[Stryke 9]

It's probably for the best that anybody who needs TV to tell them about how to have sex doesn't breed, anyway.

Sex ed's been all but eliminated in most of the public schools, apparently. Bush's say-nothing-but-tell-them-to-abstain-anyway **** all the way to straight nothing, the horror stories just keep coming in.

[an0n]

WTF?! When I was like 12, me and my school-chums used to sit at the back of the English class and 'read the articles' in Real Wives.

The only thing the teacher ever said was "Pay attention!".

[Drew]

thats the schools policy. they could ban/allow hardcore pr0n if they wanted to. it could go either way. this school chose its standards. its not censorship or else that magazine would have never been avalable in the first place. its the school saying, "hey we dont want softpr0n in our schools.", which it has ever right to do. No prinicple in there right mind would let a noticed playboy(or the like) stay in school. They, omg, disiplined the kid, big deal.  
Hey look on the news guys.
Theres evidence that the colombine shootings could have been prevented if the father stepped up and told the kids to stop their actions.  By the looks of it, the school is laying down the law to the kids, so to speak.

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Drew
thats the schools policy. they could ban/allow hardcore pr0n if they wanted to. it could go either way. this school chose its standards. its not censorship or else that magazine would have never been avalable in the first place. its the school saying, "hey we dont want softpr0n in our schools.", which it has ever right to do. No prinicple in there right mind would let a noticed playboy(or the like) stay in school. They, omg, disiplined the kid, big deal.  
Hey look on the news guys.
Theres evidence that the colombine shootings could have been prevented if the father stepped up and told the kids to stop their actions.  By the looks of it, the school is laying down the law to the kids, so to speak.

Firstly, it wasn;t playboy.  It wasn't even page 3 of the Sun.  The content was basically the same as you would see on and advert for suntan lotion or something.

Secondly, the job of education is not to censor or decide moral standards.  That's the job of the parents.  It's a short step from this to saying that '1984' is banned.

Thirdly, the punishment was totally disproportionate to the 'crime'.  3 days suspension for bringing in a magazine?  At the age of 12?  Hell, i bet there's no-one on this forum ('cept maybe CP) who wouldn't have done the same thing.  Not only that, the school compeltely ignored the parents response.

Finally,. this is completely unrelated to columbine.  there is no prarallel or relationship atall, bar the fact that both involve a school.   to suggest a connection is downright idiotic.  In fact, the example you cited blames parental neglect, rather than school neglect - which also serves to show the boundaries of responsibility.

[Knight Templar]

Meh, I have a few teachers that would read it along with me.

[Bobboau]

actualy it's a prety big step, a kid bringing a book of immages of atractive females in very little tightly fitting clothes and shall we say extreemly agreeable positions, is, and I hope you will agree with me, nothing like a litterary work of the magnatude of 1984. it is a thing made for one thing (to make money yhrough exploiting men's stupid fsination with) sex. now it may not be the school's right to choose right and wrong but they sould be helping the parents who's job it is to make these desisions, and it's a fair bet to assume that most parents wouldn't want there children to be dragging around a porno mag at school, so if a school finds a kid doing so it's enierly corect for them to assume that the parents wouldn't approve (simply becase that is by far the majority reaction). furthermore, it is at the very least  a distraction, the children are not going to be learning anything if there sitting in the back of the class looking at a porno mag. and finaly you have to take into consideration the other children who are being exposed to material that there parent could reasonably be assumed to not want them exposed to, sure there going to be getting exposed to it, and much worse, but the schools are not there to act as a porno distribution center, thats what the internet is for.now that being said, a 3 day suspention is a bit on the harsh side, but I don't think it falls outside the grounds of what the principal had available, and I doubt the kid is realy suffering

[Knight Templar]

Well, another key factor was that he's in the 6th grade, which partially justifies it I think, but nothing past taking the magaznie away.

[Bobboau]

well if I were the principal, that's probly what I would have done, that and calling his mom, but I don't think this was such a horable 'cencorship'

[Solatar]

I think the punishment was a little too extreme. Certainly it should be taken away, maybe his parents called. Maybe make him write lines or whatever their local form of nonserious punishment is.

EDIT: But it doesn't say anything about his previous rule breaking record. He could have a pretty bad record, and maybe this one just pushed him over the edge?

[Taristin]

...that was just lame. People in charge are forcing their views on others once again... That Sports Illustrated wasn't porn, It's women in bathing suits. He could see that at any decent beach or in most TV/Movies/magazines.  Hell, the advertisements in the Daily News are more explicit than that.

Prudes. They suck.

[Thorn]

Bob.. I agree with you for the most part.. I think...
But could you please use capitalization and possibly paragraph breaks? A post that long is very hard to read without it.

[Setekh]

*echoes Thorn*

If I were the principal, I probably would have told the parents about it first. However, we also have to realise that the punishment is just as much for the sake of the student's peers - if they think something like that is perfectly acceptable (in the context, I think it's a little out of line) and goes unpunished, that will just cause more of the same problems.

It's one thing to say he's forcing their views on others, but you know, that kid is probably easily able to transfer to another school if he wants. This principal ought to be able to run the school as he sees fit, otherwise the parents are forcing their views on him just as much. I don't think anyone is forced to go to these schools - there are plenty of them around in that area.

[Nico]

Originally posted by Bobboau
actualy it's a prety big step, a kid bringing a book of immages of atractive females in [blablabla] it falls outside the grounds of what the principal had available, and I doubt the kid is realy suffering

You're right: we should help them understand that being attracted to beautiful women is stupid and wrong.
Wasn't school supposed to prepare you to being an adult? But I forgot that's America, puritanism and all.
The only viable punition was that:
You take the mag, and throw it away. Now the kid won't bring one back again, coz he doesn't want his mags to be thrown away. Basic education thing. Too daaaaaaaaaaaaarn complicated I guess, tho.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Nico


You're right: we should help them understand that being attracted to beautiful women is stupid and wrong.
Wasn't school supposed to prepare you to being an adult? But I forgot that's America, puritanism and all.
The only viable punition was that:
You take the mag, and throw it away. Now the kid won't bring one back again, coz he doesn't want his mags to be thrown away. Basic education thing. Too daaaaaaaaaaaaarn complicated I guess, tho.

You got there just before I was about to say it. Confiscation of the magazine and maybe a letter to the parents is as far as this should have gone.