Riggo-toni Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: @Renegade7Private schools should have a lot more leeway in deciding what is acceptable for their members to do outside of class. Public schools should have almost no say. I actually agree with this, but I also think it is right, if not imperative, to criticize and even ridicule private schools, or any private institution for that matter, when their decisions reflect intolerance, bigotry, or injustice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Additionally, considering that push by the GOP to further defund public education and move it towards school vouchers...that could pay for private schools like the one in the story..yeah. **** that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Crom cares not for your rainbows. God causes more hate than anything else. And so many happily swallow the lie that it doesn't. Single worst invention of humanity. "God". Grow up. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 I think everybody agrees that private schools, especially religious private schools, should be allowed to do some things that public schools can't. Pretty sure everybody agrees that religious schools are allowed to have a say in which church the student will attend on Sunday. Just as obviously, public schools can't do that. I don't think this means that either school has complete authority to conduct unlimited control over the lives of their students (or their families). Frankly, I think our society has gone too far with what I heard referred to as "liberty of contract". As it was explained to me in social studies class, the notion of "liberty of contract" was used, back in colonial periods, to allow things like indentured servitude - the notion in which one person would literally agree to be a servant to another person for some period of time. Liberty of contract was the notion that if two people agree to something, then it's legal, they had a legally enforceable deal, mutually agreed to. But the nation decided that no, there were some rights or authorities that a person cannot sign away. Even if both parties agree, it's still too much power on one side of the deal. And I think our society has moved too far in the direction of allowing one party (usually a corporation) too much power over the other side of a business transaction. I think we really need some consumer protection laws, saying that no, just because somebody does business with you, you still don't have that power over them. (For example, I think there needs to be some laws that no, my cell phone provider does not have the authority to track my movements, to keep copies of my texts or emails, logs of my phone calls, web searches, or similar tracking information. Or maybe yeah, they can track that information to make things easier for me, but may not use that data for their own commercial purposes.) Yes, I am wandering off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh8686 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, Bang said: Crom cares not for your rainbows. God causes more hate than anything else. And so many happily swallow the lie that it doesn't. Single worst invention of humanity. "God". Grow up. ~Bang Eh, you might going a little too far with that one. God is often the excuse in these cases, for people to accumulate power and establish their security and comfort on the backs of others. This is human in-group/out-group bull**** mixed in with power dynamics and the unique failing of assholes thinking they know what some "ultimate" power does or doesn't want and then convincing others of that bull****. Whether god exists or not, you're kind of victim blaming him/her/it in a way. If anything the worst invention is the idea and process of treating living beings as an object, parasiting off of them and sucking them dry to greater and greater orders of magnitude. That's the motive behind the people indoctrinating these sheep to hate and reject like they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, The Evil Genius said: Additionally, considering that push by the GOP to further defund public education and move it towards school vouchers...that could pay for private schools like the one in the story..yeah. **** that. This is really what is at the heart of the conservative push for more charter schools and school vouchers. Most of the country isn't getting the type of charter school's we have in the DMV which specialize in science, tech, design or a multitude of other useful skills. A lot of these private charter schools are really just churches masquerading as education centers. American Madrasas is what they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 One way or another kids need to learn that what they post online they are posting for the whole world to see. I don’t think that registers with them sometimes. there’s room for discussion on what role schools should play in teaching that lesson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 3 hours ago, Renegade7 said: That's different, I dont believe even private schools should have the right to use social media as a means of constantly monitoring their student body. Especially if its jus to find a way to kick a kid out versus trying to protect them. Private schools are ran for profit and it is voluntary to go to them. If you choose to go to them and pay extra to go to them, you are saying agree with the values they have, including, in this case, an anti lgbq stance. You put yourself in position to have to follow their code of conduct. Public school is compulsory and there is no choice involved. Since everyone has different morals, trying to enforce morality on the students is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 17 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Private schools are ran for profit and it is voluntary to go to them. If you choose to go to them and pay extra to go to them, you are saying agree with the values they have, including, in this case, an anti lgbq stance. You put yourself in position to have to follow their code of conduct. Public school is compulsory and there is no choice involved. Since everyone has different morals, trying to enforce morality on the students is wrong. This is the point @Larry was making, agreeing to morals and agreeing to surveillance are not the same thing. These are teenagers we are talking about, how far are we willing to let a school go to enforce their code of conduct with the technology avaliable. And the girl isnt gay from my understanding, the school jus decided they had enough of her and expelled her while at the same time insinuating she either was or supported homosexuality in a very unclear fashion. That's f'd up. This is too much power for all the wrong reasons. This again comes back to using a kids social media profiles to make disciplinary actions. Absolutely public schools should be allowed to investigate cyberbullying or if a student says another is showing clear signs online they plan to do a school shooting. You making this too much of a black or white issue based on who's doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 23 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Private schools are ran for profit and it is voluntary to go to them. If you choose to go to them and pay extra to go to them, you are saying agree with the values they have, including, in this case, an anti lgbq stance. You put yourself in position to have to follow their code of conduct. Public school is compulsory and there is no choice involved. Since everyone has different morals, trying to enforce morality on the students is wrong. Agree with this. The parents voluntarily send their kids to this school and are or should be aware of the school's values (or lack thereof). 17 minutes ago, Renegade7 said: And the girl isnt gay from my understanding, the school jus decided they had enough of her and expelled her while at the same time insinuating she either was or supported homosexuality in a very unclear fashion. That's f'd up. My take was that the school had enough of the kid and expelled her, and then the kid's parent claimed that it was over the rainbow picture to make the school look bigoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 4 hours ago, Renegade7 said: I disagree with this straight line approach. I can understand looking at social media for red flags that can lead to school shootings, regardless of public or private. But do they jus look at every student until they find something they dont like or actually listen to students screaming at the school about what someone is posting as a clear warning sign? That's different, I dont believe even private schools should have the right to use social media as a means of constantly monitoring their student body. Especially if its jus to find a way to kick a kid out versus trying to protect them. Zero tolerance prevents some very important questions and conversations from taking place. I know this isn’t the way you want the argument to go, but everyday there are more reasons to keep kids off of social media. It’s not good for them. Their posts are held against them, forcing children to communicate with an eye towards the future out of line with their maturity level. It brings social pressure of school life home, creating higher stress. Bullies can now follow them home. It certainly doesn’t seem to be helping their social skills. Social media and unrestricted tech access isn’t essential and it’s not harmless. Maybe it’s time to stop pretending it’s just an inevitable part of technological progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: My take was that the school had enough of the kid and expelled her, and then the kid's parent claimed that it was over the rainbow picture to make the school look bigoted. They attached the picture of her with the cake to the letter they gave the parents saying that was against their moral code. That was in the OP. Quote “The WA Administration has been made aware of a recent picture, posted on social media, which demonstrates a posture of morality and cultural acceptance contrary to that of Whitefield Academy’s beliefs,” Jacobson’s email read in part. “Per our in-person meeting on October 17, 2019, we made it clear that any further promotion, celebration, or any other actions and attitudes that are counter to Whitefield’s philosophy would not be tolerated.” In the letter, Jacobson attached the Facebook picture, which shows Kenney in a rainbow sweater posing next to her rainbow cake. While rainbow flag is a symbol of LGTBQ pride, Kenney was not making a statement about her sexuality. Alford was the one who ordered cake. On the one hand, the thread is taking full liberty with blasting religious justification for bigotry yet doing gymnastics for why they should be allowed to do so? Cant have cake and eat it, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 11 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said: Why opened minded people send their kids to Christian schools is beyond me. Of course they are intolerant to anything real or perceived against their so called beliefs. This is not true of all of them. I’m sure you’ll find it more common in some areas than others. around here the Christian schools are very good. And the public schools have been in decline for some time. All you have to do is walk around the halls to see the stark difference. we decided we could handle the religious end of it. It was the cost we couldn’t do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 2 minutes ago, Destino said: I know this isn’t the way you want the argument to go, but everyday there are more reasons to keep kids off of social media. It’s not good for them. Their posts are held against them, forcing children to communicate with an eye towards the future out of line with their maturity level. It brings social pressure of school life home, creating higher stress. Bullies can now follow them home. It certainly doesn’t seem to be helping their social skills. Social media and unrestricted tech access isn’t essential and it’s not harmless. Maybe it’s time to stop pretending it’s just an inevitable part of technological progress. I'm actually fine with this conversation going in this direction if it does because I agree with you. One of the reasons I finally gave up on my facebook and so did my wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 5 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Public schools and private school are on a completely different plane. This isn’t one of those infamous slippery slope deals, @Renegade7. Private schools should have a lot more leeway in deciding what is acceptable for their members to do outside of class. Public schools should have almost no say. agreed. they also should receive almost no tax dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 13 minutes ago, Renegade7 said: They attached the picture of her with the cake to the letter they gave the parents saying that was against their moral code. That was in the OP. Sorry, I was unclear. I meant that her expulsion was only about the picture with the rainbows. The article notes that she had significant discipline issues in the past. I don't doubt that the school's administration is bigoted AF against gay people and probably considers tolerance of gay people as bad as or worse than getting in fights or smoking in the bathroom. 16 minutes ago, tshile said: This is not true of all of them. I’m sure you’ll find it more common in some areas than others. around here the Christian schools are very good. And the public schools have been in decline for some time. All you have to do is walk around the halls to see the stark difference. we decided we could handle the religious end of it. It was the cost we couldn’t do. I'm athiest and plan on sending my kids to a nominally christian school because it's a really good school and they are light on the religion and aren't intolerant. And the public schools where I live aren't great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 9 minutes ago, mcsluggo said: agreed. they also should receive almost no tax dollars. Yea, if they get money from the state then it’s a different scenerio. 58 minutes ago, Renegade7 said: making this too much of a black or white issue based on who's doing it. I see no reason why it shouldn’t be. The school is charging you to go there and you go voluntarily. They get to make the rules. Just like a restaurant can refuse service or trespass someone for whatever reason they like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 32 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Yea, if they get money from the state then it’s a different scenerio. I see no reason why it shouldn’t be. The school is charging you to go there and you go voluntarily. They get to make the rules. Just like a restaurant can refuse service or trespass someone for whatever reason they like. except.. they can't it is a clear violation of civil rights, and a crime, for a restaurant to refuse service to black clients (for instance). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 13 minutes ago, mcsluggo said: except.. they can't it is a clear violation of civil rights, and a crime, for a restaurant to refuse service to black clients (for instance). Only if the restaurant stated that was the reason. It almost impossible to prove intent. So as a practical matter... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, tshile said: This is not true of all of them. I’m sure you’ll find it more common in some areas than others. around here the Christian schools are very good. And the public schools have been in decline for some time. All you have to do is walk around the halls to see the stark difference. we decided we could handle the religious end of it. It was the cost we couldn’t do. My parents house is near a Christian school. I Think religious schools indoctrinate you in whatever religion that school represents. I wouldn’t do that, just to get an education and I know people who did that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 30 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: I see no reason why it shouldn’t be. The school is charging you to go there and you go voluntarily. They get to make the rules. Just like a restaurant can refuse service or trespass someone for whatever reason they like. No, Europe figured this out with GDPR basically telling tech companies they cant force people to give up their right to privacy jus to use their services. Some rules are jus flat out BS and open the door for wide scale abuse, they shouldnt be required for use of the service. https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-telecoms/data-protection-online-privacy/index_en.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, Renegade7 said: No, Europe figured this out with GDPR basically telling tech companies they cant force people to give up their right to privacy jus to use their services. Some rules are jus flat out BS and open the door for wide scale abuse, they shouldnt be required for use of the service. https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/internet-telecoms/data-protection-online-privacy/index_en.htm we both agree we are presenting opinions, correct? Also, I suggest internet tracking between websites and physical location seeing what their members doing on the internet are materially different. I see the can of worms it opens up, though. Like, for instance, work place monitoring your social feeds to see how often you drink, smoke, or whatever, and demoting you to save money on their health insurance costs. But it’s one those things, everything is a competition and from the companies perspective why shouldn’t they use all the information they can to obtain the best employees? I’m ok with it meta, but if I found out it happened to me I’d be pissed off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, mcsluggo said: except.. they can't it is a clear violation of civil rights, and a crime, for a restaurant to refuse service to black clients (for instance). 52 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Only if the restaurant stated that was the reason. It almost impossible to prove intent. So as a practical matter... We aren't talking about black people. We are talking about a person who may be gay, or who may just not be intolerant enough of gay people. If it's the former, gay is not a federally protected class (like race is) and, I'm not certain and didn't look it up, but I suspect that it isn't a protected class under Kentucky law. If it's the latter, yes, you can legally discriminate against people for not holding your views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 I’m catholic so I’m not torn by whatever complaints you heathens might have concerning the religious educational components. My daughter does not attend a catholic school because of religion however, but because I feel that it's a better environment than my public school options. The behavioral and academic standards are higher. As someone said previously just walking through the halls shows a stark contrast. There's also a big community component involved that can't easily be duplicated at a public school. I don’t want my little one in a public school where educators have to accommodate unreasonable parents with terribly behaved children. I want my daughter in a school where those kids, and their parents, are asked to kindly GTFO. It isn’t cheap though. If I had a traditionally catholic sized family there’s no way I’d be able to afford sending them all to private school. They’d have to draw straws. edit: there are a lot on non Catholics that send their kids to this same school. No one reaches for pitchforks over it. I did get a laugh out of seeing so many kids show up at school dressed as witches for Halloween. Times have changed! Haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.