There have been two stories in the news that have recently ignited my ire as I view Americans and their understanding of their "inalienable rights." Few things anger me more than people who feel they are entitled to something that is clearly a privilege or reward.
It's my prom!
Two girls from Dennis MA were told that their prom dates were not allowed to attend the prom because the men had criminal records. The school discovered this by doing background checks on all non-students who were planning on attending this school sponsored event. (Students are required to request permission from school authorities for any non-pupils they are planning on bringing to this event.)
Of all the non-students that were planning to attend, two were denied access. The girls (and their mothers) were indignant that the school would dare deny these two boyfriends (19 and 20 year olds) from attending the big dance. Did I mention that their criminal records contained drug and alcohol charges?! That's what I want at my kid's prom. Two adults (what non-high schooler actually wants to go to a prom anyway?) with drug and alcohol problems!
The two students (a 17 year old who is dating the 20 year old, and an 18 year old with the 19 year old) have recently won a victory in this issue. The school board agreed to review the situation and suspend the ban until the issue has been resolved. As they will not be able conclude this investigation before the prom, the druggies, I mean dates, will be allowed to attend.
Investigation? What is there to investigate? It is a school function. The school has the right to deny anyone they choose. Why make the students ask permission if there isn't the possibility of denial? What reason would there be to deny someone other than a criminal record for controlled substances?
Let's say the school allows these kids in and some students get busted with drugs or alcohol and it turns out the "dates" brought it in? Is there not outrage? Are parents calling the school asking why these people were allowed to attend? You better believe they are because some "investigative reporter" would uncover their records.
So the school has to keep such substances out of the prom, they can't decline the entrance of people who'd be likely to bring it in, so they have to search people as they come in! Of course, This is a relatively wealthy area and parents wouldn't stand for their teens being searched before attending the prom! (One of the articles I read said that the 18 year old may hire a lawyer. the 18 year old, not her family, or mother; the student!)
And speaking of parents: Why are the mothers of these students trying to get the criminals into the prom? Shouldn't they be a bit concerned that their teenage daughters are dating men with records?! I guess not. They really only seem to be concerned about the $500 dollars they spent on their daughters dress, limos, and tickets. Great message you're sending, mom!
One of the local State Representatives said, "This is still the United States and everyone should be given an opportunity to participate." Well, not really, sir (Atsalis, D-Barnstable). See, the school is running the event and they can deny anyone they like. And even if you were right, these men lost the opportunity when they decided to break the law.
And the correct "right" falls to: The School.
It's my lunch!
A middle school has recently sent out a list of things that parents can and cannot include in their children's bagged lunches. Many parents (of course) are livid saying they have the right to send what ever they like. Well, I agree, to a point. The reason for the parameters is the high number of peanut allergic pupils the school has. (Any resonance, Apu?)
People who have peanut allergies could die from exposure to peanuts. Perhaps the parents could keep their allergic children out of public school. But they have a right to an education, don't they?
So let's weigh these rights: The right to live and get an education vs the right to send homemade cookies with peanut butter chips in my kids lunch. Do I need to say it?
The correct "right" falls to: The School.
Just because you want something, or don't like a situation, doesn't mean you have a right to it. America loves individuality, but there comes a point where we all have a responsibility to the community that over shadows our own desires.
(Hey Nathaniel, this blog is part of my responsibility to the community!) But it's all just my opinion.
5 comments:
Thanks for speaking up for the little ones who can't eat peanuts. Apu Jr. appreciates your advocacy on his behalf.
You are totally right on about the prom! What I want to know now is that since all of this has been publicized, how come parents of other attendees aren't protesting that adult criminals are being allowed at the prom? (Obviously, I won't bother mentioning that the parents of the girls involved need a slap in the head)
Pertaining to the school lunch, since so many kids now have individualized diets, I do think that parents should have the freedom to send what they see fit, especially since they are already choosing to send lunch instead of allowing their child to have school lunch. When I was in elementary school, the school made an announcement to the children (nothing was sent home to parents) that Halloween candy would not be allowed as part of our lunches. Since I'm a vegeterian with very picky eating habits, my mother always packed my lunch. A few days after Halloween, she packed my lunch with my salad, fruit, and yogurt. As with every other day, she also included a two pack of Reeses' peanut butter cups. She always sent desert in an effort to fatten me up, since I was such a light eater and a bit under weight. One of the other kids saw my desert and reported me to the cafeteria monitor. I tried to explain that it was not Halloween candy, just the desert that my mother had packed with my lunch as part of my meal. It was confiscated just the same, and my mom was quite pissed, and I think, rightfully so.
I do love PB, and Ali, I'm sorry that your PB Cups were confiscated. However, children who are allergic to peanuts are seriously allergic. There is no middle ground with this allergy. If I eat a Reese PB cup, have the PB on my hands, open a door, and a peanut allergic child touches the same door, getting the oil on thier hands and then on their sandwich (or whatever) they would (at the very least) have to go to the hospital. There is no epi-pen for this and it does kill. If it were something like lactose intolerance, that's a different situation. I think that peanut allergies are even triggered if the oil comes in contact with the skin, and it doesn't have to be very much.
Here's a good resource for the severity and triggers of a peanut allergy:
http://www.allergicchild.com/peanut_allergy.htm
I too was livid that the Herald was irresponsible enough to side with the students. I thought it was simply because "Prom Bomb" made a better headline than "No Druggies at the Booggie" or "Menace in Dennis: Two criminals ousted from Prom guest list."
Ok, I here you on the prom madness. Definitely out of control perspectives. But, let's take a closer look at the PB issue. I've heard all of the peanut-oil concerns... so I raise this question... should we - Americans - be allowed to eat peanut-butter anywhere in public? We go to the grocery store, we buy a pack of Reese's cups, we touch the handle of our grocery cart and next thing you know the next mom with her kids and that same cart - bam - a trip to the hospital. Ok, so we the candy in our car between stores. And we get out at Walmart and pick up a cart -- bam - next mom off to the hospital. OK, so our kid eat PB&J at home and doesn't wash their hands after lunch and we go to the park -- bam - we've contaminated the park. It doesn't make sense at some point. It seems these allergic kids would be dropping like flies. Meanwhile, let's say we politely obey the school regulations that say we don't send our kids with PB&J -- here's the real world question -- how do you get a kid who only eats PB&J sandwiches to eat something different for lunch? suggestions welcomed!
Post a Comment