Texas family sues over "under God" reference in pledge

You're right. This country didn't need the Puritans. We would have a much greater country if the Puritans never came here.

So...help me out here. I'm having a problem "framing" this issue.

Is this an issue about the child being humiliated by a state certified teacher? I don't think so. It was a substitute.

Is this an issue about my lack of knowledge of the pledge?
Thank GOD, yes I said GOD, that I did a little research.

Silly me. I figured that this was an issue of separation of church and state...I wish that I were as good as framing the issue as you are.

Take this however you want. I could care less what you think of me. You and your opinion mean absoulutely nothing, zero, zilch to me.

 

Piss out of a book? Heel of a book? Man, that's some fancy-ass college you went to. Oh, my bad -- to which you went.

Your demeaning attitude is worse than useless. One more time: if you don't respect someone, don't post to them.

 

go on, kick the kid!

how can ya have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?



The issue is whether a child should be required to stand and say the pledge, and whether said child should be subjected to humiliation if they refuse to do so.


Whether it was a substitute or certified teacher is of no moment. The school district sets policy, hires, and supervises. The issue exists irrespective of who the perp was.

 

No one follows that standard, and if you don't like what I say, don't respond.



see how silly that is when someone else says it to you?


B-Bob, I've told you before that I don't care what your opinion is, particularly about me and my posts. The fact is that you and I disagree on substance, and your complaints about my style are based upon the substance, not the style.

I'm not going to change. Don't like it? Don't read it. Use your IGNORE button. My ego does not require your approval or acknowledgment.

 

i like civility. i think it's a good thing.

 

I guess we're kind of old school, in that sense.

I don't know who pissed in his book, but that anger is really impressive. Could make a career as an AM radio talk show host though. Good money in that.

 

Funny, I thought it was law that you could not be forced to say the pledge. How can this be the issue. There is absolutely no issue here. The sub was wrong in doing what she did. State law says that the Pledge of Allegiance and Texas Pledge are said. Federal law says that this can't be enforced. Can a student be reprimanded for not saying the pledge? What would be the point? Can a student be reprimanded for not standing and having a moment of silence? Ask yourself this...Can a student be reprimanded for not sitting? Can a student be reprimanded for talking out of turn?

Might the issue be the contradiction between state and federal law?

Is the district responsible for its employees actions? Absolutely. Was the sub disciplined? If she was, then the school has resolved the problem. If no action was taken, there is a big problem.

So, a kid is humiliated by a substitute and dad decides to sue from the ground level up. Great! Next time I go to a restaurant and order something talking Spanish, and the 1st day untrained waitress humiliates me by saying to speak in English because we're in America, I will be suing the owner of the restaurant, the mayor, the governor, the franchise, and the president of the old U. S. of A.

 

Huh? (I know I'm coming close to breaking my own rule here, but I have some respect for some of your posts). Where do we disagree on substance? Forgive me. This is a passtime, and I don't memorize threads. I honestly thought our political views were often aligned, give or take wanting to kill a person or two.

And I fail to see where we disagree on the "substance" (if there is any) in this issue concerning the pledge.

Yeah, basically agree. My post really was about etiquette, and you've let me know in no uncertain terms how you feel about that. Fair enouh. You were even kind enough to supply an excellent suggestion concerning my BBS settings. May your ill humors be confined to your cyber life, ... under god, natch.

 

Your inability to grasp the issue continues. It's quite impressive actually. We probably need a few more restaurant analogies to really close the book on this one though.

 

Welcome back.

 

Great idea...Adding two more to my list.

 

B-Bob,

you strain at a gnat and swallow a camel

where was your indignation with Falcon's Tongue?

when I play rough, it's in response to someone playing rough.

I would love to know why my comments stirred you to invoke the etiquette standard, but you were not so moved by the repeatedly offensive, rude, and vulgar comments of Falcon's t.

Got an answer that makes sense?

 

see, I don't need a list, because I love to read the comments of people I think are full of it


you have entertainment value to me

 

Dammit, FF, this is irritating on two fronts.
1) Do you know how annoying it is for me to click "view post" when you're on my ignore list?
2) Your durned reasonable question really brings me out into the light, sadly. So, in answer, I'll say I call out someone when it seems worthwhile to me. It's very judgmental, admittedly. Your arguments, IMO, are often lucid and would many times work better with a civil icing. And, um, I can't say that's as true for, er, all posters. So now I'm being insulting also.

Anyway, you won't hear the etiquette crap from me again.

 

Why is that if a non-religious person has an agenda (like there's anybody who doesn't), you're a committed person. When you're religious and committed to it, you're a zealot. I get tired of people implying that if an opinion about something is based upon religious convictions, that automatically makes it invalid. I'm not saying that's implied in the quote above. It just brought it to my mind.

 

Irrelevant. Certified, uncertified, full time, substitute, there just for lunch duty, whatever. The fact is that an adult in a position of supposed authority stepped way out of bounds. The fact that a teacher would spin it by saying that she was not certified is an indictment of the educational system in and of itself.

Whoever they are with whatever certifications they have, the rules must be the same for all who will represent the educational system.

 

Allright...time to step back and reassert...
I acknowledge that the adult was wrong to scream at the child, even more coupled with what she said. If an adult yelled at my child, I would be the first to get a piece of said adult. Would I place responsibility on the entire sytem all the way up to the president? No, but I guess that's just me.

I got a notice from my substitute (I was out of work friday) that 4 students were refered to the office. The students in the office were told to sit there out the class in the office and the referals were thrown in the garbage. The kids gave me an explanation of what happened and each class has the same story. The substitute was a nut. She said and did some things that did not follow school policy. Being in the school system, I know that there are situations where substitutes make decisions that do not follow school policy. Most substitites are not qualified to be in near a classroom, much less make statements that represent the views of the school or district. On top of that, mediocre subs are getting harder to come by. Does this damn the whole school system, all the way up the highest office in the land? If no action was taken against the sub, I can understand pressing charges against the school district, but to change the Pledge and sue the president??? Isn't this getting a little out of hand?

Have there been any updates on this story?

 

what a friendly way of saying "you aint sh.."

 

Yeah, I know. That may have meant something to me except this is one of those guys that has to attack posters by using different screen names. Now THAT'S entertainmnent.