8 responses to “Six-year-old Suspended for Bringing Camping Utensils to School Wins Reprieve”

1. 

   dan

   October 15, 2009

   People finally do the right thing……….After its cost them a bundle in bad publicity.
   Zero tolerance rules can be a good idea. Nobody should be able to get away with bringing what could be used as a weapon to school. And school officials should have the right and power to act in situations. However, punishments should not be set in stone. Acts can be looked upon as wrong no matter who does them, but who is doing them should be taken into consideration.
   The best example would be if a severely retarded kid touches a womans chest. Do we break out the lawyers and start suing for sexual harassment? No. Because while the act of touching a womans chest without her permission is unacceptable we understand that the kid doesn’t know what hes doing is wrong.
   It also reminds me of a time when I worked at a department store, and a dad brought in a crying little girl. And he said “Show them what you took” she then produced some hair clips. It had been obvious that she had stolen them. Did we call security and have her arrested for shop lifting? No. We took them back and told her that stealing was wrong and to never do it again.
   We really should just go back to the old system. Cause this zero tolerance policy doesn’t really do anything besides not allow common sense to be employed. We let common sense be the judge…. minority kids get in trouble more often and we get accused of racism. We let zero tolerance be the judge….minority kids still get in trouble more often and quotas are set so the school doesn’t look racist.

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. 

   Philip France

   October 15, 2009

   Great article, Selwyn.
   I related this situation with Federal government. When powers are concentrated, the need for “catch-all” templates abound. This impedes individual liberty.
   Authority and power/influence over individual lives should be spread upon the many and the more localized rather the few and the distant. This liberates the individual from tyranny.
   Our nation’s founding documents presume a sense of rugged individualism and caution against the constraint of certain God-ordained rights. In order to blend these foundational and Godly principles in an advanced society, Selwyn is absolutely correct that common sense should prevail. This requires that we, the civil society, advocate for power and authority that is wide-spread and localized. This is also why Barack Husein Obama II should be impeached and why EVERY voter should vote out his/her Congressman/Congresswoman that does not demonstrate allegiance to this founding principle.

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   yoyo

   October 15, 2009

   dan, I agree with you, issues like culpability, stage of development and understanding should be taken into account. Now try and marry that understanding with the rightwing law and order three strikes and your out. Catch the cognitive dissonance? We lefties are blasted for the idea that you look at who did the crime and their motivation, they call it relativity (as if that’s a bad thing).
   One of the best lessons from christ is the idea that you should love (and understand the sinner) unfortunately most fundie christians I know have very little interest in that particular message.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   yoyo

   October 15, 2009

   Phil, I can see you knitting under the tumbril in France as I type. This comment “This requires that we, the civil society, advocate for power and authority that is wide-spread and localized. This is also why Barack Husein Obama II should be impeached” makes absolutely no sense at all.
   I thought you were against federal power, so what does “wide spread” mean in this context? And WTF should Obama be impeached? What rule has he broken? The election promises he was elected on and haven’t yet managed are those you dont wont him to act on like DADT.
   “Civil society” define your terms, most of the opposition to your POTUS has been anything but civil. What I would call civil society you despise as elititists.
   So have a think and get back to me x

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   Dan

   October 16, 2009

   Sorry, you don’t get to invoke what Jesus taught, when you don’t even believe he was the son of God, let alone that there is a God at all. So, forgive me if I don’t think a person who mocks Christianity knows more about its teachings then a Christian. YOU don’t get to tell us what we should believe, how we should behave or how we should react to situations based on your messed up interpretations on what you THINK Jesus taught.
   As far as I’m concerned,you do not exist anymore. I’m really sick of, you, your attitude, and mocking what we believe in.

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. 

   Philip France

   October 17, 2009

   Darling Yoyo;
   What a clever dodge of Dan’s legitimate indictment of your “ logic”, or rather lack thereof. I am not sure if I should be flattered that you preferred to debate with me or that you cowered from taking on Dan. In either case your arguments are extremely weak and tremendously wanting.
   I hesitate to do so, but I must cast your vacuous words back into your teeth. Here goes:
   “I can see you knitting under the tumbril in France as I type.” This statement in and of itself is utterly delusional by two counts: One, you would never “see” me knitting, even at gunpoint and Two, I would never, EVER visit France, whom I consider the land of Sissies and Sellouts. Instead, I will lament their once-great Christian heritage by viewing the Champs Ulysses and the wondrous Christian-inspired greatness of the former France via electronic and photographic means. Darling, if you are paying attention, France is being burnt to the ground by “youths” (their press are such sissies that they cannot bring themselves to call radical Islamo-fascists that which they are!). Mark my words, and mark them well: France will be the first European nation to be an Islamic “republic” under Sharia. I’ll bet the entire bill of our first date on it. I would have paid it anyway, but you get to choose what charity (subject to my approval) that we donate the sum to.
   “I thought you were against federal power, so what does “wide spread” mean in this context?”
   Yoyo, your question is contradictory. Ask it again, and be more specific and logical.
   “And WTF should Obama be impeached? What rule has he broken?”
   Where shall we start? How about his very eligibility? No one has seen evidence of his eligibility. NO ONE, Yoyo. No one has seen his school records or grades. No one has seen his theses. NO ONE. No one on EARTH can really verify that Barack Hussein Obama II is REALLY Barack Hussein Obama II. The only one who MIGHT have done this was his grandmother who (forgive me) “conveniently” passed away on the eve of his election. Did he snuff her? An honest person HAS TO ask this question, under the risk of being a deleterious sycophant.
   Articles of Impeachment, you wonder? How about High Crimes and Misdemeanors? Under this clause, his sins are legion. The American President vows to uphold our Constitution “so help me God”. How does the government takeover of G.M. and Daimler-Chrysler, LLC square with this? Hmmm? How does the federal takeover of AIG and of many of U.S. Banks square with this? How does the dictating of the salary of the CEO of Bank of America square with this? These are all trick questions.
   The obvious impeachable offenses are the unconstitutional exceeding of his branch of power. But does he care? Hell, no. Look at what he is doing to restore power to the Marxist dictator Alaya of Honduras? A Marxist of the worst order!
   Yoyo, it is time for you to be honest and to come clean. If you are an advocate of Marxist Communism and the resulting deaths and oppression, make your case. Let us “Neanderthals” know why we should buy into our subjugation. You are out of excuses. Join me in my offer for a date. Permit me to show you how a true gentleman can treat a lady, even one with whom he largely disagrees.
   Lastly, I couldn’t let this one go: “Civil society” define your terms,”
   Civil society is a society in which debate is always welcome. It is one where human dignity is respected and where all life is cherished. It is where we seek to evaluate all opinion and compare them to extant facts. When opinions are commensurate with actual facts, we applaud them and esteem them and hold them forth. However, when they do not (and this is the evil sin of the global Left) they must be dismissed and held up as abominable shame.
   Yoyo, you KNOW what I am talking about. Deceive yourself no longer.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. 

   yoyo

   October 17, 2009

   Very quickly boys because I’m in the middle of cooking a wonderful meal, I promise I’ll be back to talk specifics later (if I dont have too much Margaret River Merlot LOL).
   Nasty Dan, being an atheist does not mean that I cannot quote Jesus or talk about content of the bible for that matter. I will aslo quote Freud, Marx or Walt Whitman at times. I notice that you guys love to take the words of many philosophers or politicians you may not necessarily follow to use in argument. From your over the top reaction I take it that you have decided that you are infact a fundie christian who does not believe in mercy. I would not have said that about you until this point.
   Phil, you’ve missed the imagery in my point. When it suits you you avoid the point even when it’s your own phraseolgy or you take the minor bits and conclude that is the whole. I hate to even type the name Orly Taitz but I am intersted in why you would even want to see school reports or the pictures his mum stuck on the fridge for only this POTUS. As for the comment about killing his relatives, what more do i need to say?

   LikeLike

   Reply
8. 

   Philip France

   October 17, 2009

   SWING and a miss! You don’t even know when you have lost an argument. For shame.

   LikeLike

   Reply