The "Right" to Humilate Onself

[chanel]

And the punishment was not that harsh. They cannot play volleyball. Big frickin deal! Doesn't there have to be damages to move a case forward? I'd like to see how they spin this. The girls lost a multi billion dollar contract playing for the Hooters Pro Volleyball Team?

 

[Jon]

Rules are rules. They broke the rules. They were punished.

strolling, I'm not surprised you're trying to cry foul and say that boys don't receive the same punishment. That's not the matter at hand. Boys don't take pictures of each other acting in this manner. That's not to say they don't act this way, but they certainly don't take pictures of it and put them on MySpace and Facebook. Now that doesn't mean they don't take pictures of each other getting piss drunk and acting stupid, but apparently none of male athletes at this school have those kinds of pictures online. Because I promise you the parents of these kids are on MySpace and Facebook looking for similar incidents for the male athletes. And if they find anything, it will become a part of the case, and those boys will be punished as well.

The article said the matter was brought to the attention of the school. If someone brings similar matters to the attention of the school for male athletes, they will take similar actions against them. But the school doesn't sit around and search MySpaces and Facebooks, nor should it.

 

[Jon]

Yes, but where we differ is who's responsibility is it to teach that lesson.

It's the parents' AND the school's responsibility. Schools are now and have always been more than a place to learn textbook materials. It is the school's responsibility to teach kids appropriate human behavior. If the teachers at this school had similar photos online, there would be mass outrage. Why should students be subjected to any less scrutiny?

 

[lawbuff]

SCOTUS has ruled in numerous cases that schools have the right to mete out this kind of punishment for off campus activity. the most famous case was probably morse v. frederick, but there have been others.

That was a school sponsored event though, a parade, and it concerned drug promotion.

 

[Immanuel]

Yes, but where we differ is who's responsibility is it to teach that lesson.

It's the parents' AND the school's responsibility. Schools are now and have always been more than a place to learn textbook materials. It is the school's responsibility to teach kids appropriate human behavior. If the teachers at this school had similar photos online, there would be mass outrage. Why should students be subjected to any less scrutiny?

I respect your opinion (and mine is nothing more than opinion either) but I respectfully disagree. I can agree that schools teach appropriate human behaviour, but I disagree that should the student make an error in judgment (off school grounds and during non-teaching hours) that the school has a right to discipline the students.

As for teachers, they are employees of the school district, not customers (a student would in effect be a customer) of the district. Rules apply differently in my humble opinion.

Immie

 

[del]

SCOTUS has ruled in numerous cases that schools have the right to mete out this kind of punishment for off campus activity. the most famous case was probably morse v. frederick, but there have been others.

That was a school sponsored event though, a parade, and it concerned drug promotion.

i said most famous, not only.

 

[Ravi]

The point I am making is if you want to change a school rule then run for the school board. This is not a civil rights issue. Its ridiculous. The important thing is that the kids learn a lesson. Don't we agree about that at least?

I didn't read the entire article, only your blurb, and perhaps I missed something.

Why were they forced to apologize to the athletic board?

 

[Shogun]

SCOTUS has ruled in numerous cases that schools have the right to mete out this kind of punishment for off campus activity. the most famous case was probably morse v. frederick, but there have been others.

yea, but that was a fucked up decision all the way around the block. Hell, under this definition a kid couldn't wear half of the band t shirts available... OFF CAMPUS.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Schools should not be left to decide what constitutes moral behavior. Also, since this happened no only off-campus, but while school was on summer recess, I think the girls did not have fair notice that they were still subject to school imposed rules of behavior.

In balancing the right of schools to control the little heathens off-campus against the Constitutional right of free speech, the schools should be required to show that it used the least restrictive alternative to achieve the disciplinary result. I'm not sure that ensuring the morals of students is a governmental interest much less an important state interest.

This should go down in the courts.

Now, yes, the parents need to do some fixing of these little girls. But, not the schools. If you have never done battle with these bureaucratic numb-skulls, be glad. They give idiots a bad name.

 

[Ravi]

Oh my...it happened at a slumber party. This is really pretty mild for slumber party activity.

I've no problem with the school enforcing a code of conduct.

I have a huge problem with them forcing the girls to apologize to the athletic board. That amounts to public humiliation and the school has no right to do such a thing.

If anyone should be punished by the school for this incident it is the person that leaked the pictures.

 

[Jon]

Also, since this happened no only off-campus, but while school was on summer recess, I think the girls did not have fair notice that they were still subject to school imposed rules of behavior.

While the photos in question were taken during summer recession, they were viewable online during the school year. The behavior of the girls is not the only issue, it's the displaying of said behavior for people to see.

 

[007]

Two wrongs don't make a right. What the school did was wrong, and what the girls did was wrong. The school has no right discipline those girls for something they did completely outside and independent of the school. What the girls did was wrong but it should be up to the parents to discipline them for acting like little porn stars. The ACLU... well... they're just sticking their nose in making something out of nothing, as usual. They should get lost. But, apparently, unfortunately, people smell money.

 

[Jon]

The girls are being disciplined by not being allowed to participate in a school event. They are not be suspended or expelled. The school has bylaws, which the girls were made aware of, that govern who can and cannot participate in sports. They broke the rules. They don't play sports.

 

[Immanuel]

SCOTUS has ruled in numerous cases that schools have the right to mete out this kind of punishment for off campus activity. the most famous case was probably morse v. frederick, but there have been others.

yea, but that was a fucked up decision all the way around the block. Hell, under this definition a kid couldn't wear half of the band t shirts available... OFF CAMPUS.

Thinking of some of the shirts my 17 year old son is wearing, maybe I will have to rethink my position on this thread.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Also, since this happened no only off-campus, but while school was on summer recess, I think the girls did not have fair notice that they were still subject to school imposed rules of behavior.

While the photos in question were taken during summer recession, they were viewable online during the school year. The behavior of the girls is not the only issue, it's the displaying of said behavior for people to see.

But, it was not public. According to the article the page is only viewable by "friends".

Seems to me like the girls need to do a better job of choosing their "friends".

Immie

 

[manifold]

Two wrongs don't make a right. What the school did was wrong, and what the girls did was wrong. The school has no right discipline those girls for something they did completely outside and independent of the school. What the girls did was wrong but it should be up to the parents to discipline them for acting like little porn stars. The ACLU... well... they're just sticking their nose in making something out of nothing, as usual. They should get lost. But, apparently, unfortunately, people smell money.

So you agree with the ACLU's position, that the school has no right to discipline these girls for something they did outside of the school, but you still think they're making something out of nothing.

Do you always contradict yourself so plainly and obviously?

 

[Jon]

Also, since this happened no only off-campus, but while school was on summer recess, I think the girls did not have fair notice that they were still subject to school imposed rules of behavior.

While the photos in question were taken during summer recession, they were viewable online during the school year. The behavior of the girls is not the only issue, it's the displaying of said behavior for people to see.

But, it was not public. According to the article the page is only viewable by "friends".

Seems to me like the girls need to do a better job of choosing their "friends".

Immie

It was viewable, period. Other students could see them. Plus, if these girls are like the other people I know on MySpace, they'll accept friend requests from anyone. But that's not the point. They are not "private" just because they are only viewable by friends. They are still public.

 

[007]

Two wrongs don't make a right. What the school did was wrong, and what the girls did was wrong. The school has no right discipline those girls for something they did completely outside and independent of the school. What the girls did was wrong but it should be up to the parents to discipline them for acting like little porn stars. The ACLU... well... they're just sticking their nose in making something out of nothing, as usual. They should get lost. But, apparently, unfortunately, people smell money.

So you agree with the ACLU's position, that the school has no right to discipline these girls for something they did outside of the school, but you still think they're making something out of nothing.

Do you always contradict yourself so plainly and obviously?

You're right. It does pretty much read that way. Good catch. Maybe in this instance the ACLU has a point. The school was wrong IMO. But it also looks like there's racking over the coals for cash going on too.

 

[Jon]

I do think the school was wrong for making the girls apologize to the athletic board, especially since apologizing to the board did not make the girls eligible to play sports. It should have been a choice: either apologize and play sports, or don't apologize and don't play sports.

I still stand firm that the girls violated the rules of eligibility to play sports, and that the school has every reason to deny them the privilege of playing sports.

 

[Immanuel]

I do think the school was wrong for making the girls apologize to the athletic board, especially since apologizing to the board did not make the girls eligible to play sports. It should have been a choice: either apologize and play sports, or don't apologize and don't play sports.

I still stand firm that the girls violated the rules of eligibility to play sports, and that the school has every reason to deny them the privilege of playing sports.

The coach has every right to cut the girls from the team for any reason. No argument there.

I still do not believe the school has the right to discipline them for breaking that rule. If they can discipline these girls for this offense, how long before they are disciplining students for proselityzing other kids simply for inviting them to church on a summer Sunday morning?

Immie