• 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!

Hooters - should this teacher be suspended for this?

Was it correct to suspend this teacher for taking the students to "Hooters" restauran


  • Total voters
    81
Asking for notification is not micromanaging the school. That is being given information to make a decision about your own children.

But why stop there. If we are going to require the schools to protect against offending an overly protective parent, lets require them to send home lesson plans, song lists for bands and choirs, just in case a parent doesn't want their child to sing a certain song.
And while we are at it...lets send home a list of all the books in the library, just in case there is a title that offends one of the parents, that way they can put a hold on it so that the student can't check it out....or better yet, the school could burn it.
 
Not at all...the fact that they do is fine. However, you would mandate that a school HAD to do that just in case a parent wants to complain?
Should schools have teachers send home school plans nightly so as to not offend a parent with hyper-sensitive sensibilities?

You are being ridiculous now. Permission slips for off-campus activities is not unreasonable.
 
You are being ridiculous now. Permission slips for off-campus activities is not unreasonable.

Its not ridiculous. That is essentially what many have been advocating. You have to give parents information to make a choice, right?

I agree that permission slips to go off campus to an activity are appropriate.
However, to micromanage every little thing that the student does on that trip, beginning with where they eat or stop to pee is just silly.
 
Its not ridiculous. That is essentially what many have been advocating. You have to give parents information to make a choice, right?

I agree that permission slips to go off campus to an activity are appropriate.
However, to micromanage every little thing that the student does on that trip, beginning with where they eat or stop to pee is just silly.

It's not micromanagement. The parent only gives permission for their own child. Everyone else is free to make that decision on their own.
 
Not at all...the fact that they do is fine. However, you would mandate that a school HAD to do that just in case a parent wants to complain?
Should schools have teachers send home school plans nightly so as to not offend a parent with hyper-sensitive sensibilities?

How about not exaggerating the issue here.
 
But why stop there. If we are going to require the schools to protect against offending an overly protective parent, lets require them to send home lesson plans, song lists for bands and choirs, just in case a parent doesn't want their child to sing a certain song.
And while we are at it...lets send home a list of all the books in the library, just in case there is a title that offends one of the parents, that way they can put a hold on it so that the student can't check it out....or better yet, the school could burn it.

Is any one calling for any of that crap? No. So why even go there. Why not actually talk about this issue, which is special events off campus, and permission slips, which are already required.
 
Its not ridiculous. That is essentially what many have been advocating. You have to give parents information to make a choice, right?

I agree that permission slips to go off campus to an activity are appropriate.
However, to micromanage every little thing that the student does on that trip, beginning with where they eat or stop to pee is just silly.

That is not what any one has been advocating. Don't go building that strawman.
 
That is not what any one has been advocating. Don't go building that strawman.

Sure it is. Are you suggesting that there are decisions that a school can make without informing the parents?
Do you draw the line simply at off-campus activities?

What if kids go to a weekend debate tournament. At the lunch break, there are a number of restaurants down the street. Do you require the school to pre-approve which of these places are OK for the kids to patronize. Should the school be required to get a list of all the restaurants in a 1 mile radius and submit it to the parents to check off which restaurants they approve of?

What if the teacher hadn't gone, but it was found out that some of the students went to "Hooters" on their lunch break. Should the teacher be suspended or otherwise reprimanded for not properly supervising and/or otherwise preventing the students from going there?
 
Last edited:
Is any one calling for any of that crap? No. So why even go there. Why not actually talk about this issue, which is special events off campus, and permission slips, which are already required.

are you trying to tell us that tyhe complaining parent had not already authorized their child to take the trip under the teacher's supervision

you, like the complaining parent, want to monday morning quarterback
you admit you don't want information to be sent home about all activities
you only want the teacher to be suspended if they do anything the parent would LATER complain about on a selective basis - as selected by a complaining parent
the teacher took the kids to a legal establishment
and few seem to recognize that it was but one child's parents who had an issue. had the bulk of the parents objected, then we would recognize what happened was against societal mores - but that was not the case
and it is not clear cut - as can be evidenced by the diverse opinions within this thread
the school administration caved
 
Sure it is. Are you suggesting that there are decisions that a school can make without informing the parents?
Do you draw the line simply at off-campus activities?

What if kids go to a weekend debate tournament. At the lunch break, there are a number of restaurants down the street. Do you require the school to pre-approve which of these places are OK for the kids to patronize. Should the school be required to get a list of all the restaurants in a 1 mile radius and submit it to the parents to check off which restaurants they approve of?

Was this a week long event? No. So what relevance does it have to the discussion? None.

Note that I have not had to resort to exaggeration to make my point. Note I have not had to resort to misrepresenting any ones position. Note that I am not the one who is trying to force my values on others. Those are all you, and a sure sign of just how weak your position is.
 
Was this a week long event? No. So what relevance does it have to the discussion? None.

Note that I have not had to resort to exaggeration to make my point. Note I have not had to resort to misrepresenting any ones position. Note that I am not the one who is trying to force my values on others. Those are all you, and a sure sign of just how weak your position is.

Nice dodge. Why not answer the questions?

I'm not trying to box you in, I actually have a sincere interest in figuring out where you stand on this issue.
You call it "exaggerating"...I'm just trying to flesh out the issue. Sure...we can all limit it to the specifics of this particular case, but some of us are interested in debating the bigger issues that this one example raises.
 
Last edited:
Nice dodge. Why not answer the questions?

I'm not trying to box you in, I actually have a sincere interest in figuring out where you stand on this issue.
You call it "exaggerating"...I'm just trying to flesh out the issue. Sure...we can all limit it to the specifics of this particular case, but some of us are interested in debating the bigger issues that this one example raises.

How is this for a statement of position: permission slips with full itineraries should be used whenever possible. Out of all the trips done off campus by public schools, this would mean the far and away vast majority of them would be covered by that. When not possible, those in charge of the trip will have their names listed on the permission slip so parents can decide if they think those people have good judgment. On school trips, any place that might be controversial should be avoided without explicitly being listed on the permission slip.
 
How is this for a statement of position: permission slips with full itineraries should be used whenever possible. Out of all the trips done off campus by public schools, this would mean the far and away vast majority of them would be covered by that. When not possible, those in charge of the trip will have their names listed on the permission slip so parents can decide if they think those people have good judgment. On school trips, any place that might be controversial should be avoided without explicitly being listed on the permission slip.


What about the specific questions addressed?

What if kids go to a weekend debate tournament. At the lunch break, there are a number of restaurants down the street. Do you require the school to pre-approve which of these places are OK for the kids to patronize. Should the school be required to get a list of all the restaurants in a 1 mile radius and submit it to the parents to check off which restaurants they approve of?

What if the teacher hadn't gone, but it was found out that some of the students went to "Hooters" on their lunch break. Should the teacher be suspended or otherwise reprimanded for not properly supervising and/or otherwise preventing the students from going there?
 
pretty much... yes. i always have. most teachers/coaches that I have known do. It is not that big of a deal, it is a legal responsibility, it is polite, it safeguards potential issues like nut allergies, etc. do they need to ask if they can drive in the fast lane... no. Do they need to ask to take students to Hooters? yes.

Scenario: A coach and his team are at a weekend event, staying in a hotel. The students want to eat and they pick McDonald's; does the coach need to ask permission?
 
A family, kid friendly restaurant is modeled after an authoritarian patriarchal social construct? WTF? Are you serious? Perhaps you can explain this theory then... I am listening. :)



With your description of how you apparently think that I view family structure, that's how. That was ridiculous. am I upset, no. Am I thinking WTF is with that? Yes... :lol:



I think that you use to many absolutes... unless you can demonstrate how I am being ultra-sensitive about anything, let alone this issue in particular.

No, you're missing my point.

There ARE some people who think the "family unit" is an arbitrary social construct that perpetuates patriarchal authoritarianism. So, should coaches stop taking their kids to family restaurants in order to remain sensitive to uber-feminist, fringe leftists? If not, then why should we remain sensitive to uber-religious, fringe rightists?

Hooters IS a mainstream restaurant. It's perfectly legal for ANYONE to patronize. The fact that the waitresses dress "sexy" is totally irrelevant since female sexuality is a societal norm. If you don't like the mainstream then you should endeavor to change it, but pretending like you can shield your child from it is just unrealistic.

If teachers can bring their kids to a family restaurant without worrying about offending some fringe leftist (except in California...:2razz:), then teachers should be able to bring their kids to contemporary, mainstream restaurants without worrying about offending some fringe rightist who lives in the 1800's.
 
0112_hooters_bn.jpg


Well with the reputation hooters has its not surprising and was not smart.

Also after looking at what hooters waitresses look like I don't see the problem.

No, you're missing my point.

There ARE some people who think the "family unit" is an arbitrary social construct that perpetuates patriarchal authoritarianism. So, should coaches stop taking their kids to family restaurants in order to remain sensitive to uber-feminist, fringe leftists? If not, then why should we remain sensitive to uber-religious, fringe rightists?

Hooters IS a mainstream restaurant. It's perfectly legal for ANYONE to patronize. The fact that the waitresses dress "sexy" is totally irrelevant since female sexuality is a societal norm. If you don't like the mainstream then you should endeavor to change it, but pretending like you can shield your child from it is just unrealistic.

If teachers can bring their kids to a family restaurant without worrying about offending some fringe leftist (except in California...:2razz:), then teachers should be able to bring their kids to contemporary, mainstream restaurants without worrying about offending some fringe rightist who lives in the 1800's.
 
It's the name! If the joint was called "Uncle Bob's" and had sexy waitresses and was racy nobody would have come down on the woman.

But the name is "Hooters" which implies a naughtiness not fit for kids.
 
It's the name! If the joint was called "Uncle Bob's" and had sexy waitresses and was racy nobody would have come down on the woman.

But the name is "Hooters" which implies a naughtiness not fit for kids.

I swear if anyone says that they are talking about owls I'm going to hit myself in the head with a hammer. :lol:
 
It's the name! If the joint was called "Uncle Bob's" and had sexy waitresses and was racy nobody would have come down on the woman.

But the name is "Hooters" which implies a naughtiness not fit for kids.

Well, not so much for myself - There's the Pink Taco and I have no problem going there because it doesn't have the overall vibe that Hooters carries on.
There's also a place called Damn Good Pie and I've eaten there with my kids, as well - it's the overall nature of the place that puts it in the no-no for me in this case.

so, sure, some people might only notice it because of the name - just not me.
 
Not at all...the fact that they do is fine. However, you would mandate that a school HAD to do that just in case a parent wants to complain?
Should schools have teachers send home school plans nightly so as to not offend a parent with hyper-sensitive sensibilities?

Did I say I thought they should have to do it? Nope. :roll:

I do think the more info. schools send home in reguards to what is going down at school? The more parental involvement the school will see-which is a good thing. ;)

At this point I am starting to wonder do you own stock in Hooters or something? :)
 
Last edited:
Did I say I thought they should have to do it? Nope. :roll:

I do think the more info. schools send home in reguards to what is going down at school? The more parental involvement the school will see-which is a good thing. ;)

At this point I am starting to wonder do you own stock in Hooters or something? :)

No....I just don't believe in micromanagement. We could set up a system where parents had total input into everything going on it a school...including the books that are allowed in the library. I think you have to find a happy medium. People can be way too overly sensitive. I think we need to stand back and recognize that these were high school kids. Not 8 year olds. I think when you do that, you see how ridiculous those calling for suspension really are.
 
Scenario: A coach and his team are at a weekend event, staying in a hotel. The students want to eat and they pick McDonald's; does the coach need to ask permission?

Hooters is not MacDonalds. Hooters is unlike almost every other restaurant/bar out there and THAT is the point. It is not comparable, hence your scenario is moot.
 
Hooters is not MacDonalds. Hooters is unlike almost every other restaurant/bar out there and THAT is the point. It is not comparable, hence your scenario is moot.

let's see
hooters has food and is open to the public
like any other restaurant


please describe why it is not
 
No, you're missing my point.

I understand your point perfectly, actually. What you are doing is trying to have me answer irrelevant questions that you think will help prove your point.

There ARE some people who think the "family unit" is an arbitrary social construct that perpetuates patriarchal authoritarianism. So, should coaches stop taking their kids to family restaurants in order to remain sensitive to uber-feminist, fringe leftists? If not, then why should we remain sensitive to uber-religious, fringe rightists?

IF I remember correctly, you either stated or indicated that I was one of these people, "who think the "family unit" is an arbitrary social construct that perpetuates patriarchal authoritarianism". In fact, I think that you stated it directly....

Also, I am against coaches taking students to Hooters which should not be classified as a "family restaurant" and I am Conservative... there goes your stereotype I guess. ;)

Can't fit everything into a nice little box...

Hooters IS a mainstream restaurant. It's perfectly legal for ANYONE to patronize. The fact that the waitresses dress "sexy" is totally irrelevant since female sexuality is a societal norm. If you don't like the mainstream then you should endeavor to change it, but pretending like you can shield your child from it is just unrealistic.

The fact that waitresses dress "sexy" is TOTALLY RELEVANT and Hooters IS NOT a mainstream restaurant and I'm not certain that it should be OK to take kids there either... the fact that they dress sexy is the entire point, one that you completely fail to acknowldge, instead opting to lrepeat that it is legal and anybody that disagrees should give up since they have no point when it is exactly the opposite...

If teachers can bring their kids to a family restaurant without worrying about offending some fringe leftist (except in California...:2razz:), then teachers should be able to bring their kids to contemporary, mainstream restaurants without worrying about offending some fringe rightist who lives in the 1800's.

You keep saying family restaurant now right after yousaid that you didn't buy into those who think the "family unit" is an arbitrary social construct that perpetuates patriarchal authoritarianism and that a family restaurant is offensive... Do you have dual personalities? :2razz:

Keep saying I am a fringe leftist all you like, you might even actually believe it too! Also, it is Conservatives that would dislike women dressing trashy and liberals that are for it, Conservatives that are for keeping children within the bounds of morality and Liberals that are for stretching morals to the breaking point, so I think that you have the political spectrum backwards... ;)
 
let's see
hooters has food and is open to the public
like any other restaurant


please describe why it is not

Why it is not what?

Woman also get abortions when it is not needed since it is legal, does that make it right or positive?
 
Back
Top Bottom