Once again....your post is nothing more than stretching to find some basis to support your feigned selective outrage.
Ummm...you are the one who is outraged here, remember. I am the one who thinks the school handled the situation properly when they found out about it.
Why would patronizing a national all-age restaurant be considered "Controversial"? Obviously to other than a minor few...it isn't. That's why it is "selective outrage".
Explain how you can deny it is controversial when several in this very thread have explained why they would disapprove? Just because you see no problem with it does not mean that it is not controversial. Next you are going to tell me abortion is not controversial...
Why should the school have to change its policies to avoid offending the sensibilities of ONE parent. They shouldn't
To make them better? The point is not the "one parent", it's the fact that this highlights a potentially flawed system.
Perhaps parents who are so concerned about what their high school child is subjected to should take the trip with them. That way they can cover their eyes and ears anytime they see or hear anything that they don't approve of.
Or some one could take 5 minutes and list the plan for the day for the parents on the form that they sent home to sign. That would make alot more sense.
C'mon people. Get real. If you this is not selective outrage and you really are that hypersensitive that you are offended by this, then you really should stick to Perkins...because in the real world, Beer is served at many restaurants and people may see women in shorts and tanktops.
Again, dishonesty and hyperbole. I stated already, more than once I was not offended. I also am not outraged, that is you. Selective outrage is in fact likely in your case, as I can think of several places a school might take kids you would disapprove of as a parent. Let's say the school took your kids to a church service without notifying you, would you be so relaxed about it?
I want to repeat to you the real meat of this, the point that you still have not argued. The point is not what kind of place Hooters is, not what is worn by the waitresses there, not what is served. it's that a teacher took students to a place that simple common sense would have let her know would piss off at least one parent(and by your account, the kid in question even said as much) without getting
permission or
notifying the parents. Parents are the arbiters of what their kids should see, and where there kids should go. The parents make the rules, not the state. The state has no business making these decisions. The state serves the people, and in this case, poorly served one of it's employers. And yes, a school is part of the state unless it is private.