Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thong-Wearing Teens Kicked Out Of Dance
KGTV via Yahoo ^ | april 30 2002 | KGTV

Posted on 04/30/2002 4:30:34 AM PDT by KneelBeforeZod

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 601-616 next last
To: Hemingway's Ghost
But you're right: it is a sucker bet, and I'll feel a moment of guilt when I collect my 2 bills.

I'm sure you'll get over it pretty quickly ;)

201 posted on 04/30/2002 7:31:05 AM PDT by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: all
oops, poorly worded ....

Interstate Commerce rationalization

202 posted on 04/30/2002 7:34:37 AM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
and I have yet to see what you describe

My thoughts exactly. Aside from a little more butt cheek, a thong is no more "revealing" than regular french cut or similar undies. They're not granny britches, but unless they're from Fredericks and missing some fabric, they'll cover as much as a skimpy bikini.

203 posted on 04/30/2002 7:34:56 AM PDT by xsrdx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: tomkat
if my otherwise well-behaved son showed up for the prom only to be met at the door by some wannabe nazi prick demanding to see his underwear, or *gasp* lack thereof, i'd be sorely tempted toward sanctioning my kids decking of said (likely lascivious) perv.

Oh, is your son likely to drop his pants on the dance floor? Remember she was checking the underwear of girls in short skirts. Want to bet in the past at dances there had been a lot of flashing thongs on the dance floor? If you want a real eye opener go to a high school dance and watch the gyrations going on. Simulated coitus, it gets pretty graphic. Sounds like an attempt to try and enforce a little decorum by the school, carried out in a clumsy manner.
204 posted on 04/30/2002 7:35:08 AM PDT by Kozak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Old Fud
If the daughter had come home in rough shape because her scantily clad privates proved to be to much of a temptation for a couple of football players, Mom would be mad too. And lawsuits would ensue.

EXACTLY

Suzi Creamcheese wears a thong & miniskirt to a school dance and gets gang-felt-up on the dance floor? Parents sue the school district for failing to keep such skanky activity from happening.

Vice Principal makes damn sure Suzi Creamcheese isn't wearing a thong? Parents sue the school district for violating Suzikins' "right" to be a "bang me" billboard for young adolescent boys.

The parents are the Mk 1 Mod 0 rockheads here, not the school.


205 posted on 04/30/2002 7:35:08 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
Once the Skirt reaches a certain level, that act of dancing itself, makes the underwear Outerwear.

If the skirt is too short, then the school should ask the girls to leave, or to change into a longer dress and return. There is absolutely no legitimate rational for lifting the dress to see what they otherwise could not see. You authoritarians are are dead wrong on this.

The State mandates that kids go to school and then, once there, deprives them of their Constitutional 4th Amendment Right. This further deprives the adolescents there right to recourse and rememdy. Yes, the Constitution applies to "We the People" not just "We the Adults." If the Constitution did not apply to everyone, then could the authoritarians not also deprive children of their Constitutionally protected Right to life and liberty?

You authoritarians never cease to amaze me with the imposition of your private will over another's protected Rights!

206 posted on 04/30/2002 7:35:24 AM PDT by BillofRights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
More evidence that we are no longer a superpower. 4 posted on 4/30/02 4:36 AM Pacific by cardinal4 [

DITTO !!

207 posted on 04/30/2002 7:36:45 AM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KneelBeforeZod
Legal precedents require proof of more than a pair of lasses in such undergarments. After all...
TWO THONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT!
208 posted on 04/30/2002 7:37:24 AM PDT by JAWs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: christine11
uh oh! ;)

LOL, girlfriend. Your secret's safe with us!

209 posted on 04/30/2002 7:40:00 AM PDT by Quilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
My disgust is with the process. If this vice principal really did lift up young girls skirts in front of others, that is absolutely wrong and demeaning.

Our daughter dressed modestly, but the thought of her being touched by any school official, in a public forum, would certainly incur my wrath.

Was there a dress code outlining the length of skirts and/or what type of underwear is acceptable?

In law enforcement parlance, her actions constitute a strip search by merely exposing the students' underwear.

I'm not ready to give school officials that authority without specific probable cause and parental consent to do so.

To be graphic, did she check to ensure that the boys in attendance were wearing underwear at all. During a slow dance with an attractive young woman, I suspect the boy without underwear would be showing much more than the girl with whom he was dancing.

210 posted on 04/30/2002 7:40:25 AM PDT by EODGUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: BillofRights
The State mandates that kids go to school and then, once there, deprives them of their Constitutional 4th Amendment Right. This further deprives the adolescents there right to recourse and rememdy. Yes, the Constitution applies to "We the People" not just "We the Adults." If the Constitution did not apply to everyone, then could the authoritarians not also deprive children of their Constitutionally protected Right to life and liberty?

Wonderful speech, but completely wrong. See posts 68 and 78.

211 posted on 04/30/2002 7:41:22 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte
Like handing jewels to an inocent child.....
212 posted on 04/30/2002 7:42:05 AM PDT by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Kozak
Remember she was checking the underwear of girls in short skirts.

The remedy for girls wearing skirts that are too short is to send them home, not to grope and molest them. If lifting their skirts and eye-balling their "privates" is okay, then why stop there? What else can they do that is okay with you? Where does it stop and who decides? That is why we have a Constitution and Rights to privacy -- so authoritarians like you aren't the ones making the decisions for everyone else.

213 posted on 04/30/2002 7:43:51 AM PDT by BillofRights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: riley1992
ping
214 posted on 04/30/2002 7:45:25 AM PDT by NoCurrentFreeperByThatName
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Domestic Church
It is a matter of teaching virtue and chastity and not be duplicitous.

I'm not sure what kind of underwear one wears has to do with Virtue and chastity.
but if it makes you feel better, then by all means force your moral authority on all of us.
215 posted on 04/30/2002 7:45:54 AM PDT by vin-one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: no one in particular
To be graphic, did she check to ensure that the boys in attendance ...

or, even more to the point, what of a young woman who's
skirt failed to meet this fascist's definition of 'proper length',
but was in fact wearing 'grannie drawers' underneath ?

would the public humiliation of her skirt being arbitrarily raised have been any less palpable ?

216 posted on 04/30/2002 7:46:52 AM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
I have a simple solution to this whole mess:

No dances.

Seriously. Why should a school be holding dances?

217 posted on 04/30/2002 7:47:11 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: scholar;sultan88;mudboy slim
Sweet Jesus!!

Now there's a job I *think* I could execute with perfection; up to (& maybe during) the massive coronary...

Yea; checking the thong undies on sweet, nubile, hard body-teens & accurately recording color & style isn't something entrusted to just anyone.

...ain't that right, Mud? :o)

218 posted on 04/30/2002 7:47:16 AM PDT by Landru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EODGUY
sorry, didn't mean to exclude you on 216 ...
219 posted on 04/30/2002 7:49:30 AM PDT by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: JAWs
Ubi ubi est sub ubi?
220 posted on 04/30/2002 7:50:19 AM PDT by freebilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 601-616 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson