[$tinkle]

8th graders suspended for not standing during pledge

is this school district a dictatorship?

how does this comport with standing when the judge enters a courtroom?

my personal opinion: saying the pledge treads close to the kind of indoctrination appropriate for the military & (j)rotc

 

[jimmydean]

Standing when a judge enters the courtroom is showing respect for his title. Standing during the pledge isn't a requirement to gain an education.

 

[$tinkle]

Standing when a judge enters the courtroom is showing respect for his title. Standing during the pledge isn't a requirement to gain an education.

but i believe standing for the judge is mandatory (could be held in contempt otherwise)

 

[jimmydean]

but i believe standing for the judge is mandatory (could be held in contempt otherwise)

Yes, it is. It's also the smart thing to do as to not piss off the person that has control. Standing for a judge also doesn't require the phrase "under god".

But I fail to see how the pledge is a requirement for education.

 

[$tinkle]

But I fail to see how the pledge is a requirement for education.

some would say "yeah, but isn't getting suspended undermining that?", to which the obvious rejoinder would be something along the lines of getting online education, and i'm pretty sure being pantless in front of the computer is an inalienable right.

it takes more than honoring some dead white guys for me to sport my sundial

 

[Lowlight7]

1. Is it really that unreasonable to ask that students who enjoy the fruits of the public education system show a little respect by standing during the Pledge of Allegiance? No one asked them to say it, no one asked them to salute, just stand.

2. If the expected behavior outlined in the school handbook is so unreasonable, there are alternatives to public school. Unfortunately, these alternatives are slightly less convenient than standing for 40 seconds.

3. I've never met an 8th grader with an ideology. If he has one in school, it's more likely an excuse to be obnoxious or get attention.

 

[LordOpie]

1. Is it really that unreasonable to ask that students who enjoy the fruits of the public education system show a little respect by standing during the Pledge of Allegiance? No one asked them to say it, no one asked them to salute, just stand.

Don't they have a first amendment right to not stand?

What rights do minors have?

 

[$tinkle]

Don't they have a first amendment right to not stand?

i believe the "normal" set of rights can reasonably be restricted while under the authority of school officials (e.g., flag burning). if their parents have a huge problem w/ this, they reserve the right to put them in private schools at their own expense. similar situation when freepers' parents get the vapors over darwinian instruction, however correct & relevant.

What rights do minors have?

to get a tax-payer funded abortion w/o their parents' notification in some areas

 

[Lowlight7]

They do have a constitutional right to free speach.

They do not have a constitutional right to a free education.

The priviledge of a free education is given to them so long as they follow the rules. In this case, one of the rules is to stand during the pledge of allegiance. Their parents get to elect members of the school board that have similar views and values as they would like instilled in their children.

Example: I have a constitutional right to say whatever I want at work. However, my employer has a right to terminate me if what I say is against the rules.

 

[$tinkle]

They do have a constitutional right to free speach.

but not absolutely. recall there are many school districts which have clothing & hair standards for attendance. and the "bonghits for jesus" story was posted here a few yrs back too

They do not have a constitutional right to a free education.

true; this is actually mandated through some arbitrary threshold which i believe to be above the 8th graders in this story

Example: I have a constitutional right to say whatever I want at work. However, my employer has a right to terminate me if what I say is against the rules.

and you have the right to sue him.

 

[manimal]

and you have the right to sue him.

not if he works for uncle sam.

 

[jimmydean]

and you have the right to sue him.

Oregon is an "at will" employment state. You can still sue, but if it says in the handbook that I have to wear womens underwear and I agree to the job, but don't agree to the practices, they can fire me for not following the rules and I don't stand a chance in court.

 

[SPINTECK]

They do have a constitutional right to free speach.

They do not have a constitutional right to a free education.

The priviledge of a free education is given to them so long as they follow the rules. In this case, one of the rules is to stand during the pledge of allegiance. Their parents get to elect members of the school board that have similar views and values as they would like instilled in their children.

Example: I have a constitutional right to say whatever I want at work. However, my employer has a right to terminate me if what I say is against the rules.

But isn't it a law a child under 16 must be in school?? Isn't it also the obligation of the public school system to take that child unless he has documented behavior that is dangerous or a distraction??

Tricky case when you try to make someone do something physically.

I have my teaching degree and I've seen some things that bother me. I went to and substituted in a working class school district where the kids were on short leashes. Then I substituted at a wealthy district where the kids had more freedom and could do pretty much as they pleased- like college.


It bothers me because control and obedience is forced on the working class to create little worker bees while freedom, ideas and tolerance are promoted in wealthier (yes- more educated) systems.

If it was my class, I'd let the kid sit in his stupid chair not bothering anyone and not force my politics or control on him at 7:15am in the morning. If he disrupted my class, that's a different story.

 

[JohnE]

If it was my class, I'd let the kid sit in his stupid chair not bothering anyone and not force my politics or control on him at 7:15am in the morning. If he disrupted my class, that's a different story.

Exactly. Kid is looking for attention one way or another.
Too bad he isnt in Nazi Germany, old school Soviet Russia, Maoist China or Sadaams Iraq. His parents would be on the way to re-education camps or worse...

 

[SPINTECK]

Exactly. Kid is looking for attention one way or another.
Too bad he isnt in Nazi Germany, old school Soviet Russia, Maoist China or Sadaams Iraq. His parents would be on the way to re-education camps or worse...

All the more reason not to do anything- prove that this country provides freedoms to people. Would you rather the administration had the power to incarcerate the kid and his family for merely not following the pledge??

People that talk about freedom only to make up rules like standing for the flag in order to take freedoms away (punishment, explusions, prison) hurt the flag more than any civil disobedience.

 

[Lowlight7]

but not absolutely. recall there are many school districts which have clothing & hair standards for attendance. and the "bonghits for jesus" story was posted here a few yrs back too
true; this is actually mandated through some arbitrary threshold which i believe to be above the 8th graders in this story
and you have the right to sue him.

Just as I had to remove my "Got Meth?" t-shirt and wallet chain when I was in school. I think the school has an obligation to remove what it deems detrimental or obstructive to learning. The school board that makes those decisions are elected officials.

And just as I have a right to sue my employer, parents are allowed to appeal what they deem an unjust punishment. When I was in school, the punishment was withheld pending a formal review and the parents were allowed to seek legal counsel.

But isn't it a law a child under 16 must be in school?? Isn't it also the obligation of the public school system to take that child unless he has documented behavior that is dangerous or a distraction??

Yes, they must be in school. Home schooling is option, so is private school, and many public school systems offer alternative education options.

The public school system is not expelling them for not standing during the Pledge, they're suspending them. The article doesn't even specify how many days they were suspended. Punishments excluding expulsion for actions against the code of behavior are pretty standard in public school.

It bothers me because control and obedience is forced on the working class to create little worker bees while freedom, ideas and tolerance are promoted in wealthier (yes- more educated) systems.

I cannot think of a more pompous statement.

If it was my class, I'd let the kid sit in his stupid chair not bothering anyone and not force my politics or control on him at 7:15am in the morning. If he disrupted my class, that's a different story.

I agree that modern politics should be left out of the school environment, however the Pledge of Allegiance is not politics. It is an oath of loyalty to our country. No one is even making them say it, only to stand silently and be respectful of those that do.

School is about control because if kids had a choice in the matter they wouldn't go. By the time they're teenagers they already know everything.

 

[JohnE]

All the more reason not to do anything- prove that this country provides freedoms to people. Would you rather the administration had the power to incarcerate the kid and his family for merely not following the pledge??

People that talk about freedom only to make up rules like standing for the flag in order to take freedoms away (punishment, explusions, prison) hurt the flag more than any civil disobedience.

I neither stated nor inferred that I wanted them incarcerated. If a kid or person does not want to stand, and they have the nuts not to, let them.
It is ironic that they desire to disrespect a symbol of the freedoms they are exercising. And that most of the time they have done nothing to earn, and will do nothing to deserve, the freedoms they exercise so freely and loudly.

 

[$tinkle]

can it be as simple as this?

these kids are violating school policy & are now bearing the fruits of their labor.

is there anything more than this?

 

[ohio]

can it be as simple as this?

these kids are violating school policy & are now bearing the fruits of their labor.

is there anything more than this?

As far as the kids' punishments, yes it is that simple. They broke rules they were aware of, and received a proportionate punishment.

The bigger question is whether the policy is appropriate, but changing it now will not change the fact that the kids broke the rules and should be punished, though I suspect a policy change will come as an emotional win and vindication for them.

 

[jimmydean]

As far as the kids' punishments, yes it is that simple. They broke rules they were aware of, and received a proportionate punishment.

The bigger question is whether the policy is appropriate, but changing it now will not change the fact that the kids broke the rules and should be punished, though I suspect a policy change will come as an emotional win and vindication for them.

 

[$tinkle]

maybe these kids found their inspiration from their parents' Breakfast Club VHS's

 

[Lowlight7]

Could you describe the ruckus, sir?

 

[Stray_cat]

I wish I could remember the names of the people/school involved. It was a while ago, during a war protest a few students came in wearing arm bands reminiscent of the Nazi party. They were suspended. They kids/parents took their case to the supreme court. The court ruled that because the arm bands were an active disruption the suspension held. But I don't see how sitting during the pledge is an active disruption...unless fights are breaking out over it I'd let em' sit. Only when you start punishing silent statements like this do they become disruptive.

 

[$tinkle]

But I don't see how sitting during the pledge is an active disruption.

i would expect the "distraction" argument would be used, or not respecting authorithai

 

[Stray_cat]

i would expect the "distraction" argument would be used, or not respecting authorithai

I think we're back at the same question of 'should the act of not pledging allegiance be disobedience.' I consider it arbitrary if the student doesn't believe in 'the nationhood.'

To put things in an inverse perspective I had to do mandatory stretches while MC Hammer played over the PA directly after doing the pledge.

 

[Silver]

The kid should start standing and give a Nazi salute to the flag during the pledge.

After all, the handbook says he has to stand. It doesn't say that he can't salute the flag, right?

 

[submarinemike]

i remember my junior year of high school my history teacher decided that one day was going to be constitution day where we went over every amendment and discussed what it was about. and then at the end of class he explained to all of us students how for the most part our constitutional rights don't have affect on school grounds. they could search any of us at random with out cause, our speech was limited, and ect.... students in public schools have few to no rights and it's legal for schools to do that. it's f-ed up and wrong but that's the way it is at least in california. and second, if these kids hate america so dang much then they can get the f*** out. i hate france, so what do i do about it? i live in another country besides france and dont complain about it.

 

[Silver]

i hate france, so what do i do about it? i live in another country besides france and dont complain about it.

Unless you were born in France, and moved to the United States on your own dime, you're a retard.

 

[ohio]

dang

this made me laugh

 

[Lowlight7]

and then at the end of class he explained to all of us students how for the most part our constitutional rights don't have affect on school grounds. they could search any of us at random with out cause, our speech was limited, and ect.... students in public schools have few to no rights and it's legal for schools to do that. it's f-ed up and wrong but that's the way it is at least in california.

Alot of private schools are the same way. Some are even LESS tolerant than public schools. I for one wouldn't stand for paying large amounts of cash for my kid to go to private school only to have class disrupted by miscreants.

Considering that we're a democratic society, I think the answer is "If you don't like it, change it."

 

[SPINTECK]

Just


I cannot think of a more pompous statement. .

Perhaps you didn't understand the statement or would have provided evidence or an antidote to the contrary. I'm saying my public school (pottstown) in the armpit of my county with 28 students to a class of working families controlled the student body with a swift hand where as a main line school (radnor) with 20 students to a class and wealtheir (yes more educated as well) parents had an "open campus" where kids could even bring food to class. Different philosophies and free thinking.

I agree that modern politics should be left out of the school environment, however the Pledge of Allegiance is not politics. It is an oath of loyalty to our country. No one is even making them say it, only to stand silently and be respectful of those that do.

.

So answer me this, if the Pledge of Allegiance is not politics, why was "under God" added to it in 1954?? Do you think it was really to emulate Lincoln or to separate us from the communists??


So must agree to disagree, I think appropriate, non-violent civil disobedience is an excellent way to exercise your rights, but sometimes prove you really don't have as many rights as you think. Perhaps everyone at work should be forced to say the pledge and stand. Lets lead these children by example instead of forcing procedures we don't even exercise upon them.

 

[SPINTECK]

I neither stated nor inferred that I wanted them incarcerated. If a kid or person does not want to stand, and they have the nuts not to, let them.
It is ironic that they desire to disrespect a symbol of the freedoms they are exercising. And that most of the time they have done nothing to earn, and will do nothing to deserve, the freedoms they exercise so freely and loudly.

Thanks for correcting me, I didn't wasn't sure how you intended that last statement.

 

[valve bouncer]

If it was my class, I'd let the kid sit in his stupid chair not bothering anyone and not force my politics or control on him at 7:15am in the morning. If he disrupted my class, that's a different story.

That's exactly what I do. Wanna sit there and stare blankly at the paper and not participate? Fine, just be quiet. Wanna tap away on your phone or get up and yap incessantly to your friend 4 desks away then we have a problem. You've gotta pick your battles when you're a teacher, especially when the kids are less than motivated. This is wasting everyone's time.

 

[SlapheadMofo]

The little ingrates have the right to sit.

And 'under gawd' needs to be un-inserted from the pledge.

 

[johnbryanpeters]

1. Is it really that unreasonable to ask that students who enjoy the fruits of the public education system show a little respect by standing during the Pledge of Allegiance? No one asked them to say it, no one asked them to salute, just stand.

2. If the expected behavior outlined in the school handbook is so unreasonable, there are alternatives to public school. Unfortunately, these alternatives are slightly less convenient than standing for 40 seconds.

3. I've never met an 8th grader with an ideology. If he has one in school, it's more likely an excuse to be obnoxious or get attention.

I was an eighth grader with an enquiring mind, not an ideology, and I got a lot of grief in public schools for refusing to recite the pledge or read from the Bible.

There is no fvcking reason in the world to require the general public to recite an oath of fealty to a totem.

That is all.

 

[Lowlight7]

Perhaps you didn't understand the statement or would have provided evidence or an antidote to the contrary. I'm saying my public school (pottstown) in the armpit of my county with 28 students to a class of working families controlled the student body with a swift hand where as a main line school (radnor) with 20 students to a class and wealtheir (yes more educated as well) parents had an "open campus" where kids could even bring food to class. Different philosophies and free thinking.

I'm sorry, I thought your original statement pretty much spoke for itself.

You said:

"It bothers me because control and obedience is forced on the working class to create little worker bees while freedom, ideas and tolerance are promoted in wealthier (yes- more educated) systems."

I resent your insinuation that us working class folks are bred from birth to be intolerant, enslaved drones while the wealthy get to be free and frolicking progressive thinkers.

I'm from the working class. My parents are from the working class. My grandparents were from the lower class, and my great-grandparents were, well, Amish. 11.5 of my twelve years of grade schooling were provided by the government, as were both of my associates degrees. My education and my knowledge, however, are what I made of them. I owe the government for giving me the opporunity, for giving me the pieces of paper, but the education is something I had to work for.

My high school was split between the rich kids and poor kids. We were overcrowded with 32 students to a class. I do not remember tolerance or free thought being promoted or condemned at school, but I remember them being promoted at home by my working class parents. It's been ten years since I graduated high school and I honestly can't remember how "open" our campus was, or if we were allowed food and drink in class, but I do remember things like the scientific method, quadratic equation, and history of western civilization.

So answer me this, if the Pledge of Allegiance is not politics, why was "under God" added to it in 1954?? Do you think it was really to emulate Lincoln or to separate us from the communists??

"Under God" was added because Ike was impressed by a sermon.

Politics is the process by which power is acquired and applied. The Pledge of Allegiance is a pledge (a promise where one does not invoke a sacred witness) of allegiance (a duty of fidelity of a citizen to his state) to a symbol of the United States of America. Note it is not a pledge of allegiance to a sovereign, elected official, or the government itself. Just a pledge to the flag and the country it represents.

Perhaps everyone at work should be forced to say the pledge and stand. Lets lead these children by example instead of forcing procedures we don't even exercise upon them.

Let's get one thing straight - procedures you don't exercise. I raise the flag outside of my office every morning. I stand at attention and salute. If you choose not to do the same during at your job that's fine and I do not think less of you for it - your job is not a priviledge the government gave you. However, for a student at a public school the opportunity to learn is being provided by the government and I do not feel it is unreasonable that they ask them to stand quietly while those that choose to do so recite the pledge and salute the flag of the country that is providing them with that opportunity to learn.

When I was a senior in High School I wrote a piece for the school paper about a student who had AIDS and withdrew from school for homebound education. The school administration did not want my article published, so I independently printed and distributed it in school. When they found out I was suspended for five days, effectively making me fail all my classes for the quarter. I appealed the punishment but the school board upheld the decision. I was not in a position to change the rules, and I did not want to live with them, so I paid my own way through private school for my last semester.

Like most things in a democratic society: If you don't like something you can live with it, change it, or seek an alternative. Civil disobedience is a possible way to exact that change. Unfortunately, the parents stated in the article that their children were not remaining seated as an act of civil disobedience.

 

[ohio]

I resent your insinuation that us working class folks are bred from birth to be intolerant, enslaved drones while the wealthy get to be free and frolicking progressive thinkers.

I'm from the working class.

I think you read too far into that. It's not that anyone is bred to be intolerant; it's that they are in environments of differing tolerance for free and alternative thought. You said yourself that you credit your point of view to your parents, not your school. Give credit where credit is due: to your great parents and yourself, not to the public education system.

In many private schools, such behavior would be openly discussed and likely encouraged.

There is no question that the environment and consequences are different, and in general those environments are only available to specific economic classes.

I too am a product of public school. With the exception of a few teachers (who were often in conflict with administration and curriculum), everything after elementary school was about rote memorization and borderline indoctrination. Any independent thinking was a credit to the students, their parents, and a few maverick teachers. It was certainly not encouraged.

 

[SPINTECK]

but I do remember things like the scientific method, quadratic equation, and history of western civilization.


.

old math and basic 19th century science- good worker bee stuff. I was taught that too (and college prep physics, CP chem and calc1- still old basic crap, which is fine, but not well rounded).

How about philosophy, courses at colleges while in high school, field trips to cutting edge corporations and universities (not just museums)?? Grant and scholarship programs?? Wealthy schools in my areas do those things, while my working class school worried more about policy. I never knew about those huge differences in standards and philosphies until I substituted. Telluride school district has half days every friday during ski season so the kids can skiing! SO yeah, it bothers me that I learned the majority of crap taught to middle class is generic working class stuff while better schools not only had more tolerance, but better programs and more opportunities.

I really think your overly defensive about this statement. To be honest, my worker bee shool made me a good little corporate worker bee, which is now my decision. Again, we must agree to disagree.