You posted it happily as fact. If you post/repeat someone else's lie, you are a liar.

The teacher knows better why he acted than the ignorant obstinate disruptive kid that won't listen. Derp.

Still lies. You LOVE lies. Grow a pair and stand by them. I get that, in your efforts to support Trump, you have trained yourself to believe any right leaning lies and claim any non right wing fact is fake news, that doesn't mean the rest of us must support your psychosis.

Sure, kid gets to lie, you get to repeat it and claim it's not a lie because you didn't create it, just repeated it. That's pathetic, Bob. Infantile, dumb, and pathetic.

Bob. Learn to read. I'm not going over it again. I answered that question in the previous post. Doubly pathetic.
Do you still have any teeth?

Bottom line, the kid is an ignorant obstinate idiot who believes his uninformed opinion outweighs any other, including the school boards, and that he may exercise his right to free speech anywhere at any time with impunity.

Bottom line, kid is a disruptive, ignorant dumbass....and I'm not a bit surprised you're backing him and contradicting rules, laws, authority, the English language (that you seriously need to learn better, Vladimir), logic, civility, and fact to do so.

Guess you've never heard of hermaphrodites or neuters. Not surprising. The words/concepts are only a few thousand years old, created by those Greek libtards to muddy the language and hurt Trump. Your arguments get dumber every day. *facepalm

https://www.etymonline.com/word/hermaphrodite

I did not write the title -- still not lies.
Kid say kicked out for gender questioning. Teacher indicates kicked out for being disruptive.

Its the kids video - he get to title it.


On big issues like this ( ie debating on school lunch) , if one believes that school policy is wrong , is not acceptable to speak up?

Granted a better forum would be a school board meeting.

Bottom line the teacher is afraid of loosing his job and hence pushes the position of national policy.

Dishonest stating it in a way that strongly implies he was kicked out for his opinion, and hides from the fact it was for speaking out repeatedly, disruptively.
That's a lie by obfuscation.

Did you even watch it?
The teacher was clear, he was kicked out for continuing to argue after being allowed to state his opinion...a right he did not have but a privilege he was granted. That is disruptive, as is requiring individual attention a second time to discuss the same thing.

He was kicked out for repeating his opinion, disrupting class and the teacher.

The issue is being disruptive in class, thinking his uninformed opinion should shout down an informed one from the teacher, an opinion held by the school board and codified in the rules of conduct.

Regardless of what the douchebag kid thinks on this matter, he has no right to disrupt the class by debating policy.
The kid is free to think, but not to disrupt class. He may express his thoughts....at home or in open public forums, not class.

If you defy school policy, expect to reap the rewards of being removed from school and all that comes with that. Duh. Challenge, sure, appropriately, in appropriate venues and times, like a school board or PTA meeting, not during class. If you wish to challenge it inappropriately and disruptively, don't think standing on the right to speak gives you immunity from other rules or repercussions. That's not how it works. It's not an absolute right....I'll prove it, go argue gender in a federal court that's in session, see how long you remain standing and unincarcerated. Better yet, go argue something not insanely pro Trump at a Trump rally, see how many teeth you have in the morning...If you see morning.

Former Washington Middle School teacher Kerstin Westcott resigned in front of the school board after detailing incidents of violence, abuse, and fear for the safety of students and staff.

Westcott goes on to detail the following incidents that happened during the 2016-2017 school year:

-"Student set 3 fires in the bathrooms-we were never evacuated"
-"[Redacted] was kicked in the face during a fight and his glasses were broken"
-"Drugs and cigarettes have been both sold and used in and around the school"
-"So many fights that students have started arming themselves with weapons (including brass knuckles, knives, a large stick, and a lock) with which to fight"
-"Student jumped and beaten to the ground and kicked in the head and stomach repeatedly while she was down"
-"Student approached a teacher personally and said he had a gun and was going to shoot that teacher"
-"Student told staff, 'I am going to kill the teacher. I am going to get a shotgun and find out where he lives. Watch me. I am not kidding.'"

During a fight, Westcott recalls an administrator telling a teacher, "We're numb to fights around here. Is it a real fight?"

The letter says 11 percent of Washington Middle School students were in the "red zone" for behavior, meaning they had committed at least six major offenses during the school year.

I dislocated the same teammate's shoulder twice during American Football practices back in high school (boarding school). He's 2 years my senior & about 6 inches taller than I. 1st time's dislocation he was hospitalized. The second time around, when I pop his shoulder out, 1 or 2 seconds later another teammate popped his shoulder back in right away by rushing him. After a few screams he opened up his eyes, saw me and yelled "You AGAIN!?" I didn't know whether to feel sorry or LOL... I did both. Must have the weirdest expression on my face ever.

He was a student prefect & a very good sport. I was either #1 or 2 in art class, so I gave him my best paint work as gift to make up for it. Fond memories.

they should all be publicly shaming him and the school board

The news says the police want to be clear that this was a school resource officer, not real police that handcuffed her, and any questions should be submitted to the school board, not the police department.
The board president is claiming this is somehow a setup by other board members as a devious plot to get rid of the superintendent. Does that make sense to anyone? I can't follow his logic.

The next few school board meetings will be interesting.

@eric3579 Thanks for the quality!

My mom is president of a district school board in Kansas, so the "education" parts of the cuts have hit really close to home for her (and by extension me, even though I'm not living there). Very very tight budgets. Most music programs got drastic cuts years ago, and are effectively gone now. AP programs for college credit? Gone. Good teachers for academic subjects? Usually bail for greener pastures very quickly.

...But, being rural Kansas, plenty of money gets spent on bus / coach / equipment / facilities for the football team. To be fair, a good chunk of that comes from booster clubs rather than gov't. Still shows where the priorities are.

Nah, I'm glad it's all happiness and ice cream, just being cynical...

Just seems to be the exact thing a school board would try to squash into the mud.

I see your point, and mostly agree, except with the caveat that police only have the right to use REASONABLE and NECESSARY force, and that only when it's required to gain compliance. That was absolutely not the case here. I think that's why such quick action has been taken against him.

When an officer uses unreasonable and/or unnecessary force, they have gone from upholding the law to breaking it themselves. When they do it against children, particularly against calm, nonviolent children, they have become outrageous child abusers rather than peace officers, and should be treated as such. At least, that's how I see it.
Perhaps I'm biased because at 4 years old I was lifted by the neck and thrown clear across the room for saying "no" to an adult. Looking back at that, it was definitely child abuse, but it did teach me the lesson that if you defy authority, even if authority is 100% in the wrong, you'll pay a price. A lesson worth learning, but a terrible way to teach it.

I do agree, disregarding his lawful command was a crime. I don't see how it required any violence to remedy, and I'm given hope by the fact that the school board and police have seen his actions as completely undefendable and have already taken steps to ensure at least HE doesn't repeat them, at least not with the authority of a badge.

I'm definitely not seeing any actual legitimate censorship issue and no legitimate point or argument--and certainly no censorship "rule." There is no rule or law against showing nipples on the internet. The decision to blur the photograph was made entirely by this V Magazine at their own discretion for their own reasons.

Compared to many western countries, the United States is relatively light on censorship precisely because of the codification of the first amendment. There are very few circumstances in which the federal government uses criminal law to enforce censorship, and using civil law to do likewise (such as in cases of libel) is relatively hard. Naturally, the truth on the ground is always more complex, because of all of the ways you can sneak sort-of-censorship into local and state laws such school boards determining public school curriculums, shady contracts, and discriminatory public decency laws. That last, which is really more what this guy is arguing about in a ham-fisted way.

I certainly don't believe there should be different laws for men and for women. If a bare-chested man in public is acceptable, I believe a bare-chested woman should be just as acceptable. In this case, I'd go so far as to say I believe that should be federal law, but that can likewise backfire in ways I don't agree with (eg, I believe wether to allow concealed handguns should be a local decision), so I'm not quick to make blanket statements.

Certainly the US is socially and psychologically backward in many, many ways, but it's also better in that respect now on balance than it has ever been in the past.

You're seemingly bothered by the semantic difference between "gives" and "grants" or "guarantees". Guarantees would have been a better word, but the idea that this is "indoctrination" in ...what exactly?...seems silly and totally reactionary.
Read "Miracle In Philadelphia", it gives a GREAT idea of what went on, along with tons of details mostly unknown.
EDIT: For instance, did you know that Ben Franklin was often carried in on a 'sedan chair' (or it's non-covered equivalent) carried by prisoners on 'work release'?!
While the bill of rights does use that wording, it's the government that secures those rights FOR you...or to say it another way, 'gives' you (security in them).
"Power", in the form of the continental congress, "Gave" you those rights (EDIT: by codifying them in our laws and our basic outline for government/governing). I say they are certainly NOT "god given inalienable rights" which is proven by the fact that many people do NOT have them around the world. If they were truly "god given inalienable rights", they could not be removed or ignored by anyone, could they?
It may be poor wording, but indoctrination? Come on. What are the Texas School Boards "history" text books then? Now THEY re-write history.

(Because I know you won't really read any links: Texas VOTED to REMOVE Capitalism from their textbooks. Yes, you read that correctly. Texas, REMOVED the word Capitalism from their textbooks because of negative connotations. Instead, you should use the term Free-Market Enterprise. So yeah, good thing those pesky liberals didn't vote to keep the word capitalism in the textbooks . . . )

You do know we have an education BECAUSE of liberalism. Much like everything else conservatives hold sacred . . .

You WILL mind dumb kids when they can't pay their taxes to support your liberal/socialist social security checks later in life, or the roads you have to drive on.

You WILL mind dumb kids when statistically speaking, less educated men are more likely to commit violent crimes and less educated women will have more children, which means more food stamps. You know, the things conservatives hate spending .5% of our annual government budget on.

So while us "liberals" have been petitioning for more teacher freedom, higher pay to attract better teachers, been against standardized tests and against for-profit schools, you conservatives can keep trying to hawk your proven to fail for-profit "capitalist" schools.

Oh, and I hate to tell you, but public schools don't teach kids to hate capitalism. Neither does the Lego Movie either. Turn off Fox News once in a while and step outside. Maybe talk to a total stranger (which means putting the gun down for a minute and not Standing Your Ground). Which coincidently, would diminish greatly with a robust liberal education. (In case you didn't get the play on words, as in teaching kids more than how to recite words and flip hamburgers. It's called A Mile Wide, An Inch Deep.

But hey, you would know all this if the Texas School Board wasn't eliminating pieces of history because they don't fit their current political agenda.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-know/culture/texas-school-board-approves-controversial-textbook-changes/954/

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20131122-texas-education-board-approves-science-books-that-fully-cover-evolution.ece (They wanted to prevent evolution from being taught despite the piles of evidence supporting it.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html You want to talk about "bias"? Yeah, conservatives are trying really hard to rewrite history in their favor by making sure no experts ever have a say in the selection of textbook material, but people who "feel" like there is a bias. You know, because truth has a well known liberal bias.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/23/education/texas-education-board-flags-biology-textbook-over-evolution-concerns.html?_r=0

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/21/how-texas-inflicts-bad-textbooks-on-us/

Yeah, I'm sorry, but the facts don't bear out in your case. Except, that our system is going downhill, but it's not because of their "liberal" education, that's for sure.

As a kid I got bullied, but it sounds like this kid has it worse. One thing that really struck me the first time I saw an "it gets better" PSA was that those kinds of spots can apply to bullied kids in addition to LGBT kids. Glad to see something like the evolution of that.

To me, it seems like we've got something institutionally wrong with schools that allows bullying to be as prevalent as it is. I say that because in my experience and that of most other people I know that were bullied, things are at their worst from roughly middle school to early-mid high school (say, 12 to 17 years old). Usually the senior year is noticeably better than those before it, and then the experience at college is like the difference between night and day. Obviously increasing maturity levels are responsible for some of that, but not all.

To me, administrators and teachers need to take this a lot more seriously. Good for this kid for getting in the school board's face and making them feel uncomfortable, because the status quo clearly doesn't make things any better.

Oh, and a hearty /second to Yogi's comment about the title.