You people have INSANE schools. I've never seen any of this. The worst I have seen was in 6th grade when some fight occurred before the school day began (We stay outside until 9 AM, when the bell rings) and they both got a week-long suspension.
Ohh yeah, this group of girls from school stabbed six people before getting arrested.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Science has made us gods even before we are worthy of being men." - Jean Rostand
"You have no power over me that I don't give you, and I don't have any power over you than you give me." - Vi Hart
In 7th grade a kid shoved someones leg through the wall. He didn't get punished. Then that same kid brought a pocket knife to school. He got suspended for threatening to stab someone with it. Then in 8th grade, some other person wrote a ton of curse words on the walls with permanent marker. He got detention. That's the worst things that have happened at my school.
I threw a dodge ball at a kids head and he hit his head against a concrete wall >.> We weren't playing dodge ball yet and I felt bad for doing it. But I didn't get in trouble because it was my first time actually doing something bad. This was about like 4-6 years ago i think O.o
I have an extremely sensitive conscience. so basically, you wouldn't have done the mature or right thing. nub.
Excuse me? The lawful thing to do isn't always the right thing to do. (Also, I have this bad habit of responding to trolls. "nub?" Seriously? Obvious troll etc.)
If someone wants to take some E, I'm not going to stop them. It's a victimless crime. If they get caught, it'll be their fault. But I'm not going to "tattle" on them. My chosen course of action isn't the lawful thing for me to do, but it's neither moral nor immoral.
There is no moral difference between a person willingly ingesting a mind-altering substance and a person not ingesting that substance. Neither is morally superior to the other. Thus, it is neither "right" nor "wrong" to report someone for such an action. If that action is against the law, then it is lawful to report them for it, but that still does not make it the "right" thing to do.
On the other hand, if someone were forcing drugs on someone else, then I would (1) try to stop them before it happens, (2) remove the victim from the situation, and (3) accompany the victim to the nearest authority figure in order to report the incident. That's still not the lawful thing to do. The lawful thing to do would be to report it immediately, and not get involved in the encounter. In this situation I would favor what is moral over what is lawful.
And any assessment of the maturity of a given course of action is dependent on the reasoning behind that action. I'll venture to say that the reasoning I've presented thus far is deeper than that which you've presented. Saying that my chosen course of action would be wrong because your "extremely sensitive conscience" says it's wrong isn't a valid argument. In essence, you're assuming superior morals and maturity ( an "extremely sensitive conscience") as a basis for an argument that your morals and maturity are superior ("you wouldn't have done the mature or right thing"). It's circular logic, which means it's invalid.
Excuse me? The lawful thing to do isn't always the right thing to do. (Also, I have this bad habit of responding to trolls. "nub?" Seriously? Obvious troll etc.)
If someone wants to take some E, I'm not going to stop them. It's a victimless crime. If they get caught, it'll be their fault. But I'm not going to "tattle" on them. My chosen course of action isn't the lawful thing for me to do, but it's neither moral nor immoral.
There is no moral difference between a person willingly ingesting a mind-altering substance and a person not ingesting that substance. Neither is morally superior to the other. Thus, it is neither "right" nor "wrong" to report someone for such an action. If that action is against the law, then it is lawful to report them for it, but that still does not make it the "right" thing to do.
On the other hand, if someone were forcing drugs on someone else, then I would (1) try to stop them before it happens, (2) remove the victim from the situation, and (3) accompany the victim to the nearest authority figure in order to report the incident. That's still not the lawful thing to do. The lawful thing to do would be to report it immediately, and not get involved in the encounter. In this situation I would favor what is moral over what is lawful.
And any assessment of the maturity of a given course of action is dependent on the reasoning behind that action. I'll venture to say that the reasoning I've presented thus far is deeper than that which you've presented. Saying that my chosen course of action would be wrong because your "extremely sensitive conscience" says it's wrong isn't a valid argument. In essence, you're assuming superior morals and maturity ( an "extremely sensitive conscience") as a basis for an argument that your morals and maturity are superior ("you wouldn't have done the mature or right thing"). It's circular logic, which means it's invalid.
Who writes a 4 paragraph response to a troll?? Have you nothing better to do??
ahem. i am not a troll. I feel that what is lawful is what's right.
Hence my initial comment calling your decision "lawful-neutral." Your calling me a "nub" made me wonder if you were trolling, so I covered all my bases.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This enlightening post brought to you courtesy of a serious overabundance of free time.
Hence my initial comment calling your decision "lawful-neutral." Your calling me a "nub" made me wonder if you were trolling, so I covered all my bases.
And now all your covered base are belong to me. lolololol
When I was in kindergarten, my friend took woodchips from the playground, brought them home and sharpened them with his dad's knife, and sold them for $10 each, claiming they were ancient Japanese throwing knives. He got like $100 in a week, but got suspended.
On Topic: One of my classmates was high on weed in class once. He didn't get caught though.
I have an extremely sensitive conscience. so basically, you wouldn't have done the mature or right thing. nub.
I have to say, that's the most creative way to get expelled by far.
"You have no power over me that I don't give you, and I don't have any power over you than you give me." - Vi Hart
Here, check out my MLP fanfic. My Fanfic
Ah those were the days...
Daaaaaaaaaaaamn son 2 pounds of weed!! That is a ****load of weed where did he get it?
Learn more here: http://vimeo.com/31100268
How, what, why?
Totally New at running servers? Click me!
I wonder if sansavarous is online...
IT HURT.
Im not in a very bad neighborhood.
Excuse me? The lawful thing to do isn't always the right thing to do. (Also, I have this bad habit of responding to trolls. "nub?" Seriously? Obvious troll etc.)
If someone wants to take some E, I'm not going to stop them. It's a victimless crime. If they get caught, it'll be their fault. But I'm not going to "tattle" on them. My chosen course of action isn't the lawful thing for me to do, but it's neither moral nor immoral.
There is no moral difference between a person willingly ingesting a mind-altering substance and a person not ingesting that substance. Neither is morally superior to the other. Thus, it is neither "right" nor "wrong" to report someone for such an action. If that action is against the law, then it is lawful to report them for it, but that still does not make it the "right" thing to do.
On the other hand, if someone were forcing drugs on someone else, then I would (1) try to stop them before it happens, (2) remove the victim from the situation, and (3) accompany the victim to the nearest authority figure in order to report the incident. That's still not the lawful thing to do. The lawful thing to do would be to report it immediately, and not get involved in the encounter. In this situation I would favor what is moral over what is lawful.
And any assessment of the maturity of a given course of action is dependent on the reasoning behind that action. I'll venture to say that the reasoning I've presented thus far is deeper than that which you've presented. Saying that my chosen course of action would be wrong because your "extremely sensitive conscience" says it's wrong isn't a valid argument. In essence, you're assuming superior morals and maturity ( an "extremely sensitive conscience") as a basis for an argument that your morals and maturity are superior ("you wouldn't have done the mature or right thing"). It's circular logic, which means it's invalid.
Who writes a 4 paragraph response to a troll?? Have you nothing better to do??
ahem. i am not a troll. I feel that what is lawful is what's right.
Have you seen my signature?
Hence my initial comment calling your decision "lawful-neutral." Your calling me a "nub" made me wonder if you were trolling, so I covered all my bases.
And now all your covered base are belong to me. lolololol
jk
I dont read "signatures"