Posted on 04/30/2002 4:30:34 AM PDT by KneelBeforeZod
Thong-Wearing Teens Kicked Out Of Dance
A group of parents are calling for the resignation of Rancho Bernardo High School's vice principal, claiming she enforced underwear checks at a school dance, 10News reported.
The dance occurred Friday and vice principal Rita Wilson turned away girls who were wearing thongs, the parent said.
Kim Teal is among the several parents angry with Wilson (pictured, right).
"First thing (my daughter) said when she got into the car was, 'Mom, it was horrible last night. You have to fight this,'" Teal told 10News.
According to parent Alane Garvik, girls who arrived at the dance wearing short skirts were immediately asked: "What kind of underwear do you have on?"
When Garvik's daughter red-facedly announced that she was wearing thong underwear she was told to "go home and put on appropriate underwear," according to Garvik.
Teal's daughter made it in and claims to have witnessed faculty lifting the skirts of girls to assure that the offending underwear was going nowhere near the dance floor.
"Well, I just saw ... a line of people and the vice principal, Mrs. Wilson, she was checking to see what the girls were wearing under their dresses. And she was literally lifting up their skirts and embarrassing them in front of everyone else," one student told 10News.
Parents and students have placed the blame on Wilson, for spearheading the thong underwear checks, even though there is nothing in the school dress code against them.
"It's not their right to know what kind of underwear these kids have," Garvik told 10News.
10News contacted school officials, who all declined to go on camera. But Principal Paul Gentle did say that he is "looking into the situation."
Parents are now asking for Wilson to resign.
Gentle said that even while enforcing the school dress code, it is not proper procedure to ask students what they are wearing underneath their clothes.
He told 10News that he plans to meet with parents sometime this week.
Distributing condoms and teaching sex-ed is a violation of PARENTAL RIGHTS. Government schools have no authority to do that. But they also cannot tell parents how to dress their minor children. That is a violation of parental rights also. Hell, mandatory public education is a violation of parental rights in and of itself.
The community has no right to tell me what kind of under garments to wear. There may be exceptions depending on what kind of outer clothing is used e.g. a see through blouse. But to do a general underwear check is absolutely not within the school's scope or power.
Perhaps the father of a couple of sons out there might let you know what his sons say about and think about girls wearing underwear like that.
Now tell me, since you are so proud of your decison to buy your teen daughters string bikini underwear, would you be willing to wash them and then hang them on the outside cloth line to dry? Out where the neighbors can see them?
Would you be willing to suggest theses as a gift to anyone who asked you what they could get the girls for thier birthdays?
When I dress in my work clothes, with hammer and hammer hanger, I feel like a carpenter. When I put on a suit and visit somene in the hospital, I feel like visiting clergy. When I have on my orange and am carrying a rifle through the woods in the fall, I feel like a deer hunter. And when I put on my Sunday suit and stand behind the pulpit, I feel like a preacher.
How do you think your girls feel when they put on a string for underpants? A lady?
Alas
This pro-ctive "up against the wall MF!" attitude is one sure to scar the memories of an important social event like this one.
The Vice principal has a thong sized brain.
you are attempting, none to nimbly, to avoid the main issue here.
what of the young woman who, while wearing a thong, also chose to wear a knee-length, yet 'billowy' skirt ?
in the course of a dance, while executing some kind of spin step, the billowing of said skirt exposes the evil thong.
further, assume that the girl in the mini/grannie drawers combo is a wallflower type, and would have stayed true to form throughout the dance.
why was one subjected to public humiliation and the other was not ?
We're not playing "suppose" here; we're talking about a specific, individual case. Your hypothetical is only a hypothetical.
The answer is -- the principal's behavior was unacceptable and the case is actionable in a court of law. It's a clear violation of the 4th Amendment. It constitutes an illegal search and a violation of privacy rights.
You've got your personal opinion and nothing else---no law, no precedent, nothing. All USSC precedent, in fact, seems to suggest the exactly opposite of what you think is right.
they did a pretty fair job in the latter 1770s ...
you might consider one relatively consistent personality.
it's generally the trademark of a rational human adult...
subliminal BoR ping - LOL
Hey---I'm sorry you can't grasp a few basic principles of constitutional law. Not that I'm an expert, but I certainly didn't fall asleep in class when they were talking about this kind of stuff.
Thongs are a practical choice. And nobody's business but their own. If they choose to make a display of their rear ends on the dance floor, that's another matter; but pre-emptive strikes on underwaer are a total invasion of privacy and completely unwarranted.
Guess you were just day dreaming, then!
With respect to the grandmother, I'm afraid Hobbes1 hit the nail on the head. Since her husband died a few years ago, granny has attempted to relive her youth and gone completely off the deep end. Although it saddens us, the children and I have discussed her behavior as well.
Hey, that's a pretty good point. I remember reading about three guys in the Revolutionary war....James The Computer Tech, Timonious the Jet Mechanic....and Robert the Navigational Aids technician....
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.