The Honor CodeFollow

Yes, students at a public school have constitutional rights.

That being said, constitutional rights do not include the right to participate in voluntary extra-curricular activities. Those are privileges and can have additional restrictions placed on participation, similar to driving (in my state refusal to submit to blood/breath/urine test on suspicion of drunk driving results in automatic suspension of your license).

I have no problem, what so ever, with students who sign pledges facing the consequence for not holding up their end, even in a case like this, and no sympathy for parents who can't raise their kids to understand what it means to sign a contract.*

*Yes, I realize this may not have been a binding legal contract, but the principle of the thing still applies. It is a commitment by one party to live up to the expectations of another and provides (or should) a valuable lesson for later in life.

Not til you give cpr to two dead fat guys.

I remember a case a few years ago where a bunch of players at a school got suspended from their teams due to facebook or myspace pictures of them holding red cups.

So the students had a HUGE party that weekend... with no alcohol. The police gave tests to every single kid at the party, and all came back negative. And Facebook was plastered with pictures of them and their cups.

The school dropped the suspension--forced to accept that there was no way they could prove that the kids were drinking alcohol.

And, to be fair, they have a valid point. Yes, is it likely that the players were drinking alcohol? Sure. But it is in no way sure (of course, picture captions and comments on profiles that aren't private help ***** you). I don't really ever drink, and I have a few friends who don't either. We'll still go to friend's parties though. If someone posted pictures on Facebook, people who didn't know me would totally think I was drinking alcohol.

I think that is the biggest problem with these cases. I have no issues with the agreement or the suspension, given they are sure she was drinking. If she was holding a beer can in the pic, sure. If she was holding a cup, it's a much weaker argument.

But yes, people really need to teach kids these days about watching what they put online. And Facebook should really default to "friends-only" for everything. I'm fairly certain its current default is completely public.

Holy crap, yes, this. I kinda sorta almost got in trouble with my new girlfriend's family because my pictures were not "Friends Only" like I thought (I guess it goes album by album). Apparently her father was looking at my pics; luckily for me the ones he could see were not nearly as bad as others, but still it made me freak out because I thought I had set everything to private.

Now I know I have it right and only friends can see everything.

Edit: I kept my political views open to everyone, just they know I'm a crazy liberal.

Edited, Apr 12th 2010 10:57am by LockeColeMA

Nothing too bad, mostly pics of me at parties, or with girls who likes to show off their cleavage. More embarrassing than traumatic; not the classiest pics for your girlfriend's father to see, especially since we've never met in person.

When facebook changed its privacy settings without my knowledge (I hadn't used the site in several months), my parents had a laugh at a drunk, and then eventually passed out on the floor, Sweetums.

Edited, Apr 12th 2010 10:51am by Sweetums

I used to care, but I don't really anymore. They can enjoy my constant barrage of absolutely nothing.

What Joph said.

So we're all agreed that students do not have a "right" to participate in school-run extracurricular activities? Just checking the pulse here.

Yup.

They don't have the right--it's certainly a privilege. However, I differs somewhat from classic definitions. Your permission to take part isn't really earned (with sports it is, perhaps, but not with clubs). Rather, it is readmission that must be earned after your privilege is stripped.

Just always kinda annoyed me how my school always went on and on about how these things were privileges that had to be earned when they... well... didn't.

Plus, it can't be a right. Then your school would be violating your rights if they didn't offer extracurriculars. I think they SHOULD, of course, but I certainly don't think they HAVE to. Especially now that it's a choice between firing teachers and cutting programs. One's unfortunate, sure, but the other is someone losing their livelihood, which is way worse.

[EDIT]

Joph knows gbaji well. :P

Edited, Apr 13th 2010 12:58am by idiggory