabres at all. Weapons that can harm, torture, maim and kill were perfectly ok, ...but show a little flesh... and all hell breaks loose. :-\
(http://blog.stackoverflow.com/wp-content/uploads/star-wars-poster1.jpg)
This wasn't the actual image he wanted on his T-shirt, but it was close. The one he wanted was more similar to the spoof one below,
(http://www.collider.com/uploads/imageGallery/Family_Guy/family_guy_star_wars_poster_blue_harvest_l.jpg)
and Princess Leia was off to the right, very, very tiny, ...but she was flashing a tiny bit of leg... from the kneee down. I was surprised that she even saw it. I remember the poor guy at the T-shirt shack was having a hard time figuring out why she found it so objectionable, ...and she was too embarrassed to even point it out. She gestured to it about 4 times with the pen, but was scared to get closed to it, ...as if pointing out a piece of flesh would corrupt & pollute her soul for eternity. And I really remember the look of disapointment on the little kid's face because he couldn't get his Star Wars T-shirt. :'(
-
Yes you are wrong. I have referred to Obama as a "quasi-socialist." :) But I'm on the verge of calling him an outright socialist.
I don't really have much of a "general philosophy" and I don't belong to any political party. That's why I vote for whomever I want (e.g., Clinton twice, Bush twice). The "Dems suck" is a little too simplistic for me. I do not go on the "state's rights" rants. I don't really care much about the differences between political parties. I do have a problem with much of what liberals stand for these days, and I think the mindset of many liberals is dangerous, but I'm not a big fan of the current Republican party either. Both parties are floundering.
I think that this is largely hogwash. The political views you post on here are almost uniformly right-leaning and you've posted that "conservatives are happier than libs" meme at least four times that I can think of. In at least two separate discussions, you alluded to the fact that you shared political views with HH6, a devout conservative. While you may not be a registered Republican, it's apparent from your posts that most of your political views are conservative.
In light of that, I will reiterate what I said in my last post. The contradiction (as I see it) wasn't so much in regards to a specific post from any of you three, but the common political leanings among you all.
-
Beach, why is HI like 90% lib?
When I lived there, it seemed like 90% didn't care....
I can't explain it Hereford. We have been a one party state pretty much since statehood. We elected our first Republican Gov in over 40 years back in 2002 and she has been fantastic. The state legislature has, I believe, two Republicans in the Senate and four in the House. All four of our D.C. reps are Democrats. And these are the "tax and spend" liberal Democrats. They have been bad for the business community.
People do care a lot about politics here, but most of our politics is local, so we deal with different issues, like losing Superferry. >:( Like that stupid cell phone ban on Oahu. >:( Like the furlough controversy that has been dominating the news here.
-
I think that this is largely hogwash. The political views you post on here are almost uniformly right-leaning and you've posted that "conservatives are happier than libs" meme at least four times that I can think of. In at least two separate discussions, you alluded to the fact that you shared political views with HH6, a devout conservative. While you may not be a registered Republican, it's apparent from your posts that most of your political views are conservative.
In light of that, I will reiterate what I said in my last post. The contradiction (as I see it) wasn't so much in regards to a specific post from any of you three, but the common political leanings among you all.
Ah so what. You shouldn't be so caught up on labeling people. What a pointless exercise. I admittedly label some as liberal, conservative, etc., but I certainly don't typically keep tallies of peoples views on issues.
I created a "conservatives are happier than libs" topic at least four times? I'm calling horse manure on that one. I could be wrong, but I recall making two threads that posted polls/commentary about whether conservatives are happier than liberals. But so what? Conservatives probably are happier than liberals. What the heck difference does that make when it comes to my political views?
lol . . . So I alluded to sharing HH6's political views? And when was this? We actually disagree on a number of issues, but I respect the heck out of him, what he does, and what he stands for.
As I said before, and this horse is about dead so you can have the last word, I don't have a general philosophy, don't care if you or anyone else thinks I do have one, and I'll continue to vote, speak, etc. on issues by calling things as I see them.
-
Ah so what. You shouldn't be so caught up on labeling people. What a pointless exercise. I admittedly label some as liberal, conservative, etc., but I certainly don't typically keep tallies of peoples views on issues.
Yes you do:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=131390.msg1866671#msg1866671
Oh phooey. A "true Republican" adheres to Ronald Reagan's Eleventh Commandment, which you break every day on this board. A "true Republican" supports his party through thick and thin and doesn't flush his vote down the toilet by voting for a "Libertarian," which in turn makes it more likely a Democrat will win. You are a phony baloney, disloyal "Republican." A liberal if I ever saw one.
And get your facts straight. I am a two-time Clinton voter. :)
Here's a painfully ironic post directed at jaguarenterprises from the same thread :
You are right that I don't know for a fact what your political persuasion is. I just have opinion (that you're a liberal), which obviously could be right or wrong. As I said in this string, you have conservative leanings when it comes to business. But that's about all I've seen. You impress me as pretty much a bleeding heart, which I don't mean as an insult. One of my closest friends is a bleeding heart liberal. Her husband is in Iraq, and she hates Bush. I have no problem with her politics, or yours. I do have a problem with all the American hating, but I don't we'll ever agree on that. :)
And you agree with 240? Shocking. :o
(BTW, you can choose to believe that I spent the hours between this and your last post sitting in front of my computer, scouring old posts for an out-of-context quote. However, I've actually been at dinner. This is one of MANY posts from you that popped up after a two minute search using keywords like "libertarian" and "republican". I was actually pretty shocked that such blatant counter-examples to your last post existed. I was actually just searching for some quotes from you calling 240 a ct nut.)
-
Yes you do:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=131390.msg1866671#msg1866671
Here's a painfully ironic post directed at jaguarenterprises from the same thread :
(BTW, you can choose to believe that I spent the hours between this and your last post sitting in front of my computer, scouring old posts for an out-of-context quote. However, I've actually been at dinner. This is one of MANY posts from you that popped up after a two minute search using keywords like "libertarian" and "republican". I was actually pretty shocked that such blatant counter-examples to your last post existed. I was actually just searching for some quotes from you calling 240 a ct nut.)
Oh this is comical. So I say that I "admittedly label some as liberal, conservative, etc. but I certainly don't typically keep tallies of peoples views on issues." And to disprove this statement (i.e., that I either routinely or always do this), and keeping in mind that I post on this board darn near every day, you find a couple of two-year-old statements made to 240 and jag? lol . . . . You're smarter than that Al. This is one of those fish in the barrel moments. :)
And if you're going to search my old posts, you should plug in "phoney baloney Republican." I'm sure I've said that more than once. :) And note that the overwhelming majority of my statements regarding self-professed Republicans were probably directed to the same person. (But feel free to clarify, because I haven't searched my old posts.)
Since you're searching through my two-year old posts, where are the four or more threads I created about liberals being happier than conservatives? lol . . . .
-
I didn't say you started four threads about conservatives being happier. I said you made at least four separate posts stating virtually the same thing.
My point in posting those old quotes was not to show that you "routinely or always" label people, it was to show that in a similar situation, you engaged in the same "pointless exercise" that I did... or, for that matter, any person with a functioning brain would. It's not a matter of keeping tallies of the political views of others. As you stated, you post on this board virtually every day, often in threads I follow. Just from the sheer volume of posts you make, it would be impossible not to be familiar with your political views. The beauty of the quote is that it specifically shows you doing two things which you attempt to deride me for doing: labeling people and keeping a tally of their political views. The age of the quotes is irrelevant. I simply chose those because they were such glaring examples.
-
I didn't say you started four threads about conservatives being happier. I said you made at least four separate posts stating virtually the same thing.
My point in posting those old quotes was not to show that you "routinely or always" label people, it was to show that in a similar situation, you engaged in the same "pointless exercise" that I did... or, for that matter, any person with a functioning brain would. It's not a matter of keeping tallies of the political views of others. As you stated, you post on this board virtually every day, often in threads I follow. Just from the sheer volume of posts you make, it would be impossible not to be familiar with your political views. The beauty of the quote is that it specifically shows you doing two things which you attempt to deride me for doing: labeling people and keeping a tally of their political views. The age of the quotes is irrelevant. I simply chose those because they were such glaring examples.
I'm sure I've made at least four separate posts about lots of things. Which again proves nothing.
You didn't make a point. I actually conceded that I do label people sometimes. So the fact you found two-year-old statements, out of the thousands of posts I've made on this board, which actually confirmed what I already admitted, did nothing more than confirm my statement.
I often deride people for engaging in ad hominem, but I do that on ocassion too. (Here is the part where you find some of my ad hominem statements to confirm what I just said.) That really has nothing to do with whether it's useful or a poor communication/discussion technique. Just as trying to label someone you don't even know is still pointless, whether I occasionally engage in the some exercise or not.
What's funny is you are perplexed by me expressing viewpoints that don't fit into the little box you've tried to put me in, which should tell you there is something wrong with your box.
-
When you appear to be tacitly including yourself in that group, it does prove something. Unless you were trying to point out that you were unhappy when you said you believed those studies? Your recycling of the statement and the contexts in which you re-used it seemed to indicate that you considered yourself a part of the preternaturally happy conservative movement. Of course, there is always the completely believable and reasonable possibility that you were just throwing that statement out there at random.
You conceded that you do label people, but you denied that you kept a tally of their political beliefs. So, yes, I actually did make a point. But the larger point (which you also aggressively missed) wasn't so much the labeling and tallying, it was the labeling and tallying subsequent to reading multiple posts... which is inevitable. How does paying attention to what someone repeatedly says and referencing those statements in later conversations constitute poor communication technique?
What's funny is you are perplexed by me expressing viewpoints that don't fit into the little box you've tried to put me in, which should tell you there is something wrong with your box.
Except it's not a problem with the box. Everyone else in the box holds the same political leaning and supports the same contradiction. That's the only reason it jumped out at me. It's a problem with the viewpoint.
-
When you appear to be tacitly including yourself in that group, it does prove something. Unless you were trying to point out that you were unhappy when you said you believed those studies? Your recycling of the statement and the contexts in which you re-used it seemed to indicate that you considered yourself a part of the preternaturally happy conservative movement. Of course, there is always the completely believable and reasonable possibility that you were just throwing that statement out there at random.
You conceded that you do label people, but you denied that you kept a tally of their political beliefs. So, yes, I actually did make a point. But the larger point (which you also aggressively missed) wasn't so much the labeling and tallying, it was the labeling and tallying subsequent to reading multiple posts... which is inevitable. How does paying attention to what someone repeatedly says and referencing those statements in later conversations constitute poor communication technique?
Except it's not a problem with the box. Everyone else in the box holds the same political leaning and supports the same contradiction. That's the only reason it jumped out at me. It's a problem with the viewpoint.
lol. So now I am "tacitly" making points. This is precisely the kind of pointless stuff I was talking about. You read a few posts, try and find some hidden meaning, then make an assumption, repeat it as fact, etc. That's funny. I've never claimed to be happier than liberals or conservatives, although I am a very happy person. My happiness has nothing to do with my political views. And I certainly do go around comparing my happiness to others.
I post topics all the time, the overwhelming majority of the time because I find them interesting, or I think some others might find them interesting. But people struggling to maintain their own comfortable level with labels will try and find some “tacit” motive.
Then you say: "You conceded that you do label people, but you denied that you kept a tally of their political beliefs. So, yes, I actually did make a point."
Buzzzzzz! :) What I actually said was:
I admittedly label some as liberal, conservative, etc., but I certainly don't typically keep tallies of peoples views on issues.
Very important to pay attention to detail when you're trying to keep people in the box.
And yes, there is a problem with the box. The notion that I express a view that is somehow inconsistent with what YOU believe is my "general philosophy" is just ridiculous. But to each his own. :)
-
lol. So now I am "tacitly" making points. This is precisely the kind of pointless stuff I was talking about. I've never claimed to be happier than liberals or conservatives, although I am a very happy person. My happiness has nothing to do with my political views. And I certainly do go around comparing my happiness to others.
You attempt to tacitly make points all the time. You just did it with an abortion article. You posted the story sans commentary, but you've posted enough anti-abortion stuff in the past that your intentions are crystal clear. The articles you post usually have a conservative slant to them, and often come from biased, conservative websites. You can pretend that each individual post you make exists in a vacuum, but anyone with common sense can see a common thread among your posts.
You read a few posts, try and find some hidden meaning, then make an assumption, repeat it as fact, etc. That's funny.
No. As you stated a few posts ago, you post on this board virtually every day. YOu yourself said you have made thousands of posts that go back years. My picture of you isn't based on a "few" posts. It's based on a very large, consistent catalogue of posts.
Then you say: "You conceded that you do label people, but you denied that you kept a tally of their political beliefs. So, yes, I actually did make a point."
Buzzzzzz! :) What I actually said was:
Very important to pay attention to detail when you're trying to keep people in the box.
Likewise, you might want to consider becoming a little more detail oriented as well. Immediately following that quote, I post the larger, more important point, which you continue to ignore. Here it is:
the larger point (which you also aggressively missed) wasn't so much the labeling and tallying, it was the labeling and tallying subsequent to reading multiple posts... which is inevitable. How does paying attention to what someone repeatedly says and referencing those statements in later conversations constitute poor communication technique?
And yes, there is a problem with the box. The notion that I express a view that is somehow inconsistent with what YOU believe is my "general philosophy" is just ridiculous. But to each his own. :)
Me, from earlier:
In light of that, I will reiterate what I said in my last post. The contradiction (as I see it) wasn't so much in regards to a specific post from any of you three, but the common political leanings among you all.
-
It's interesting that so many of the conservatives on the board are essentially co-signing mandatory school uniforms.
As I've already mentioned in this thread, I went to a parochial high school, as well as a parochial grammar school. Even within our relatively tight dress code, we always managed to find a great deal of wiggle room. That's just going to happen with kids... hell, people in general. You just have to fucking deal with that shit. This t-shirt mess is hardly an indication of why dress codes would be a good idea. This is coming from someone who isn't even a clothes horse. My main criteria in choosing clothing to purchase
is how similar it looks to stuff I already have. And to be honest, I liked our dress code. I thought we looked so much neater than the public school kids. And Catholic school girls are just fucking hot.
I'm just kinda blown away (except, I'm not even a little surprised) that so many people who go on and on about our nanny states and state's rights see the solution to what is ABSOLUTELY a non-issue as giving up choice.
hahahah see thats b/c you buy into the olbeirman msnbc BULL SHIT!!!!!!!!!!
conservatives arent for the total lack of government and regulation...when its actually needed and warrented then the majority of conservatives are for it...
Im totally for uniforms in school and would consider myself conservative/independent or vice versa b/c like other have said it would help to solve a number of problems maybe you didnt go to a school with gangs, maybe you didnt go to a school where ppl tried to sneak on campus or off...
I totally agree that students will find a way to modify their uniforms but thats still better then the alternative option...
-
hahahah see thats b/c you buy into the olbeirman msnbc BULL SHIT!!!!!!!!!!
conservatives arent for the total lack of government and regulation...when its actually needed and warrented then the majority of conservatives are for it...
Im totally for uniforms in school and would consider myself conservative/independent or vice versa b/c like other have said it would help to solve a number of problems maybe you didnt go to a school with gangs, maybe you didnt go to a school where ppl tried to sneak on campus or off...
I totally agree that students will find a way to modify their uniforms but thats still better then the alternative option...
I didn't say conservatives were for the total lack of government. I guess what I posted is up for interpretation, but what I intended to get across is that a basic tenet of conservatism is small government and emphasis on local government. (States' rights?)
Most people don't attend schools where gang activity is a problem- structured gangs with hierarchies, colors and hand signs. Uniforms wouldn't really
In theory, dressing everyone in the same clothes should solve a lot of problems, but in practice it doesn't, for two simple reasons: A)There simply aren't that many problems related to clothing in American schools B) the problems that do exist still exist in uniformed schools. You can still immediately tell which kids are poor, kids still test the boundaries of what they can get away with appearance wise and things like coats and gym shoes are still targeted for theft.
I'm not even anti-uniform. I always thought we looked so much neater than our public school counterparts and Catholic school girls are just fucking hot. It's like a school full of cheerleaders. What I am debating is the idea that uniforms are problem solvers. I think they're non-factors in most student-related issues.
-
Yeah...you've posted stuff like that before, I just didn't feel like searching for it.
Regardless ::)