• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Student Suspended for Refusing to Wear a School-Issued RFID Tracker

Is there a reason you directed this at me, or are you addressing the crowd?

Mostly addressing the crowd, but you're the one who brought up the Texas Pledge, aren't you?

Do students pledge allegiance to the state of Texas?
 
Mostly addressing the crowd, but you're the one who brought up the Texas Pledge, aren't you?

Do students pledge allegiance to the state of Texas?

Unfortunately, yes, they do, and apparently you can even be suspended if you don't. Rather silly really.
 
I don't think it is a conspiracy theory. There is no reason for them to make children wear RFID tags.If they were that concerned about kids skipping school then they can post security guards at the entrances and exits to the building. As far as I know teachers still take attendance at the start of every class and the school will notify parents when their kids have missed classes. As for being able to tell which kids belong to the school or not then they can institute a uniform policy. My nephew's middle school he went to mandated brown khaki pants or shorts, and either a black,dark blue or light blue polo shirt depending on the grade the child was in and those polo shirt colors would change every year.

I would rather allow children the chance to be individuals. Uniforms are about conformity and stripping individuality and little of anything else. There is no reason schools must do such things.
 
Where are this girl's friends on this issue? When I talk about my g-g-g-generation, it is understood that we were power in numbers. We staged sit-ins in front of the principals office until we successfully achieved the abolition of the damn dress code. I cannot fathom us as HS students wearing snoop tags. Of course they hadn't been invented yet, but if they had been, we would have burned them in unison.

Of course we had plenty of good paying jobs to choose from after graduation. That meant that we had individual powers above and beyond being crushed under the thumb. We actually didn't have to 'play nice' all of the time.

I understand all too well why young people today have to spend their whole childhood sucking up to authority, and I don't like it one bit. This also breeds the group of youngsters who save up for tattoos on their faces. They can't play the game.

I was born 30 years too late. My eyes are sore from what I'm seeing.
 
I would rather allow children the chance to be individuals. Uniforms are about conformity and stripping individuality and little of anything else. There is no reason schools must do such things.
Uniforms identify who belongs at that school and who doesn't. A uniform policy ensures that no one can walk into school wearing something inappropriate simply because the rules don't ban a certain type of attire. Uniforms ensure that no one can wear gang colors or be accused of being in a gang. Uniforms ensure that no one is hassled or harassed because of the way they dress or because of what brand of clothes someone wears.
 
Where are this girl's friends on this issue? When I talk about my g-g-g-generation, it is understood that we were power in numbers. We staged sit-ins in front of the principals office until we successfully achieved the abolition of the damn dress code. I cannot fathom us as HS students wearing snoop tags. Of course they hadn't been invented yet, but if they had been, we would have burned them in unison.

Of course we had plenty of good paying jobs to choose from after graduation. That meant that we had individual powers above and beyond being crushed under the thumb. We actually didn't have to 'play nice' all of the time.

I understand all too well why young people today have to spend their whole childhood sucking up to authority, and I don't like it one bit. This also breeds the group of youngsters who save up for tattoos on their faces. They can't play the game.

I was born 30 years too late. My eyes are sore from what I'm seeing.

Agreed. These children should stand together against this and whatever else that needs crushed.
 
I would rather allow children the chance to be individuals. Uniforms are about conformity and stripping individuality and little of anything else. There is no reason schools must do such things.

Oh, but there is. Students like to play games with clothing, and press the envelope as far as possible. Dress codes are notoriously difficult to enforce, as it becomes a game for students to see how far they can go.

Kids are in school for one purpose and one purpose only: To learn. They need to dress in such a way as not to call attention to their manner of dress, as that is a distraction to learning. Teachers and administrators don't need to waste time figuring out what the latest gangland styles may be.

Further, the argument that dress codes, or even uniforms, are against individuality are just so much hot air. Kids are, and will be individuals, after all regardless of their clothing. Moreover, teens dress not to be individuals, but to conform to whatever their peer group finds cool.

One day, they will become adults. When that happens, if they have been successful at learning, they will have a job and a boss. The boss will tell them what is and is not appropriate for the workplace, just as the school is doing now. They will have a choice to work elsewhere, just as they now have a choice to go to school elsewhere.
 
Uniforms identify who belongs at that school and who doesn't. A uniform policy ensures that no one can walk into school wearing something inappropriate simply because the rules don't ban a certain type of attire. Uniforms ensure that no one can wear gang colors or be accused of being in a gang. Uniforms ensure that no one is hassled or harassed because of the way they dress or because of what brand of clothes someone wears.

Yes, those are the reason people give. Uniforms in and of themselves breed conformity and are the exact opposite of individuality. Everything you said indeed furthers my point in fact.

gang colors
identification.
people being harassed for not fitting in.

These are all arguments made by someone that wants conformity to the group.
 
In loco parentis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Parental locus, or in loco parentis, is Latin for in the place of a parent.
It is a concept where the legal responsibility for a minor child transfers some powers to a individual or an organization (school).
The logic is tha this transfer of responsibility is necessary for the proper care of the child.

In other words, since a parent does not need a search warrant based upon probable cause to search their own minor child's room, the child's school is accorded the same powers.

I sure as Hell don't like the concept, but it is firmly established in common law, and our hands are tied.

The same defense would also cover the RFID tag issue discussed here.
Since the RFID concept is radically different, though, I hope that it can be shut down easily and quickly.
Parents do not use RFID at home, so hopefully in loco parentis cannot be used by schools as a defense.

hmmmm, wasnt aware of that, thanks but again depending on how its used that doesnt bother me because again, its school property.
I do think there are cases where a school might over reach but this isnt one of them at least not per my understanding of it. Maybe more will come out.
 
Oh, but there is. Students like to play games with clothing, and press the envelope as far as possible. Dress codes are notoriously difficult to enforce, as it becomes a game for students to see how far they can go.

Yes, and that is caused by a need for _____________.

Kids are in school for one purpose and one purpose only: To learn. They need to dress in such a way as not to call attention to their manner of dress, as that is a distraction to learning. Teachers and administrators don't need to waste time figuring out what the latest gangland styles may be.

They don't need to waste time doing that anyway.

Further, the argument that dress codes, or even uniforms, are against individuality are just so much hot air. Kids are, and will be individuals, after all regardless of their clothing. Moreover, teens dress not to be individuals, but to conform to whatever their peer group finds cool.

So what if they do dress to conform to the group? Some do and some don't, but that hardly calls for a system that makes that decision for them. Uniforms are designed for exactly what I said and they have always been used for such. This is in fact no different.
 
Worrying about this just seems like conspiracy stuff to me. No rights are taken away.
 
Not really.
Wrong again.
If you do not like the rules of the workplace, you can apply elsewhere.
Public schools are based upon where you live.
If there are no private school options, you have no other choice.
 
Wrong again.
If you do not like the rules of the workplace, you can apply elsewhere.
Public schools are based upon where you live.
If there are no private school options, you have no other choice.

That was not my point. Rights are lost in either situation mentioned.

And I haven't been wrong once.
 
Damn school trying to assure the best way they can that students are safe, where they should be, attending class and not leaving without being detected, the nerve of them!!!!!, what is this old Russia!

:scared:
<end sarcasm>

Im still waiting for a list of these rights violations and harm over the pros.
 
IYHO, that is.

Says the guy that is wrong.

They work for the school board, which represents the parents, so yes.

So because they work for the parents what they actually need to do is somehow affected? It would seem to me that if they work for the parents they would do what the parents wanted, but that wouldn't mean there is an actual need for anything to be done. I would of hoped you would have understood the difference between an actual need for something and doing what the parents desire. Apparently I was wrong on that much.
 
Says the guy that is wrong.



So because they work for the parents what they actually need to do is somehow affected?
It would seem to me that if they work for the parents they would do what the parents wanted, but that wouldn't mean there is an actual need for anything to be done. I would of hoped you would have understood the difference between an actual need for something and doing what the parents desire. Apparently I was wrong on that much.

and on a lot more.

Have you actually worked for a boss, ever, or are you still in high school? Of course what they do is affected by who they work for.
 
and on a lot more.

Have you actually worked for a boss, ever, or are you still in high school? Of course what they do is affected by who they work for.

You don't appear to be understanding my point. If you wish I will openly admit they will do what the parents want them to do, but there is a difference in actions that are called for and actions that you are ordered to do. My original point was the action is not necessary, not that they wouldn't otherwise do it because the parents desired it. Bosses do in fact order many actions that are not necessary, but people do them anyway because that is their job.
 
Last edited:
Damn school trying to assure the best way they can that students are safe, where they should be, attending class and not leaving without being detected, the nerve of them!!!!!, what is this old Russia!

:scared:
<end sarcasm>

Im still waiting for a list of these rights violations and harm over the pros.

The only reason I would object is the fact that it is Mandatory to attend school. If it werent then I would have no objection on the rights angle per say. Putting her in another school without RFID is probaly a good solution. I personally dont like RFID because they inherrently unsecure. If I had a student attending that school that would be my concern. This sort of technology is a double edged sword. I dont have children in public school because quite frankly they are inferior in almost every way. To much politics not enough education.
 
Back
Top Bottom