redwhine Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 The child would have good reason to stick thier fingers up and leave both situations. I agree, and have said no other. However, see below as to my take on their relative abilites to do so. Being in school wouldn't make any difference what so ever. See below. The teacher having over stepped the mark would be the one having to defend their actions to the school board, not the child. After the fact, maybe. If someone is murdered, ought their relatives be perfectly happy as long as the murderer is gaoled in the end? I would imagine that a child forced to do anything whilst in school might think they haven't much choice in the matter, it would be understandable for a child to think that. But i'm an adult. I'm not viewing this from a childs point of view. The child is not free to leave the school; he/she is obliged to attend by law. Plus, the school has a duty of care to the child, and cannot allow him/her to wander off without neglecting said duty. Also, the child's parent/s is/are (obviously) not in attendance. How many children go to weddings unaccompanied by parents/associated adults? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted May 2, 2010 Share Posted May 2, 2010 I agree, and have said no other. However, see below as to my take on their relative abilites to do so. See below. After the fact, maybe. If someone is murdered, ought their relatives be perfectly happy as long as the murderer is gaoled in the end? I would imagine the relatives would take some satisfaction from it, although, that's a little extreme isn't it?. Originally posted by redwhine The child is not free to leave the school; he/she is obliged to attend by law. I never suggested the child leave the school. I said they'd have every right to stick their fingers up and leave the situation. Originally posted by redwhine Plus, the school has a duty of care to the child, and cannot allow him/her to wander off without neglecting said duty. Also, the child's parent/s is/are (obviously) not in attendance. How many children go to weddings unaccompanied by parents/associated adults? I agree. The school does have a duty of care towards the welfare of a child. However, the school's lawful responsibilities towards a child goes only so far, as does it's authority. Children being unaccompanied by parents is irrelevent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwhine Posted May 3, 2010 Share Posted May 3, 2010 I would imagine the relatives would take some satisfaction from it, although, that's a little extreme isn't it?. Yes. It was designed to be so. As it is exactly the same in principle, it illustrates the absurdity of your point. I never suggested the child leave the school. I said they'd have every right to stick their fingers up and leave the situation. How, whilst remaining in school? (The situation is in the school.) I agree. The school does have a duty of care towards the welfare of a child. However, the school's lawful responsibilities towards a child goes only so far, as does it's authority. I know. That's what I've been saying. This thread is about a teacher who has reportedly overstepped their authority. If they had not done so, this thread would not have been started. Children being unaccompanied by parents is irrelevent. Oh really? Do you have children? Would you be happy to find out they had been wandering the streets (where a Roman catholic priest might have found them:o) when you had thought them to be in the care of responsible adults? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted May 4, 2010 Share Posted May 4, 2010 Yes. It was designed to be so. As it is exactly the same in principle, it illustrates the absurdity of your point. It's absurd to compare this to murder. Originally posred by redwhine How, whilst remaining in school? (The situation is in the school.) ............................................................. The child need only remove themself from the situation. They needn't leave the school premises. Originally posted by redwhine I know. That's what I've been saying. This thread is about a teacher who has reportedly overstepped their authority. If they had not done so, this thread would not have been started. That's right.. the teacher "reportedly" overstepped their authority. But you've been telling me that this is all about authority. Because teachers have it.. vicars do not. That's what I find baffling. If niether have the authority to demand someone to do it.. why are they completely different matters?. Originally posted by redwhine Oh really? Do you have children? Would you be happy to find out they had been wandering the streets (where a Roman catholic priest might have found them:o) when you had thought them to be in the care of responsible adults? Yes I have children. But what does any of this have to do with my comment?. Children being accompanied by adults at a wedding is not relevent to them being unaccompanied at school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwhine Posted May 5, 2010 Share Posted May 5, 2010 It's absurd to compare this to murder. You're confused? Please show where I compared this to murder. Or retract. I have re-read the relevant post and can find no comparison being made. Originally posred by redwhine How, whilst remaining in school? (The situation is in the school.) ............................................................. The child need only remove themself from the situation. They needn't leave the school premises. I'm even more confused. How can they remove themselves from a situation in a school without leaving said school? That's right.. the teacher "reportedly" overstepped their authority. But you've been telling me that this is all about authority. Because teachers have it.. vicars do not. That's what I find baffling. If niether have the authority to demand someone to do it.. why are they completely different matters? >Sigh< No, No, NO! If the teacher had the authority, they would not have overstepped their authority. They overstepped (...went beyond...) their authority. That's what the thread is about. Yes I have children. But what does any of this have to do with my comment?. Children being accompanied by adults at a wedding is not relevent to them being unaccompanied at school. >Sigh< If a child is in the company of their parents, they could deal with an errant vicar. A child threatened by a teacher is on their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted May 5, 2010 Share Posted May 5, 2010 You're confused?I'll agree with you there. Originally posted by redwhine Please show where I compared this to murder. Or retract. I have re-read the relevant post and can find no comparison being made. I'll not be retracting anything. You claimed the principles were exactly the same. I said it's absurd to compare this, ie.(the principles of this incident) to murder, ie.( the principles of any investigation following a murder. Originally posted by redwhine I'm even more confused. How can they remove themselves from a situation in a school without leaving said school? Quite easily. They simply stand up and walk out of assembly. What's confusing about that?. Originally posted by redwhine >Sigh< No, No, NO! If the teacher had the authority, they would not have overstepped their authority. They overstepped (...went beyond...) their authority. That's what the thread is about. I'm aware that the teacher overstepped their authority. That's why I fail to see why it would be a completely different matter if a vicar did it. I fail to see how "authority" has anything to do with a teacher overstepping the mark. Originally posted by redwhine >Sigh< If a child is in the company of their parents, they could deal with an errant vicar. A child threatened by a teacher is on their own. The parent/s could indeed deal with an errant vicar. But who want's to make a scene at a wedding... would you??. Secondly: A child may be without their parent/s at school, but that hardly constitutes being on their own. As you have already stated, "schools teachers" have a duty of care towards a childs welfare, so despite being threatened by an errant teacher, they would still have other teachers looking out for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
some guy Posted May 5, 2010 Share Posted May 5, 2010 I'm amazed they still sing prayers in primary schools. What with all the immigrants, especially muslims that are taking over. If we went to a school in their country we'd have to pray to Allah, so they should adapt to OUR way of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwhine Posted May 6, 2010 Share Posted May 6, 2010 You're confused? I'll agree with you there. Well that about says it all. I ask a question and you reply as though it was a statement. Then accuse me of comparing this situation to murder, when I have not. Then say a child can stay in a school and still be apart from a situation in that school. I'm aware that the teacher overstepped their authority. That's why I fail to see why it would be a completely different matter if a vicar did it. I fail to see how "authority" has anything to do with a teacher overstepping the mark. And then cannot understand that if a teacher had the authority, they would not have overstepped their authority! Etc, etc., etc. I've wasted enough of my time in the vain hope of explaining simple things to you over and over again. With the benefit of hindsight, I should've simply ignored you. Goodbye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomdido Posted May 6, 2010 Author Share Posted May 6, 2010 I'm amazed they still sing prayers in primary schools. What with all the immigrants, especially muslims that are taking over. If we went to a school in their country we'd have to pray to Allah, so they should adapt to OUR way of life. What is our way of life? Should it be preserved and unchanging? Should we still beat children and send them up chimneys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted May 6, 2010 Share Posted May 6, 2010 Well that about says it all. I ask a question and you reply as though it was a statement.You're strange? Origanally posted by redwhine Then accuse me of comparing this situation to murder, when I have not. You compared the principles of the investigation; by claiming that they were exactly the same, that's what I'm accusing you of saying, as you well know. Originally posted by redwhine Then say a child can stay in a school and still be apart from a situation in that school. Yes, that's right. If the given child; or any child come to that, decided to remove themselves from school assembly due to the unacceptable behaviour of a teacher. They could do so without leaving the school premises. Of course they could. Originally posted by redwhine And then cannot understand that if a teacher had the authority, they would not have overstepped their authority! Etc, etc., etc. What??? NO!... I don't think so. You're the one who keeps bleeting on about "the teacher" with their "position of authority", which I find confusing simply because thier "position of authority", is none existant in relation to singing hymns.... As is the vicars! Originally posted by redwhine I've wasted enough of my time in the vain hope of explaining simple things to you over and over again. With the benefit of hindsight, I should've simply ignored you. Goodbye. See ya! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.