Dad Calls Son's School From Iraq, Son Get Suspended

[QUOTE="gobo212"]

By your logic, we should write tickets to everyone in the car when the driver goes through a stop sign.

DeeJayInphinity

While not perfect, that is a good analogy.

Just like the VP, not the kid is in control of the school? ;)

Just like the VP, not the kid is in control of the school? ;)gobo212

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]1. As for my example, it was not reasonable to rat your friends out because they are drinking. DeeJayInphinity

2. There is zero integrity in blindly following the rules, only mindlessness and a lack of loyalty to those that matter most to you. mrbojangles25

3. Next you'll be telling me that the french who ratted out Jews in hidng to the nazis were only following the rules and had "integrity, honesty, etc"mrbojangles25

4. Not every scenario is so cut and dry, man...view the world with compassion and understanding, not with technicalites and white/black points of view. mrbojangles25

5. Question the rules, disobey the lame ones on occasion, raise a little hell. Its your duty, as a person of integrity, to do so.mrbojangles25

1. The "unreasonable" comes from the fact that he was my friend, and from the fact that we were causing no harm. Why are the rules there? To prevent certain people from being disruptive. We were not being disruptive, and as a friend it is his duty to overlook that with understanding. And like I said, I would have accepted this punishment if the RA or someone else ratted us out, not my friend though. He sold his friendship so he could follow the rules.

2. The kid was told, by an authority figure, he could accept a call. He was suspended on a technicality, aka he was suspended by someone who blindly followed the rules. A technicality, in layman's terms, is when a punishment is rendered that lacks meaning. In other words, the punishment is does not teach the guy anything...it merely makes him (and the community, im sure) upset.

3. I admit this is an extreme example, but the cold hard truth is that law-abiding French people in Nazi-occupied Europe turned Jews over to the Nazis. Only the people with integrity that saw the world as a gray area did not do so. Based on what youve said here, I Would have to assume that you would be as cold and blind as some Europeans were because "they followed the rules".

4. Cut and Dry would mean the kid knew the rule and broke them...thats cut and dry, and he would rightfully be suspended. The reason this is not cut and dry is because he got permission from someone and got in trouble for it. That is the opposite of cut and dry

5. Who is grasping for straws now?...and you didnt get my meaning; I said unreasonable laws. Most reasonable laws go strictly in line with people's moral compass...you would not piss on my lawn because your concious would object to that. Likewise, it would be reasonable to rat out your friend if he was getting drunk and planned to fight someone, but it would be unreasonable to rat your friend out simply because he was enjoying a few beers peacefully in his room.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]We have already acknowledged the fact that the VP, supposedly, did not have permission to give the kid time to talk to his dad during school.DeeJayInphinity

That doesn't make any sense...

Let's take a look at a somewhat parallel-like example of this whole situation: A kid had his/her phone privelages taken away. A week later, one parent decided to give them back. The other parent doesn't know. Now the latter parent should....what, punish the kid for using the phone or have a talk with the parent who's lifted the ban.

It's simple...if he got the permission..there should be no reason to suspend the kid (back to real problem). The VP should take the fall, unless there is some big misunderstanding.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]We have already acknowledged the fact that the VP, supposedly, did not have permission to give the kid time to talk to his dad during school.DeeJayInphinity

not yet.

why? because you dont get it!

the kid did not know better. He is supposed to do what the VP says, and what the VP said was wrong. Now tell me, how is it fair and logical that the kid should get punished for the VP's blunder?

not yet.

why? because you dont get it!

the kid did not know better. He is supposed to do what the VP says, and what the VP said was wrong. Now tell me, how is it fair and logical that the kid should get punished for the VP's blunder?

mrbojangles25

if he got the permission..there should be no reason to suspend the kid (back to real problem). The VP should take the fall, unless there is some big misunderstanding.a55assin

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

not yet.

why? because you dont get it!

the kid did not know better. He is supposed to do what the VP says, and what the VP said was wrong. Now tell me, how is it fair and logical that the kid should get punished for the VP's blunder?

DeeJayInphinity

Yes, but the VP is essentially the enforcer of those rules.

If you came across a cop, and he told you there was a crazed gunman in the house, and you should run across the street, would you do it? Of course you would, he is a cop and he is telling you to do something!

What if, as a result, you got a jaywalking ticket. Be honest...would you actually say "well, I did break the rules, I deserve this" or would you make a rightious complaint?

[QUOTE="a55assin"]if he got the permission..there should be no reason to suspend the kid (back to real problem). The VP should take the fall, unless there is some big misunderstanding.DeeJayInphinity

But how would the kid know that the VP's permission wasn't valid? It's not his fault the VP is incompetent. If I were to have received permission from the VP when I was still attending High School, I wouldn't think twice about using a cel...

It's not just partly the VP's fault...it's ALL his/her fault.

The "unreasonable" comes from the fact that he was my friend, and from the fact that we were causing no harm. Why are the rules there? To prevent certain people from being disruptive. mrbojangles25

2. The kid was told, by an authority figure.mrbojangles25

3. I admit this is an extreme examplemrbojangles25

5. Who is grasping for straws now?..mrbojangles25

If you came across a cop, and he told you there was a crazed gunman in the house, and you should run across the street, would you do it? Of course you would, he is a cop and he is telling you to do something!

What if, as a result, you got a jaywalking ticket. Be honest...would you actually say "well, I did break the rules, I deserve this" or would you make a rightious complaint?

mrbojangles25

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]If you came across a cop, and he told you there was a crazed gunman in the house, and you should run across the street, would you do it? Of course you would, he is a cop and he is telling you to do something!

What if, as a result, you got a jaywalking ticket. Be honest...would you actually say "well, I did break the rules, I deserve this" or would you make a rightious complaint?

DeeJayInphinity

youre completely avoiding the point of my example (which is nearly identical to the case of the kid who got suspended)

worst of all, you know it too. I think youre beyond ignorant, I just hope that when you do unknowingly break a rule or law, the people are as understanding about it as you are not.

You have consistently avoided the points peopel are trying to make, and I cant help but feel you are some 12 year old clutching to the ideals of your folks.

Either that, or this is some big joke and youre taking us for the ride. I think I will assume the latter, since I will sleep better knowing someone like you believes the crap you do.

youre completely avoiding the point of my example (which is nearly identical to the case of the kid who got suspended)

worst of all, you know it too. I think youre beyond ignorant, I just hope that when you do unknowingly break a rule or law, the people are as understanding about it as you are not.

You have consistently avoided the points peopel are trying to make, and I cant help but feel you are some 12 year old clutching to the ideals of your folks.

Either that, or this is some big joke and youre taking us for the ride. I think I will assume the latter, since I will sleep better knowing someone like you believes the crap you do.

mrbojangles25

The thing is, this is a special case. His father's in Iraq, on the opposite side of the world. It's difficult, in the first place, to even get a chance to phone home while in country. Plus, there's the dramatic difference in time zones, I.E. it's night time here when it's day time there, so there'd be a very limited window in which he would be able to call his son.

Add to that the fact that the Assistant Principle granted them permission and this is an unfair case.

[QUOTE="dave123321"][QUOTE="cametall"]

The problem is the assistant pricipal, one of the highest authority figures in the school, made an exception and granted permission for him to speak to his father on his cell phone.

The student shouldn't be suspended, the assistant pricipal should be in trouble.

Jandurin

I agree.

It's a big deal for people that give half a sh** about their grades.

What I really like about this argument is that I'm arguing against blindly listening to authority and ignoring your own judgment.. and this guy has the audacity to tell me that I'm blindly listening to authority. :lol: People these days.DeeJayInphinity

though if anything the kid did use his own judgement, otherwise he would have just made the call without asking the VP.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

youre completely avoiding the point of my example (which is nearly identical to the case of the kid who got suspended)

worst of all, you know it too. I think youre beyond ignorant, I just hope that when you do unknowingly break a rule or law, the people are as understanding about it as you are not.

You have consistently avoided the points peopel are trying to make, and I cant help but feel you are some 12 year old clutching to the ideals of your folks.

Either that, or this is some big joke and youre taking us for the ride. I think I will assume the latter, since I will sleep better knowing someone like you believes the crap you do.

DeeJayInphinity

Passive aggressiveness FTW :roll:

What I really like about this argument is that I'm arguing against blindly listening to authority and ignoring your own judgment.. and this guy has the audacity to tell me that I'm blindly listening to authority. :lol: People these days.DeeJayInphinity

The cellphone rule in american school is the stupidest thing ever. My sister got a four hour detention because her phone rang during class.Azurr

no its not really stupid...if you have it on vibrate or silent then its a different story...but leaving it on so that it can ring is disruptive and disrespectful to the teacher...

otherwise he would have just made the call without asking the VP.

Hewkii

Eh, whatever. That just mean the kid gets a day off. No biggie.Jandurin

It's a big deal for people that give half a sh** about their grades.XBebop

Also, I feel like the teachers would be open to making up work lost during this time.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]Eh, whatever. That just mean the kid gets a day off. No biggie.queenfan66

[QUOTE="Jandurin"]Eh, whatever. That just mean the kid gets a day off. No biggie.queenfan66

I doubt anyone would care about one suspension

A Dad serving in Iraq calls his son during the school day where they have a strict ban on cell phones and the son gets suspended.

The part that makes this more interesting is that the parents already told the school the father may be calling, I quote.....

"The odd part is that the father had apparently made an arrangement in advance with the assistant principal to allow his sons to receive calls from him. "He had spoken with Mr. Fletcher," said Pat Hill, the boys' mother. "He thought there was an agreement understood that if he called either Joshua or Brandon at school, that everything was fine." "

This one is pretty simple. The school has a strict policy on phones so any talking is against the rules and he should have been punished. You can't make an exception for this because then you're showing special treatment. It's a shame that this mother is turning this into a "support the troops" issue. The assistant principal should be suspended without pay for agreeing with this and the mother should focus on more important things.

Knowledge is power!

Jaysonguy

but because i woulda *****slapped the teacher who tried to take up my phone when im talking to my dad.MarioFanatic

[QUOTE="MarioFanatic"]but because i woulda *****slapped the teacher who tried to take up my phone when im talking to my dad.Jandurin

i agree the kid shoulda smacked that uptight teacher!

wow stupidity all around.

The school seems completly hell bent on enforcing rules w/out any sort of consideration to personal well-being. Teaching kids to be cold mindless tools is a wonderful learning environment. They should of looked at the situation and understood this allowed an exception.

The kid and his mom need to learn a lesson about reality. Fact is in life you're going to get punished for doing the right thing one day or another (or something you never figured you'd get in trouble for). I got into an inncident with a teacher over something, and got myself suspended eventhough the administration and the rest of the faculty had told me I did the right thing. It really peeves me that they are so whiny about such a light penatly since many more people in the world are jailed, tourtured, and killed for doing what's right.

[QUOTE="a55assin"]if he got the permission..there should be no reason to suspend the kid (back to real problem). The VP should take the fall, unless there is some big misunderstanding.DeeJayInphinity

Your logic is completely backward. You remind me of Voltaire's character Pangloss from Candide. He knew that he shouldn't break the rule because he asked permission? That makes no sense. Of course he can't break the rule, unless, that is, he has special permission to do so, which, (I don't care what you say, you don't doubt the VP's authority when it comes to the rules in HIS OWN SCHOOL) he had.

So the kid knew his father might call him during school. What should he do? Obviously, ask for permission from a teacher or a principal if he can take the call. What kind of a person questions the VP's authority in his own school? "My principal said it's okay, but I don't know, maybe he doesn't have the authority to do so." In addition, your assuming that the VP didn't have the authority to do so. Either way, it doesn't make a difference.

Goodnight.

Either that, or this is some big joke and youre taking us for the ride. I think I will assume the latter, since I will sleep better knowing someone like you believes the crap you do.

mrbojangles25

That's what I was thinking too. There's no way this guy can be serious.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="MarioFanatic"]but because i woulda *****slapped the teacher who tried to take up my phone when im talking to my dad.xbox3604lyf

i agree the kid shoulda smacked that uptight teacher!

haha ya, in for a penny, in for a pound

A Dad serving in Iraq calls his son during the school day where they have a strict ban on cell phones and the son gets suspended.

The part that makes this more interesting is that the parents already told the school the father may be calling, I quote.....

"The odd part is that the father had apparently made an arrangement in advance with the assistant principal to allow his sons to receive calls from him. "He had spoken with Mr. Fletcher," said Pat Hill, the boys' mother. "He thought there was an agreement understood that if he called either Joshua or Brandon at school, that everything was fine." "

This one is pretty simple. The school has a strict policy on phones so any talking is against the rules and he should have been punished. You can't make an exception for this because then you're showing special treatment. It's a shame that this mother is turning this into a "support the troops" issue. The assistant principal should be suspended without pay for agreeing with this and the mother should focus on more important things.

Knowledge is power!

Jaysonguy

Um when you probably dont see your dad for year long periods and that he could easily be killed at any minute really, i think you should be able to talk to him for a few minutes on the cell, the school can go stick it where the sun dont shine if you ask me.

[QUOTE="WildLIkeChild"]If it really was the only time when the dad could call his son, like the article said, then I don't see what the problem is with letting him take the call.Jaysonguy

Because it goes against school policy and you're not supposed to do it.

The family weighs the consequences, either you don't take the call or you do and get suspended. That's how life works. If it's important you take the call and suffer the punishment.

In this country everyone wants to do what they want whenever they want with no consequences. The second they're stopped they find the first excuse.

It's just a shame that the troops get brought into this discussion.

Wow. I hope your kidding man, because that is pathetic.

Your glad they didn't make exceptions? I hate the war in Iraq, its the worst thing America's done in a good 3 decades, and if I was in the school's position I would have made an exception. This punishment was exceptionally heartless and pointless.

For gods sake, get a grip, his PARENTS called him, not his friends. Your acting as though hes broken some sort of sacred rule. Who gives a damn if the school bans cell phones.

I really don't understand this rule. I went to a public highschool that consistently got amongst the highest marks out of any school in the nation, and they by and large didn't give a damn about cell phones. They'd confiscate them if you obviously used them, and there was the occasional techno-nazi but they werent so far up their asses they'd suspend someone for talking.

I think I've found whats so seriously, seriously wrong with society.

I don't care what you say, you don't doubt the VP's authority when it comes to the rules in HIS OWN SCHOOL) he had.nbtrap1212