I cannot reverse the thought process involved in an over-simplification.
I have said before, liberals argue until they prove their premise and then will not go beyond it to the logical outcome. Once they come to their preconceived conclusion...the argument is proven; according to them.
I’m afraid I do not understand what you mean, and frankly find your statements insulting.
You asserted that the parents should be prosecuted, if indeed a crime has been committed. I pointed out that the school was doing this without parental notification or consent. You then fell back on the “parents fund it” talking point.
From that point of view, every property owner in the school district is liable.
Then you accuse me (apparently) of over simplifying it, and failing to follow through to a logical conclusion?
Please identify the over-simplification involved in pointing out that prosecuting parents for something they didn’t do is wrong.