Suspended for not standing for pledge!

[Jarod]

So it seems we have two competing interests here.

The interest to allow kids to freely express themselves and be free from a preceved acceptance of something they do not belive in.

Vs.

The interest in forcing kids to be polite in school and to show respect for religous and political ideas.


In this case, where quietly sitting is the perceved lack of politeness, I will side on the right to express oneself over the need to make kids be polite and respectfull. Now if they were expressing themselves in a more disruptive way... Id side with the polite respect.

 

[Damocles]

So it seems we have two competing interests here.

The interest to allow kids to freely express themselves and be free from a preceved acceptance of something they do not belive in.

Vs.

The interest in forcing kids to be polite in school and to show respect for religous and political ideas.


In this case, where quietly sitting is the perceved lack of politeness, I will side on the right to express oneself over the need to make kids be polite and respectfull. Now if they were expressing themselves in a more disruptive way... Id side with the polite respect.

Catch up. Read some of the newest posts. Thanks.

 

[Damocles]

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.

Like this one.

 

[cawacko]

This says it all... 'FIGHT THE POWER!'

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuTi9UZtPbw"]YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.[/nomedia]

 

[Jarod]

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.

Hip Hip Hurray, we agree!

 

[Jarod]

Now, lets talk about who is outraged... Clearly the Conservatives at the School District were outraged.

I wonder when the last time a student was suspended for sitting quitely.

I dont know where you got the idea I was outraged... You were wrong. I looked over my posts and cant see where you got that idea. Please consider if you are too quick to claim false outrage or not!

 

[Battleborne]

Whatever Cupcake............

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.

This is about the tenth time you said you were going to put me on IA...and for the record...why did you edit my response to someone else to make it look racist?
Post the entire response next time...this would be honest...and to be honest I do believe you are a closet homo...you surely do not talk like a guy...'metro' guy maybe...but not a real guy...take that to the bank Cupcake!

BAC is my superior...LMAO...this guy is a has been 'Black Panther'...the only power he has is over weak women...and Metro Dudes!

 

[Jarod]

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.

I came back to this because I wanted to ask you, Are you admitting these kids should not have been suspended?

 

[Damocles]

I came back to this because I wanted to ask you, Are you admitting these kids should not have been suspended?

"Admitting"? Yes. I wasn't really talking about these kids specifically. I was attempting to have an abstract conversation about the reality that there could be times that the teacher would ask for them to stand in that situation that would not negate their rights.

You admitted that later. "Yes, I can see that..." were the words you used.

Then I stated what I actually think, which is different than the argument I really was propounding. One would have to determine the motivation for the question otherwise, and I do not think that it is possible in every case and rights should be protected. That's what we are about.

I like to argue, even things like this.

 

[Jarod]

"Admitting"? Yes.

Cool

 

[Damocles]

Cool

Shortened response. I'll copy and paste the stuff I edited in...

I wasn't really talking about these kids specifically. I was attempting to have an abstract conversation about the reality that there could be times that the teacher would ask for them to stand in that situation that would not negate their rights.

You admitted that later. "Yes, I can see that..." were the words you used.

Then I stated what I actually think, which is different than the argument I really was propounding. One would have to determine the motivation for the question otherwise, and I do not think that it is possible in every case and rights should be protected. That's what we are about.

I like to argue, even things like this.

 

[Damocles]

I never said I can't... however I dont belive that makes it approperate in this senario.

Here, you are saying you can see what I was talking about. Then prove that it was too much to speak abstractly on the subject. I then stopped trying. It is worthless to try to argue minutia in an abstract way when the other party refuses to look at it in an abstract way.

 

[Jarod]

Shortened response. I'll copy and paste the stuff I edited in...

I wasn't really talking about these kids specifically. I was attempting to have an abstract conversation about the reality that there could be times that the teacher would ask for them to stand in that situation that would not negate their rights.

You admitted that later. "Yes, I can see that..." were the words you used.

Then I stated what I actually think, which is different than the argument I really was propounding. One would have to determine the motivation for the question otherwise, and I do not think that it is possible in every case and rights should be protected. That's what we are about.

I like to argue, even things like this.

Me too... and it does not mean I am outraged.

Plus, if I say I remember something, its because I do. Regardless of if I can prove that thing or not!

 

[Damocles]

Me too... and it does not mean I am outraged.

Plus, if I say I remember something, its because I do. Regardless of if I can prove that thing or not!

It doesn't mean that you are not mistaken. Your memory is no more perfect than any other person's.

 

[Jarod]

It doesn't mean that you are not mistaken.

True, and it does not mean I am a liar. I freely admit I could be mistaken... I still remember what I remember... But I could have a false memory for some reason..

With ANYTHING I say, in fact with ANYTHING ANYONE says, there is the possability of a mistake.

 

[Jarod]

To call someone a liar over something like that is an ignorant and inflamatory thing to do. To support someone who is calling someone a liar in that situation is not cool.

 

[Damocles]

True, and it does not mean I am a liar. I freely admit I could be mistaken... I still remember what I remember... But I could have a false memory for some reason..

With ANYTHING I say, in fact with ANYTHING ANYONE says, there is the possability of a mistake.

I've never said you were a liar about it. I just laughed because you kept doing it after it was pointed out it was incorrect.

 

[Damocles]

As it stands...

1. I don't think you lied, I just think you misremembered.

2. I thought it was funny.

 

[Jarod]

I've never said you were a liar about it. I just laughed because you kept doing it after it was pointed out it was incorrect.

I still dont think I am incorrect. I COULD be mistaken, but I still do not belive I am.

If someone attacked you like SuperCandy attacked me, I would have said something.

 

[Jarod]

I've never said you were a liar about it. I just laughed because you kept doing it after it was pointed out it was incorrect.

I kept doing it, and NOW WILL keep doing it because I think its funny how upset SUPERCANDY gets over it.