• 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!

Valedictorian denied high school diploma for saying hell in speech

ChrisL said:
I don't know. You would have to look into other zero tolerance school policies that were fought in the past and see I guess. It's not THAT important to me. :2razz:
Click to expand...

I agree not that important at all.:mrgreen: Cheers:party
 
Thing is, I used to do **** like this when I was a kid too. Do or say something snotty and then, when the inevitable consequences came along, I'd get all high-minded and self righteous. Well, I could pretend it was a matter of principles, but it was really just being an obnoxious kid. I look back and I regret acting like that. I mean, it's part of growing up, I think most teenagers go through that, but I am glad I moved past it. I feel sorry for people who haven't moved past that attitude in adulthood, or worse, who feel that shouldn't even try to move past it at all. Like that kind of attitude is a good thing.
 
Seems a bit harsh.
 
Mason66 said:
Can you provide proof of a rule she broke? As it has been pointed out earlier inthis thread there is no rule against using profanity in the school.
Click to expand...
Oh she didn't technically break any rules? My mistake, I thought she had.

How can you equate the girl saying Hell with yelling fire in a crowded theater?
Click to expand...

You said "an adult . . . has the right to say anything [they] pleases with no consequences from anybody", to which I replied with an example of why that statement is false.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Thing is, I used to do **** like this when I was a kid too. Do or say something snotty and then, when the inevitable consequences came along, I'd get all high-minded and self righteous. Well, I could pretend it was a matter of principles, but it was really just being an obnoxious kid. I look back and I regret acting like that. I mean, it's part of growing up, I think most teenagers go through that, but I am glad I moved past it. I feel sorry for people who haven't moved past that attitude in adulthood, or worse, who feel that shouldn't even try to move past it at all. Like that kind of attitude is a good thing.
Click to expand...

I dont like bullies. I like when someone stands up to them. They should have resolved this privately. They didnt, instead they made an unreasonable demand, and are now getting their heads handed to them for their beligerence. If they had a zero tolerance policy that they were blindly following they were being foolish. Further holding her diploma hostage, is bogus Barbra Striesand. Either way they were wrong. The young lass was standing up for herself. Rightfully. She stood her ground on principle. That in and of itself is rare these days. I read the quote she made there was nothing about it in or out of context that was remotely snotty, petulent, mean or rude. It wasnt even very far from her submited speach. She exchanged the word with a word it was interchangable with and interchanged with frequently anyhow. She was absolutely right to stand her ground and NOT back down. (Hey isnt there like a Tom petty song that goes like that?:2razz:) :peace
 
Guy Incognito said:
Thing is, I used to do **** like this when I was a kid too. Do or say something snotty and then, when the inevitable consequences came along, I'd get all high-minded and self righteous. Well, I could pretend it was a matter of principles, but it was really just being an obnoxious kid. I look back and I regret acting like that. I mean, it's part of growing up, I think most teenagers go through that, but I am glad I moved past it. I feel sorry for people who haven't moved past that attitude in adulthood, or worse, who feel that shouldn't even try to move past it at all. Like that kind of attitude is a good thing.
Click to expand...

"used to"? bwahahaha.

You are doing it in this thread to a similar degree.

The vast majority of us find your position not just wrong, but ignorant. When the inevitable consequences come along, you get all high minded, speculating that most of us are likely in school still, or just removed from it.
 
ARealConservative said:
"used to"? bwahahaha.

You are doing it in this thread to a similar degree.

The vast majority of us find your position not just wrong, but ignorant. When the inevitable consequences come along, you get all high minded, speculating that most of us are likely in school still, or just removed from it.
Click to expand...

The childish, stubborn behavior should not be encouraged, and it is wrong to encourage it. Those who are encouraging it are not mature adults, either because they are not adults or if they are adults they are not mature ones.I think you know that you are in the wrong. You should know, at least.

What I am doing here in calling out the people defending he disobedient child is not hypocrisy because I am no doing anything against the rules.
 
Last edited:
If the school has standards, and she broke them, why should she be an exception?

Maybe the "F" word should be used wantonly, too?
 
PirateMk1 said:
I dont like bullies. I like when someone stands up to them. They should have resolved this privately. They didnt, instead they made an unreasonable demand, and are now getting their heads handed to them for their beligerence. If they had a zero tolerance policy that they were blindly following they were being foolish. Further holding her diploma hostage, is bogus Barbra Striesand. Either way they were wrong. The young lass was standing up for herself. Rightfully. She stood her ground on principle. That in and of itself is rare these days. I read the quote she made there was nothing about it in or out of context that was remotely snotty, petulent, mean or rude. It wasnt even very far from her submited speach. She exchanged the word with a word it was interchangable with and interchanged with frequently anyhow. She was absolutely right to stand her ground and NOT back down. (Hey isnt there like a Tom petty song that goes like that?:2razz:) :peace
Click to expand...

Well as much as I love Tom Petty, I have to disagree wih you. Maybe you're just not getting what I'm saying. There is nothing wrong with saying "I don't know what the hell I am going to do when I grow up" or whatever was said here. Hell just happens to be against the rules. It is not intrinsically immoral to say "hell."
What is wrong is refusing to apologize for breaking the rules, and instead demanding that you get your way because you happen to disagree with a certain rule.
You may or may not agree with the rule, I happen to disagree wih the legitimacy of not only that rule but the entire public education system, but that is not the point. The point is that an apology is in order. Refusing to apologize, the self righteous attitude attendant to the refusal, is what is snotty, petulant, etc.

How have we argued about this for so long and yet you still don't know I consider her refusal to apologize to be the problem no the use of the word hell.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Well as much as I love Tom Petty, I have to disagree wih you. Maybe you're just not getting what I'm saying. There is nothing wrong with saying "I don't know what the hell I am going to do when I grow up" or whatever was said here. Hell just happens to be against the rules. It is not intrinsically immoral to say "hell."
What is wrong is refusing to apologize for breaking the rules, and instead demanding that you get your way because you happen to disagree with a certain rule.
You may or may not agree with the rule, I happen to disagree wih the legitimacy of not only that rule but the entire public education system, but that is not the point. The point is that an apology is in order. Refusing to apologize, the self righteous attitude attendant to the refusal, is what is snotty, petulant, etc.

How have we argued about this for so long and yet you still don't know I consider her refusal to apologize to be the problem no the use of the word hell.
Click to expand...

Yep Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers gots love em. :cool: The problem I have is she should not have to write a public appology. She did nothing that would warrent that, even if there is a school policy against cursing. If she appologized privately to the board and the principle maybee and that would just be for the purpose of getting the diploma not actuall contrition. If it was me I would be thinking long and hard before I sucked up if I sucked up. I would never write a public appology for this. It could have been handled by the principle better thats for sure. Did she break their rule? Yes she did, technically. That doesnt not in anyway alieve the school of discrection. And discretion is what I am argueing. Zero tolerance is for mindless drones in most cases. This be one of those cases. Rules be rules, I get that. I can even agree to an extent. However, discrection should be applied in their application. She should at most get a slap on the wrist, more apporpriate would be a private admonshment and be done. Thats were I think you and I are crossing our wires.:)
 
EnigmaIncognito said:
Oh she didn't technically break any rules? My mistake, I thought she had.
Click to expand...
Of course there was actually a rule broken. All schools have rules against profanity. Just because the student handbook did not explicitly list the rule does not mean there was not one.
 
Somerville said:
when news sites in other countries are posting something this inconsequential, you gotta think they believe the US is just a bit 'off'
Click to expand...

And there you have Christian right-wing Okalahoma for ya!
 
PirateMk1 said:
Yep Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers gots love em. :cool: The problem I have is she should not have to write a public appology. She did nothing that would warrent that, even if there is a school policy against cursing. If she appologized privately to the board and the principle maybee and that would just be for the purpose of getting the diploma not actuall contrition. If it was me I would be thinking long and hard before I sucked up if I sucked up. I would never write a public appology for this. It could have been handled by the principle better thats for sure. Did she break their rule? Yes she did, technically. That doesnt not in anyway alieve the school of discrection. And discretion is what I am argueing. Zero tolerance is for mindless drones in most cases. This be one of those cases. Rules be rules, I get that. I can even agree to an extent. However, discrection should be applied in their application. She should at most get a slap on the wrist, more apporpriate would be a private admonshment and be done. Thats were I think you and I are crossing our wires.:)
Click to expand...

Well an apology is getting off easy isn't it? Saying " hell" isn't a very serious crime, but an apology is not a serious punishment either. If you just leave it at that it is pretty simple. But rebuffing the very easy thing that was asked of her has compounded the situation uneceasarily.

If she had really done nothing wrong then it would be fine to refuse to apologize. If she was standing up for a no me principle I could agree. But there is no reason for her refusing except that she just doesn't like the rule. No rationale, just outright refusal for no reason other than whim. Tha is a childish reason to throw hissy fit.

Students dont have first amendment protections, that much is established. Remember the bong hits for Jesus case? I could get behind a freedom of speech issue but that is not what this is about. She had no right to free speech in this context, and her speech crossed a line.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Well an apology is getting off easy isn't it? Saying " hell" isn't a very serious crime, but an apology is not a serious punishment either. If you just leave it at that it is pretty simple. But rebuffing the very easy thing that was asked of her has compounded the situation uneceasarily.

If she had really done nothing wrong then it would be fine to refuse to apologize. If she was standing up for a no me principle I could agree. But there is no reason for her refusing except that she just doesn't like the rule. No rationale, just outright refusal for no reason other than whim. Tha is a childish reason to throw hissy fit.

Students dont have first amendment protections, that much is established. Remember the bong hits for Jesus case? I could get behind a freedom of speech issue but that is not what this is about. She had no right to free speech in this context, and her speech crossed a line.
Click to expand...

Public written appology in my opinion goes too far, also she was not technically a student in their charge at the time of the speach as the class was certified before that. The refusal was for a WRITTEN PUBLIC appology. Its not just a simple appology. She's right to refuse that.
 
Guy Incognito said:
The childish, stubborn behavior should not be encouraged, and it is wrong to encourage it. Those who are encouraging it are not mature adults, either because they are not adults or if they are adults they are not mature ones.I think you know that you are in the wrong. You should know, at least.

What I am doing here in calling out the people defending he disobedient child is not hypocrisy because I am no doing anything against the rules.
Click to expand...

You don’t have a monopoly on this issue. We also get to decide what is childish.

I find it is you being childish and stubborn in regards to this issue. Fortunately, so few agree with you, that nobody is really encouraging your behavior. Yet you continue doing it anyway.
 
ARealConservative said:
You don’t have a monopoly on this issue. We also get to decide what is childish.

I find it is you being childish and stubborn in regards to this issue. Fortunately, so few agree with you, that nobody is really encouraging your behavior. Yet you continue doing it anyway.
Click to expand...

Hey! People are entitled to disagree, and this a forum. It doesn't matter if "few" people agree or not. That is what a discussion board is for! I think THIS post is one of the MOST childish that I've seen yet.

Obviously YOU'VE run out of arguments, so you're going to pick on the poster.
 
I have seen this article on several forums and yet for the life of me can't find any comments on who and what made this terrible decision to not let this valedictorian get her diploma. Anyone figure that out? Who stopped this and for what reason?
 
Muddy Creek said:
I have seen this article on several forums and yet for the life of me can't find any comments on who and what made this terrible decision to not let this valedictorian get her diploma. Anyone figure that out? Who stopped this and for what reason?
Click to expand...

THEY did it because SHE broke a rule (that didn't exist).

"THEY didn't do anything wrong, but THEY won't do it again."

A L
 
Muddy Creek said:
I have seen this article on several forums and yet for the life of me can't find any comments on who and what made this terrible decision to not let this valedictorian get her diploma. Anyone figure that out? Who stopped this and for what reason?
Click to expand...

The girl submitted a speech to deliver which was preapproved (by whoever approves them), and while delivering her speech she changed the word from "heck" to "hell" in the speech. The school was unhappy with her changing the word from "heck" to "hell" and asked her to write an apology, which she refused to do, so they said they would hold her diploma until she delivered a written apology, and she still refused to do it.

IMO, a spoiled little brat.
 
They only denied her the diploma? that's wrong!

She should have been beheaded on the spot.
 
Mya said:
They only denied her the diploma? that's wrong!

She should have been beheaded on the spot.
Click to expand...

You're being sarcastic, but withholding the diploma really is just a slap on the wrist. This is nothing to get worked up over in her defense. If anything the punishment really should have been more severe, as the consequences of withholding her diploma do not seem to have motivated her sufficiently.
 
ChrisL said:
IMO, a spoiled little brat.
Click to expand...

Very true. I feel bad for her, though, with all of these adults taking her side and defending her, she will never learn.

Why don't the people defending the valedictorian see that they are ultimately doing her a disservice?
 
Guy Incognito said:
Very true. I feel bad for her, though, with all of these adults taking her side and defending her, she will never learn.

Why don't the people defending the valedictorian see that they are ultimately doing her a disservice?
Click to expand...

I don't know. She should look at this as another learning experience towards adulthood. I don't see what the big deal is about writing out an apology, and people wonder why children are out of control, have no respect and think only about themselves. :roll:
 
ChrisL said:
Hey! People are entitled to disagree, and this a forum. It doesn't matter if "few" people agree or not. That is what a discussion board is for! I think THIS post is one of the MOST childish that I've seen yet.

Obviously YOU'VE run out of arguments, so you're going to pick on the poster.
Click to expand...

That is what I am doing. I disagree with him, and explained why.

he doesn't have a monopoly on deciding what is acceptable behavior, and neither does the school administrator.

Group think decides these issues (which he ignorantly railed against earlier in this thread)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom