Suspended for not standing for pledge!

Damocles said:
Because this isn't a manners site, now, is it?

This has to be the absolute most disingenuous thing I have ever seen from you.

Being polite isn't what is found in the flag code.

You are pretending to be clueless because you don't want to admit that there might be another reason other than this code to ask somebody to stand. But there is.

Such pretense is getting normal for this thread.

My argument is that there are reasons other than "saluting the flag" to ask a kid to stand and that one of those is to be polite to the kids who are standing to salute the flag.

I have even stated that in some places there would be different standards on this. Posting from a site on how to salute the flag properly isn't evidence that being polite doesn't exist. In fact we all know it exists without that and I have given myriad examples.
Click to expand...
Yeah and your insistence that this is about manners is so genuine. It had nothing to do with be offended that the kids refused to stand for the flag. It is all out of miss manners. Don't pretend to lecture me on being genuine in this matter. The quote from the education official in that town points DIRECTLY to why they were suspended and manners had shit to do with it. But that's just my opinion as AN AMERICAN CITIZEN as if that gives it any more credibility.
 
Socrtease said:
And from the community education director in the school district:



"These three [students] didn't, and they got caught," said Mel Olson, the district's community education director. He said he backs the punishment, "being a veteran and a United States of America citizen, absolutely." Olson served in the Marines in Japan during the Vietnam War.

Wow you were right Damo it is all about manners which is why the community education director mention his veteran status and being an "american citizen" cause real american citizens stand out of respect for other people standing for the flag.
Click to expand...
*sigh*

Again.

I said. Please follow. Don't be a jackass.

"I can see other reasons to ask a student to stand in such a case."

I didn't say, "These people asked them to stand for a different reason."

I also said. Please follow. Don't be a jerk.

"That if this is the reason that they asked them to stand I would agree with you in this case, but that doesn't change that I can see other reasons that the teacher might ask a student to stand."

This story suggests that the "community's education director" thinks that was the reason, but the story suggests otherwise when you dig a bit deeper.

The story says the kid had been doing this all year. That is not indicative of the guy insisting that they stand for the flag.
 
Socrtease said:
Yeah and your insistence that this is about manners is so genuine. It had nothing to do with be offended that the kids refused to stand for the flag. It is all out of miss manners. Don't pretend to lecture me on being genuine in this matter. The quote from the education official in that town points DIRECTLY to why they were suspended and manners had shit to do with it. But that's just my opinion as AN AMERICAN CITIZEN as if that gives it any more credibility.
Click to expand...
Again, that official was not in the classroom and does not know why the student was asked to rise.

That is being disingenuous and shows you didn't read the whole of the story where it was stated that he had been doing it all year. This is not indicative of it being to "stand for the flag". Something new had happened.

"Lecturing" you on being genuine. LOL. I wouldn't have to if you actually would read what I said rather than pretending that I am arguing what you want me to.
 
And the article says he had been doing it all year but they finally got caught. The person that told the paper he had not been standing all year was his mom. If nothing else it does prove that their teacher was not very observant. Standing is part and parcel of the pledge.

You sigh but you are the one doing anything and everything you can to defend this stupidity by reading into it respect and manners and all kids of other shit that is not in the article and totally discount the ONLY statement made by a school district authority that indicates it was an offense to patriotism and civic mindedness.
 
Socrtease said:
And the article says he had been doing it all year but they finally got caught. The person that told the paper he had not been standing all year was his mom. If nothing else it does prove that their teacher was not very observant. Standing is part and parcel of the pledge.

You sigh but you are the one doing anything and everything you can to defend this stupidity by reading into it respect and manners and all kids of other shit that is not in the article and totally discount the ONLY statement made by a school district authority that indicates it was an offense to patriotism and civic mindedness.
Click to expand...
It would be impossible not to be "caught" in your classroom. Now this is getting to be a serious disingenuous problem.

You are again quoting the one guy who wasn't there.

As I said long ago, this story was crap. The reporter did not find out why the student was allowed to continue this for a year and now "got caught". Either the teacher was blind or something changed. We don't know what that change was, and there is nothing to indicate blindness in the teacher.

And the only quotes are form somebody who wasn't there.

Thus we speculate and say things like, "I can see other reasons why he might ask this...".
 
I am quoting the ONLY person who is an AGENT of the suspending authority. He is THE spokesperson for the school district. If this was not the reason you would think he MIGHT just know it. Even the principal said they are going to have to probably reword the requirement because it violates free speech.
 
Socrtease said:
I am quoting the ONLY person who is an AGENT of the suspending authority. He is THE spokesperson for the school district. If this was not the reason you would think he MIGHT just know it. Even the principal said they are going to have to probably reword the requirement because it violates free speech.
Click to expand...
He is not the spokesperson. He is just the person who gave a quote. The reporter was lazy and hadn't any facts.

The only person quoted didn't know facts of the case, he simply "agreed" with the punishment and gave the reason HE agreed with it, not the reason that the punishment was meted.

And as I said, one more time for the terminally slow lawyers...

"If this was the sole reason they asked I would agree, but I can see other reasons, especially considering they had let him continue the activity for the whole year."

Your quote guy is idiotic. They just now "got caught"? How many students are in the room?
 
I give up you are going to see this as harmless act and I see it as attempting to to inforce respect for a piece of cloth. We are not going to convince eachother and so I am going to stop. I concede nothing but you have debated me to a standstill.
 
Socrtease said:
I give up you are going to see this as harmless act and I see it as attempting to to inforce respect for a piece of cloth. We are not going to convince eachother and so I am going to stop. I concede nothing but you have debated me to a standstill.
Click to expand...
I don't know if this was harmless or not, for the reasons I assigned.

I have stated what I have said throughout the thread. What is it with Ds and their absolutes today?
 
Damocles said:
I don't know if this was harmless or not, for the reasons I assigned.

I have stated what I have said throughout the thread. What is it with Ds and their absolutes today?
Click to expand...
and I could say the same thing about R's and their overreactions to disappearing toothpicks and sitters when pledges are being said.
 
Socrtease said:
and I could say the same thing about R's and their overreactions to disappearing toothpicks and sitters when pledges are being said.
Click to expand...
Again you insist the painting is an apple because you refuse to move the paper towel tube and open both eyes to see the tree.

Why is it that nobody here can hold an abstract conversation when I put it in a thread with a story on the top? Even if I point out where the story sucked and how much we are all speculating about the "incident" and several times say that if their speculation is right I would agree with them.
 
Darla said:
It’s interesting how this falls down ideological lines. Let’s face it, cons like to be told what to do, and become dependent on being told what to do. Conform or be cast out, that’s their motto.

Forcing kids to stand and pressuring them to recite the pledge of allegiance is one of the early steps taken to foster fear of authority and conforming to get along in the American mind.
Click to expand...


100% correct, you are.

How many hundreds of times were we told in 2003 to sit down, shut up, and stop asking questions about Iraq, because Dear Leader knew what he was doing and we should just trust him?
 
Damocles said:
Again, only if you look at it through a straw can you only picture it in this manner. People allow their emotion to get in the way. If we focus only on that which we find repellent, we tend to miss other things that are happening. The subtlety and the reasons that something could be requested that are not what we are all bent over. We forget that there are 64 crayons in the box and only see black and white.

I used to be this same way about "In God We Trust".
Click to expand...

damo

you had to bring that one up

care to wager when that one becomes obsolete or no longer used for government affairs

besides, 'in god we trust' is only the first part, it is followed by 'all others cash'

sort of like the 'new' golden rule - thems what got the gold makes the rules

oh well
 
DonQuixote said:
damo

you had to bring that one up

care to wager when that one becomes obsolete or no longer used for government affairs

besides, 'in god we trust' is only the first part, it is followed by 'all others cash'

sort of like the 'new' golden rule - thems what got the gold makes the rules

oh well
Click to expand...
LOL.
 
Battleborne said:
You find humor in keeping *************************...and ***********...and political hacks!!!!!!!!!!:readit:
Click to expand...


f*ck dude, this is some sick @ss racist crap. Funny how the rightwing attracts so many like you, Indisputable, little acorn, toby and the rest. BAC is your superior in every measurable way. I need to officially cut your ass loose now, and put you on IA.
 
Damocles said:
Your vehemence seems to project an appearance of "outrage" to me. I did say that earlier it "seemed" that way, etc.

This is distracting from the conversation now and is basically worthless as it cannot add to the conversation. It's basically you saying "I'm not outraged" and me saying "it sure seemed that way". Not important enough to go on for so long about.

Again, if you can picture a time the teacher may ask a student to stand because it would be polite to do so then you can picture this in that same manner. I have faith that you can, and believe that saying you "can't" is only because you know it would be the end to the argument.
Click to expand...

I never said I can't... however I dont belive that makes it approperate in this senario.
 
Jarod said:
I never said I can't... however I dont belive that makes it approperate in this senario.
Click to expand...
Truly, I have been trying to talk abstractly, it isn't working.

Here is what I believe in all scenarios regardless of motive.

Err on the side of rights. Always err on the side of rights. The kid has every right to sit so long as he isn't distracting the others or otherwise being a nuisance.

Trying to ascertain motivation would only make it a mess as everybody would be running around trying to prove what somebody was thinking. We aren't the thought police.
 
Damocles said:
Because the standard is to rise.

Just as if you were a Senator, standing respectfully during the pledge, even if you weren't to say it, would be expected.

The respect isn't for the cloth, it is for the others.

Again. I think it would be different for different areas. Some may be "offended" if you do not rise in some areas, other areas would not be so long as you didn't get in the way.

I can see a teacher asking for simple manners from a student.
Click to expand...

A Senator would never be suspended from the Senate for not rising. At least not until the next election.
 
Damocles said:
Truly, I have been trying to talk abstractly, it isn't working.

Here is what I believe in all scenarios regardless of motive.

Err on the side of rights. Always err on the side of rights. The kid has every right to sit so long as he isn't distracting the others or otherwise being a nuisance.
Click to expand...


If you said that 295 posts ago this thread would have died. Anything to keep the hit count up, I guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top