My friend got expelled for serving alcohol at his house.

[rmet4nzkx]

Boy, you're on a roll tonight, Ms. Cupcake. Did you take my advice and open the wine?

I'm not short, I'm vertically challenged.

Yes, I did have a "Strawberry Delight" Malt liquor a cross between wine and beer, berry tasty My knee is better too

I prefer "dimiutive stature" because it infers height, whereas "vertically challenged" implies a limit.

 

[seniorjudge]

I got a kindhearted woman
do anything in this world for me.
But these evil-hearted women
man, they will not let me be.


--Kind Hearted Woman Blues (take 1)

Robert Johnson

 

[rmet4nzkx]

I got a kindhearted woman
do anything in this world for me.
But these evil-hearted women
man, they will not let me be.


--Kind Hearted Woman Blues (take 1)

Robert Johnson

Judgy,
Hopefully I am counted among the former and not the later.
A trip to the sidebar is required.......

 

[cbg]

You have a point, Ms. Cupcake, but the limit is so obvious (with me, anyway )that I prefer to rub their noses in it.

 

[NattensMadrigal]

You are literate and articulate. Your posts are a pleasure to read (even if I may not agree with them).

Why thank you. I appreciate it.

So it's okay with you for him to have to take responsibility for his actions, as long as the cops are involved? But if they aren't, the school should just allow him to violate the law and take no action of their own?

My opinion stands.

In my opinion, in matters that do not involve the school, punishment by the authorities should precede punishment by the school (and apparently this is the way it works in public schools). One reason for this is the "innocent until proven guilty" component of legal punishment. If the cops had busted in his house and seen everyone drinking, any punishment would be justifiable. But when the snitch arrived at my friend's house, the case of beer had not been opened. For all he knew, we could have left it in its unopened state. But after he alerted the dean of the alcohol, the burden of proof seemed to lie on the accused rather than on the accuser, and this leaves a foul taste in my mouth. It seems that any kid with a good track record can now fabricate some immoral action done by a student he dislikes and succeed in ridding the student from the school with minimal due process.

What I said is true and was meant to be sarcastic to make a point which is lost on you.

Christian Brothers as you know, operate a number of excellent schools and colleges. For years, the order financed these schools in part with the proceeds and profits of their wine making business. Wine flowed at official functions a fringe benefit, however after many years of concern for the problems associated with alcohol, they divested themselves from the business and developed and maintained strict alcohol policies. Perhaps your school has adopted such a philosophy especially since a high school is responsible for the nurturing of minors into hopefully, law abiding citizens.

You are young, it is not that you learn to be responsible for your behavior. A party is a gathering or celebration of any size. Your philosophy. "It's only wrong if you get caught by the police" is not defensable.

Grow up.

If a point has been lost on me, please elaborate. What was it you were trying to say that I apparently missed?

We obviously have different definitions of a party. The inclusion of the phrase "of any size" renders your 'party' definition a bit ambiguous. Am I at a party when I gather together with my family for dinner? Am I partying when hang out with a large group of friends? At any rate, the dean is in agreeance with myself when it comes to the "party" status of Sunday's events. (Ah, but this is such an unimportant part of the issue. Let us try not to devote any further attention to the definition of a party.)

You set up a straw man when you say that I claim "it's only wrong if you get caught by the police". I have established that I do not believe that underage drinking is either legal or morally right. Please try to read the whole of my post so I am not forced to reiterate myself once more. Finally, I hate to bring attention to a relatively unimportant issue, but inaccurate spelling is one of my pet peeves. "Defensible" is the correct spelling. (I expect to be greeted with corrections of my own spelling and grammar, and I welcome them. If corrections are brought forth in a respectful manner, I value the opportunity to improve my own spelling and grammar; that is my aim in correcting others, so hopefully you won't take it personally.)

In closing I would like to say that I have no hard feelings for any of you (though I suspect that the feeling is not reciprocated). I rather enjoy arguing, and the subject of this particular one has provided me with some personal motivation. Thanks to all who participate, but please, don't just write me off as some idiot youngin' who only needs to mature a bit more before his views fit your own.

 

[stealth2]

One point that occurred to me is that since it was a cast party, an argument could legitimately be made for it to be an extension of a school activity.

 

[seniorjudge]

Why thank you. I appreciate it.

In my opinion, in matters that do not involve the school, punishment by the authorities should precede punishment by the school (and apparently this is the way it works in public schools). One reason for this is the "innocent until proven guilty" component of legal punishment. If the cops had busted in his house and seen everyone drinking, any punishment would be justifiable. But when the snitch arrived at my friend's house, the case of beer had not been opened. For all he knew, we could have left it in its unopened state. But after he alerted the dean of the alcohol, the burden of proof seemed to lie on the accused rather than on the accuser, and this leaves a foul taste in my mouth. It seems that any kid with a good track record can now fabricate some immoral action done by a student he dislikes and succeed in ridding the student from the school with minimal due process.


If a point has been lost on me, please elaborate. What was it you were trying to say that I apparently missed?

We obviously have different definitions of a party. The inclusion of the phrase "of any size" renders your 'party' definition a bit ambiguous. Am I at a party when I gather together with my family for dinner? Am I partying when hang out with a large group of friends? At any rate, the dean is in agreeance with myself when it comes to the "party" status of Sunday's events. (Ah, but this is such an unimportant part of the issue. Let us try not to devote any further attention to the definition of a party.)

You set up a straw man when you say that I claim "it's only wrong if you get caught by the police". I have established that I do not believe that underage drinking is either legal or morally right. Please try to read the whole of my post so I am not forced to reiterate myself once more. Finally, I hate to bring attention to a relatively unimportant issue, but inaccurate spelling is one of my pet peeves. "Defensible" is the correct spelling. (I expect to be greeted with corrections of my own spelling and grammar, and I welcome them. If corrections are brought forth in a respectful manner, I value the opportunity to improve my own spelling and grammar; that is my aim in correcting others, so hopefully you won't take it personally.)

In closing I would like to say that I have no hard feelings for any of you (though I suspect that the feeling is not reciprocated). I rather enjoy arguing, and the subject of this particular one has provided me with some personal motivation. Thanks to all who participate, but please, don't just write me off as some idiot youngin' who only needs to mature a bit more before his views fit your own.

I think we have budding lawyer in our midst.

Any high school girl that uses the term and concept of "straw man" in an argument impresses me.

OP, I haven't agreed with anything you have said but I suspect there are fistfights in the chambers of the Supreme Court, so that's no big deal.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

The point of this forum is advice, not to argue with with you. You think you know everything and have yet to learn that is a false assumption.

Go to out to eat with your family when you ask the host/hostess for seating, what are you called?????? A party of x number.

The number of people at the party or whether or not it is a party is not relevant, what is relevant is the fact that a school related activity was associated with underage consumption and MIP. The private school is entitled to their rules and public schools also may discipline students, so there is no discrimination. I know of public school students who were kicked off the team for mooning motorests in a PRIVATE vehicle following a meet or bought "no-doze" pills thinking they were something else.

The lesson to be learned is that under age consumption of alcohol or other illegal substances is not apppropriate and there are consequences.

Hopefully there will not be a next time and if there is that the snitch will call the cops on all of you so someone will drum it through your thick skulls

 

[ENASNI]

Boy I wish I wihs

i sure swhs I mean wish I dint stop at that party of 5 or 6 or 65 to say HIGH before I came here.. so I could seee what you were talkin about... but the officer said I needed to come strait home..hic..

wassup..
wattdid I miss.?

 

[NattensMadrigal]

I think we have budding lawyer in our midst.

Any high school girl that uses the term and concept of "straw man" in an argument impresses me.

OP, I haven't agreed with anything you have said but I suspect there are fistfights in the chambers of the Supreme Court, so that's no big deal.

Thanks for the comliment, I appreciate it. However I am inclined to point out that I am a guy. I don't know where you got the idea of me being a girl. Anyway, my dad is constantly involved in religious debates, so I have much practice in argumentation and know of the common fallacies used in debates.

Are you, or anyone on this board, lawyers, judges, or the like? I'd like to know where my compliments are coming from.

The point of this forum is advice, not to argue with with you. You think you know everything and have yet to learn that is a false assumption.

Go to out to eat with your family when you ask the host/hostess for seating, what are you called?????? A party of x number.

The number of people at the party or whether or not it is a party is not relevant, what is relevant is the fact that a school related activity was associated with underage consumption and MIP. The private school is entitled to their rules and public schools also may discipline students, so there is no discrimination. I know of public school students who were kicked off the team for mooning motorests in a PRIVATE vehicle following a meet or bought "no-doze" pills thinking they were something else.

The lesson to be learned is that under age consumption of alcohol or other illegal substances is not apppropriate and there are consequences.

Hopefully there will not be a next time and if there is that the snitch will call the cops on all of you so someone will drum it through your thick skulls

If the point of the forum is advice and not arguing, then I thank you all for going beyond your call of duty and providing me with an enjoyable argument. You say that I believe myself to be all-knowing; I reply that my ego, while quite large, does not reach such astronomical heights. I definitely acknowledge my ignorance in the larger scale, but I have not been convinced of it in this particular issue.

I was referring to eating with my family at home--which I do almost every weekday--when I mentioned gathering together with my family. But we can look at your example. It is true that a group of people is called a "Party of 'X'" at a restaurant, but let's be realistic--what person says that s/he is going to a party when s/he eats with his/her family, whether out or in the home? We're hardly splitting hairs here; there is a mighty difference between a "party of 5" eating at dinner and high school/college parties. But as I established--and as you agree--the accuracy in labeling Sunday's events as a "party" is trivial.

When I posted this topic, I was ignorant as to the extent of a private school's power regarding the private affairs of their students. Like I said I was used to public schools being unable to take action on their students, and I didn't expect much difference for private schools. Since the creation this topic I have been enlightened, so there's no need of telling me that schools have rules.

The lesson that you mention is one I have learned long before this week (And not from getting in trouble before--I haven't.) I live in a Catholic family and have been taught morals from a young age. I acknowledge that what I do is wrong, but there isn't a human being on earth that is not a sinner.

Well there probably won't be a next time in this guy's house. But if there is, we'll follow the dean's advice and be more selective with whom we invite. Like I said, he said that he knows we've probably killed several cases, and this itself was not grounds for expulsion. The problem according to him was the parents finding out and blaming the school. So the school is not so much concerned with the morality of their students as with the parents' perception of this morality.

 

[Shay-Pari'e]

(QUOTE)But if there is, we'll follow the dean's advice and be more selective with whom we invite. (QUOTE).

HMMM, and you said your friend had the party with two cases of beer. Your a smart kid, but not smart enough to let that one slip.

Best of luck to you,

I do love to see someone articulate the way you do. My son does it daily, and it pisses me off to no end.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

If the point of the forum is advice and not arguing, then I thank you all for going beyond your call of duty and providing me with an enjoyable argument. You say that I believe myself to be all-knowing; I reply that my ego, while quite large, does not reach such astronomical heights. I definitely acknowledge my ignorance in the larger scale, but I have not been convinced of it in this particular issue.

You have demonstrated your ego defcits rather well thus far.

I was referring to eating with my family at home--which I do almost every weekday....... It is true that a group of people is called a "Party of 'X'" at a restaurant, but let's be realistic...... there is a mighty difference between a "party of 5" eating at dinner and high school/college parties. But as I established--and as you agree--the accuracy in labeling Sunday's events as a "party" is trivial.

THAT WAS NOT MY POINT, MY POINT WAS THAT OF REVELANCE, IT WAS VIOLATION OF THE LAW WHICH WAS BROKEN, NOT THAT SIZE MATTERS!


Since the creation this topic I have been enlightened, so there's no need of telling me that schools have rules.

.......
Well there probably won't be a next time in this guy's house. But if there is, we'll follow the dean's advice and be more selective with whom we invite. Like I said, he said that he knows we've probably killed several cases, and this itself was not grounds for expulsion. The problem according to him was the parents finding out and blaming the school. So the school is not so much concerned with the morality of their students as with the parents' perception of this morality.

OOOOOOPS you believe that they call it HIGH school because it's OK to be high? So it is your belief that it is only wrong if you get caught, some morals you have learned so far. The snitch's only mistake was NOT calling the police and getting everyone busted.

 

[seniorjudge]

(QUOTE)I do love to see someone articulate the way you do. My son does it daily, and it pisses me off to no end.

Wonder where that comes from?!

OP, my compliments were non-gender specific, sir.