|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,760 |
Originally posted by Viss1:
Originally posted by bishop375:
That is *not* up to the school, that is up to the parents.
But by sending their kids to private school, the parents have chosen to assign a portion of their kids' moral upbringing to the school. You might not agree with that strategy - I certainly don't - but I'm not going to tell someone what their private school should or should not be doing. I can hope that the parents realize this type of oppression is unhealthy, but at the end of the day it's not really any of my business.
Finally, someone besides us 'crazy right wingers' who understand!
Ryan
Trollin!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,677
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,677 |
Originally posted by Davo:
Originally posted by XKontour98:
A little contradictive wouldnt you say?
Not really, because if you asked the school administration they would say he lived by the rules (since he never got caught). If he would have been caught, he would not have been going to a private school.
EDIT: Oh, and it's contradictory. 
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=contradictive
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Regardless, when you say 'contradictive', you sound like an idiot.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,307
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,307 |
Originally posted by Viss1:
But by sending their kids to private school, the parents have chosen to assign a portion of their kids' moral upbringing to the school.
What is so morally wrong about posting a picture of themselves in their own section of a social website? Yeah, it's used for a lot of hookups, but, the initial concept was for social gathering.
That is the argument. The gist of the whole article was not "it's immoral for you to post your picture," it was "this is for your own good, and if you don't like it, you're expelled," which I think is completely bogus. I can see if the kids were accessing it from school, and blocking the USE of it from the school, not from having a profile on there.
1998 SVT Contour Silver Frost for sale in Classifieds.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 3,290
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 3,290 |
I agree it's bogus, but, again, parents sent their kids to this school knowing that the kids would be held to whatever "standards" the school chose to set, whether in school or not. If the parents agree with us that it's BS, they can send their kids to a different school.
E0 #36
'95 Ranger
'82 Honda CX500
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 678
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 678 |
Originally posted by Rishodi:
* * * In any case, I damn sure don't defend terrorists. Where the hell did you get such a stupid idea?
Originally posted by svt4stv:
it came printed in the weekly mailer 
LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,975
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,975 |
Originally posted by bishop375:
What is so morally wrong about posting a picture of themselves in their own section of a social website? Yeah, it's used for a lot of hookups, but, the initial concept was for social gathering.
That is the argument. The gist of the whole article was not "it's immoral for you to post your picture," it was "this is for your own good, and if you don't like it, you're expelled," which I think is completely bogus. I can see if the kids were accessing it from school, and blocking the USE of it from the school, not from having a profile on there.
Are they preventing any possible harm to the students by banninating public profiles? Yes. Are they trying to instill "Christian" values? Yes. Are the sudents there to learn about things important to the world? No. Exposing oneself to something that even has potential of doing wrong (like "hooking up") would/should throw a red flag. I'm sure John 15:19 is called to their mind.
Perhaps, it is a wake up call to some parents, actually to many parents that if a child has access to the internet, he/she can quickly find themselves in an area that would go against what they want their child to be exposed to.
1992 Ford Escort LX-E
-Tracer LTS spoiler
-GT Grille
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066 |
Originally posted by Davo:
You can't have Bibles in public schools but the U.S. government provides Qurans to terrorists. Explain that to me.
Because children are impressionable and beliefs and morals should be left to the parents to teach and not the public system.
The detainees that request "Quorans" may do so considering they are adults and they are not there to be taught.
Seriously, Ann Coulter ? That dumb [censored] needs a cock up her attention whoring ass since it's the only thing she might be good for.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066 |
Also,
As a person who went to private catholic school -- it sucks.
I absolutely hate when parents leave private/public schools to do the raising for their kids, and then turn around and become up in arms when something goes wrong or they're surprised by something about their kids.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,198 |
Originally posted by ODC:
Seriously, Ann Coulter ? That dumb [censored] needs a cock up her attention whoring ass since it's the only thing she might be good for.
How intelligent. 
|
|
|
|
|
