3 kids suspended for ignoring school policy
Reader Wayne sends me this from his hometown paper the Star Tribune;
Three small-town eighth-graders were suspended for not standing at the start of the school day Thursday for the Pledge of Allegiance.
“My son wasn’t being defiant against America,” said Kim Dahl, mother of one of the students, Brandt, who attends Dilworth-Glyndon-Felton Junior High School in western Minnesota. She said her son offered no reason for sitting.
Brandt told the Fargo Forum that Thursday’s one-day in-school suspension, “was kind of dumb because I didn’t do anything wrong. It should be the people’s choice.”
Well, if it was about the Pledge of Allegiance, I might agree (the Supreme Court agrees with me – it’s unconstitutional to require students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in school), but it’s more about following school policy;
The district today is defending the punishments. The school’s handbook says all students are required to stand but are not obligated to recite the pledge. The same is true for all four schools in the district, a school official said.
We can skip over all of the typical patriotic excuses for reciting the pledge and go straight to the fact that a rule was broken and a punishment dealt. Junior High kids don’t get to decide which rules they will and will not obey and standing up is not all that difficult. But what’s worse than a kid who thinks he can decide which rules he’ll follow? A parent who thinks their kids are adult enough to decide.
In this case, I applaud the school for taking a stand for good order and discipline – a real rarity in this day and age.
Category: Society
Freedom ain’t free, you little brats. Was their last name Murtha by chance?
“For those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor that the protected will never know.”
Semper Fi!
Particularly noteworthy occuring in Minnesota.
Charlie, their name probably isn’t Murtha – but it could be Wellstone. Or Frasier, Or McCarthy (Gene, not the old, good one), or Frankin. Minnesota has a rich tradition of mental poverty.
I love the taste of freedom in the morning, tastes like a flavor the protected don’t know. Those children should be sequestered and have their mouth rinsed with freedom-flavored soap so they will know what it tastes like.
What exactly does standing during the recital of a mantra have to do with good order and discipline?
Jonn wrote: Um, following rules. School isn’t place where students get to decide which rules they’ll follow and which they won’t. But you and I can probably argue that all day, huh?
I love the condescending Um, classic. Following rules? So, I guess all those good segregationists were just ‘following rules’ sending kids to separate schools, right? Yes, I am comparing segregation to standing during the pledge. School is for learning, not indoctrination into any particular political ethos.
What if your granddaughter had to be micro-chipped so good old Uncle Sam could make sure she was safe from school shooters and terrorists? Just follow the rules sheepmate!
Your shipmate,
Lloyd
Jonn wrote: It wasn’t putting a microchip behind their ear, it was the simple act of standing and not sitting. There’s no indoctrination going on – they didn’t have to recite the Pledge, they had to stand up.
Lloyd brings up an interesting point, Jonn: where do you draw the line? Blindly following school policy is a dangerous, slippery slope…no doubt you have limits to how much power the school board can wield in the classroom?
The rule requiring students to stand during the pledge–but not recite it–is absurd. Standing up during the pledge is just as much of an oath to the State as standing and reciting the pledge. Those students should be applauded for their refusal to bow down to the State; their suspension was an egregious abuse of power by the school.
The pledge has nothing whatsoever to do with education. Reciting it–as well as the presence of any Statist icons in the classroom–should be abolished altogether.
Jonn wrote: Here’s the thing everybody is missing; these are Junior High kids. They don’t have rights. They’re supposed to be learning how to live in a society governed by laws, not by personalities. Does anyone applaud you for rolling through a stop sign?
The problems with youths today is that no one will set boundaries for them. If we take learning about civil behavior out of our schools, what good are schools? They have rules about not chewing gum, too – are you going to stand with a violator of that rule, too? How about violators of dress codes? Those are two things we don’t regulate in the real world, too. Part of the school’s job is to make good citizens out of students – following basic rules is part of being a good citizen.
I’m pretty sure, if Lloyd is who I think he is, is probably pretty surprised that I wrote all of that defending schools.
You are to be applauded for your obedience to the State, Comrade Lilyea.
“They [Junior High kids] don’t have rights.”
That pretty much sums it up, Jonn. I’m shocked, but not surprised to hear you say that.
“The problem with youths today is that no one will set boundaries for them.”
So we leave it in the hands of a government-funded school? Sounds eerily similar to the liberal position on the matter, doesn’t it?
Jonn wrote: Nice try baiting me. Your problem is that you think kids are fully-developed people. Since our public schools were formed, the intent has always been to make good American citizens of children – long before Marx.
Just who do you think I am, Comrade John?
“Your problem is that you think kids are fully-developed people.”
And who do you think you are, John, telling people what they think? I didn’t hear anyone say they thought kids were fully developed people, except when you accused Allen. And is the intent of schools to make good citizens, or to educate? Hopefully, your statement that Junior High kids don’t have right was hyperbole. But then again, I’m new here. Or am I? Da du daaaaa.
Lloyd
Have a problem with your children standing for the Pledge? Home School your kids or send them to a private school that will not require them to stand. Problem solved.
Jonn is right, this is much more about some lazy kids who thought they were above the rules than an attempt by them to exercise personal freedom. Let me know how that “Comrade” crap works for you when the Cops pull you over for not conforming to the traffic laws. Don’t forget to yell “DON’T TASE ME BRO!”
While the only kid I continually spend time with can in fact recite the Pledge of Allegiance, I may surprise you in not liking mandatory pledge recitals in school. I feel that people should say the Pledge of Allegiance only when they actually feel the allegiance in their heart. Otherwise they’re just mumbling words, and cheapening it.
They may have broken the school rule-maybe that’s a good time to change the school rule to allow for seated and respectful silence.
Children do actually have rights in school, according to the Supreme Court, 1969, Tinker vs Des Moines, where the famous Students do not “shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door” language was created.
However, a balance must be struck between free speech and a valid educational mission. Personally, I can’t see how a valid educational mission is served only by silent standing children and not by silent seated ones. Now if they were disruptive, that’s a different story.