School Uniforms

[Strife767]

Bravo Matthew!  Your logic should also apply to people of different faiths.  If one student is uncomfortable with the beliefs of the Catholics, Born Again Christians, Mormons, Methodists etc at his public school, he shouldn't try to change them to suit him by using the media and the courts.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Uh, Matthew never tried to change anyone's beliefs, which is more than can be said for proselytizing Christians (Paszkiewicz himself accused Matthew of having insincere beliefs because they aren't the same as his own). To demand that they follow the Constitution and keep public schools and tax-paid employees religiously netural while on the job is perfectly fair.

[Guest In the Schools]

They do wear uniforms.  It's called formal and causual business attire.  And while I don't go to every BOE meeting I think it's safe to say they are usually dressed properly for the function they perform as BOE members.

Maybe you're to dense to get it so I'll outline it for you. 

1. The school system currently has a dress code. 

2. The students and parents do everything possible to side step the dress code.

3. A tremendous amount of resources are wasted trying to enforce the dress code.

The school system is requiring khaki pants and a polo shirt, not a Hitler Youth uniform.  So use your common sense for once.  Your civil rights will not be violated and your freedoms will remain in tact.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, there is a dress code. No, resources are not wasted trying to enforce it, because, everyone looks the other way.

[Guest In the Schools]

The deadline for all the parents to send back their surveys is drawing near. The papers must be back by 8/24. Just so you know, when uniforms were past in the grammar schools only 1100 responses were received. 80% were in favor. There are more than 4000 students in the grammar schools. If you don't want the uniforms, send the surveys back. I wonder if the Board will let the public review the response, or do we just take their word for it?

[Guest Guest]

A proper dress code can be enforced. It was when I went to school, and it can be now, especially if the penalty for a violation is to be put into a uniform for the remainder of the year.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'll ask again. Are you a fan of the Scarlet Letter?

Feel free to ignore this question again.

[Bern]

This is not an issue where the teachers and/or the teachers' union have any say.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I did not bring up the union. Why are you bringing up the teachers union?

We're dealing with an educational issue and last time I looked teachers are stakeholders in the students education.

The pro uniform clique argues that uniforms are needed to improve the educational environment. I want the teachers take on this. Do they believe that, or are the uniform folks making a mountain out of a molehill?

[Bern]

And when would you find it "necessary"? Unless you've seen some of the breasts and asses hanging out (and thats just the girls) please don't say they don't need to look NEAT.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Breasts and asses hanging out?

Get off it. I have never seen that. Exaggerating does not help your case.

[Guest Guest]

Well, excuse, me, but put your kids into a uniform if it makes your life easier. Why on earth is this a problem? Do what you want to do. That's no excuse for forcing it on someone else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Then with your keen sense of being an intellectual why make them wear anything at all? Didn’t it work for Adam and Eve? And it would save everyone a lot of money. If you looked last year through our grammar school system you would have seen how effective it was. Did you look? There does need to be some sense of decency in the school system and the school uniform is one way at least to teach each of them the responsibility of being need and proper going to school.

Do you stand in front of a judge in a dirty tee shirt, shorts and work boots?

[Bern]

Then with your keen sense of being an intellectual why make them wear anything at all?  Didn’t it work for Adam and Eve?  And it would save everyone a lot of money. If you looked last year through our grammar school system you would have seen how effective it was. Did you look? There does need to be some sense of decency in the school system and the school uniform is one way at least to teach each of them the responsibility of being need and proper going to school. 

Do you stand in front of a judge in a dirty tee shirt, shorts and work boots?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, we jump from uniforms to decency and Adam and Eve. Quite a jump.

And whats wrong with intellectuals?

It was the enlightened intellectual philosophers of the renaissance who came up with the philosophies that led to the rights of man and to our founders creating the bill of rights (most of whom were also intellectuals). Without intellectuals you would be living in a 19th century Russian feudal society and you certainly would not have the right to post your opinions anywhere.

Intellectuals also led the way for many of our scientific advances such as the Copernican theory by the intellectual (mathematician, astronomer and classical scholar) Copernicus.

Or the Germ theory. It took many intellectuals to think outside of the box, then test their theories and get rid of the belief that disease is spontaneously generated or generated by dark forces. Without them, you'd still be bled when you got sick.

[Guest ConnieK]

Then with your keen sense of being an intellectual why make them wear anything at all?  Didn’t it work for Adam and Eve?  And it would save everyone a lot of money. If you looked last year through our grammar school system you would have seen how effective it was. Did you look? There does need to be some sense of decency in the school system and the school uniform is one way at least to teach each of them the responsibility of being need and proper going to school. 

Do you stand in front of a judge in a dirty tee shirt, shorts and work boots?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dictating to 17 year olds what color clothes to wear is not teaching them responsibility. Setting clear rules for appropriate dress and expecting them to follow those rules while at the same time maintaining personal freedom is teaching responsibility.

A uniform may look neat, but it's not the only thing that looks neat.

And if you'll notice, even male lawyers are not required to wear uniforms. Courtroom attire has a long history behind it, which is why female lawyers have more freedom in how they dress than male lawyers - when the stodgy but unspoken rules were developed, women were hardly ever lawyers, but now they are and if you look at female lawyers even on TV, you'll see that they have a wider range of clothing than male lawyers. None of that should matter in schools, where the expectations on the students are less formal and less a matter of tradition.

[Guest Guest]

I was wondering whether anyone has heard anything of the uniform situation in Kearny High School.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Has anyone noticed that public schools started requiring uniforms after 9/11? Look at how willing people are to give up personal freedoms, for no apparent good reason, after this attack not only on our buildings but also on our collective national psyche. Stop and think. Freedom is hard enough to preserve as it is, without giving it away for no reason.

[Strife767]

Dictating to 17 year olds what color clothes to wear is not teaching them responsibility. Setting clear rules for appropriate dress and expecting them to follow those rules while at the same time maintaining personal freedom is teaching responsibility.

A uniform may look neat, but it's not the only thing that looks neat.

Exactly.

[Strife767]

Has anyone noticed that public schools started requiring uniforms after 9/11? Look at how willing people are to give up personal freedoms, for no apparent good reason, after this attack not only on our buildings but also on our collective national psyche. Stop and think. Freedom is hard enough to preserve as it is, without giving it away for no reason.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

People are dishearteningly willing to give away their freedom for the illusion of safety and security. Whether it's pointless increases to airport security (with all of the increased delays and annoyances it causes, it's still only about 3% of people who are stopped--what terrorist wouldn't take those odds?), listening in on private phone conversations, or mandating uniforms, it's all the same thing. It's just a matter of degree.

I still say what we should have done after 9/11 was rebuild the towers immediately after the rescue efforts were completed. We could rebuild the buildings in probably less time than it took those hijackers to even plan the 9/11 attack. What a hit to their morale that would be, and it'd make them feel like their efforts are futile. Hell, rebuild them with one more floor than they had before, just to spite them. I think the kind of frustration this would have likely created among anti-American terrorists would probably have helped us feel safer than all of the increased airport security since 9/11 combined.

As Carlin said (pre-9/11, mind you): "Airport security is a stupid idea, it's a waste of money, and it's there for only one reason: to make white people feel safe! That's all it's for. To provide a feeling, an illusion, of safety in order to placate the middle class. Because the authorities know they can't make airplanes safe; too many people have access. You'll notice the drug smugglers don't seem to have a lot of trouble getting their little packages on board, do they?"

P.S. This is not off-topic because it's all the same kind of freedom; like I said, it's all a matter of degree.

[Guest Guest]

Exactly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nifty, Neato and Very cooooooooollllllll . Exactomundo Duuuuude!

[Bern]

People are dishearteningly willing to give away their freedom for the illusion of safety and security. Whether it's pointless increases to airport security (with all of the increased delays and annoyances it causes, it's still only about 3% of people who are stopped--what terrorist wouldn't take those odds?), listening in on private phone conversations, or mandating uniforms, it's all the same thing. It's just a matter of degree.

I still say what we should have done after 9/11 was rebuild the towers immediately after the rescue efforts were completed. We could rebuild the buildings in probably less time than it took those hijackers to even plan the 9/11 attack. What a hit to their morale that would be, and it'd make them feel like their efforts are futile. Hell, rebuild them with one more floor than they had before, just to spite them. I think the kind of frustration this would have likely created among anti-American terrorists would probably have helped us feel safer than all of the increased airport security since 9/11 combined.

As Carlin said (pre-9/11, mind you): "Airport security is a stupid idea, it's a waste of money, and it's there for only one reason: to make white people feel safe! That's all it's for. To provide a feeling, an illusion, of safety in order to placate the middle class. Because the authorities know they can't make airplanes safe; too many people have access. You'll notice the drug smugglers don't seem to have a lot of trouble getting their little packages on board, do they?"

P.S. This is not off-topic because it's all the same kind of freedom; like I said, it's all a matter of degree.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually you can. Use the Israeli model.

Most of the security we have is a joke. Everyone working the airports knows that.

For example, confiscated liquids are thrown in a big buckets. Does anyone seriously believe that if we really thought the liquids are dangerous we would just throw them in large buckets?

You'd never get anyone to work there if they really thought they are sitting next to buckets of explosive liquids.

[Guest Guest]

Wow, we jump from uniforms to decency and Adam and Eve. Quite a jump.

And whats wrong with intellectuals?

It was the enlightened intellectual philosophers of the renaissance who came up with the philosophies that led to the rights of man and to our founders creating the bill of rights (most of whom were also intellectuals). Without intellectuals you would be living in a 19th century Russian feudal society and you certainly would not have the right to post your opinions anywhere.

Intellectuals also led the way for many of our scientific advances such as the Copernican theory by the intellectual (mathematician, astronomer and classical scholar) Copernicus.

Or the Germ theory. It took many intellectuals to think outside of the box, then  test their theories and get rid of the belief that disease is spontaneously generated or generated by dark forces. Without them, you'd still be bled when you got sick.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its the Don Quixote syndrome, fighting for what he thinks is a just cause, but everyone know there is no reason to fight because it is really not a problem, except in the mind of this one individual. It show what good this person could do instead of quibbling over senseless battles here. With all his time here, makes you wonder how much time he does spend on his cases. Glad he is not representing me.

[Guest Guest]

People are dishearteningly willing to give away their freedom for the illusion of safety and security. Whether it's pointless increases to airport security (with all of the increased delays and annoyances it causes, it's still only about 3% of people who are stopped--what terrorist wouldn't take those odds?), listening in on private phone conversations, or mandating uniforms, it's all the same thing. It's just a matter of degree.

I still say what we should have done after 9/11 was rebuild the towers immediately after the rescue efforts were completed. We could rebuild the buildings in probably less time than it took those hijackers to even plan the 9/11 attack. What a hit to their morale that would be, and it'd make them feel like their efforts are futile. Hell, rebuild them with one more floor than they had before, just to spite them. I think the kind of frustration this would have likely created among anti-American terrorists would probably have helped us feel safer than all of the increased airport security since 9/11 combined.

As Carlin said (pre-9/11, mind you): "Airport security is a stupid idea, it's a waste of money, and it's there for only one reason: to make white people feel safe! That's all it's for. To provide a feeling, an illusion, of safety in order to placate the middle class. Because the authorities know they can't make airplanes safe; too many people have access. You'll notice the drug smugglers don't seem to have a lot of trouble getting their little packages on board, do they?"

P.S. This is not off-topic because it's all the same kind of freedom; like I said, it's all a matter of degree.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you seriously quoting a comedian??? Airport security does no good!!! Your an idiot.....comparing uniforms to 911, are you kidding me. Uniforms are going to be worn at the HS regardless of the dramatics of some people's opinions. deal with it

[Guest Guest]

Dictating to 17 year olds what color clothes to wear is not teaching them responsibility. Setting clear rules for appropriate dress and expecting them to follow those rules while at the same time maintaining personal freedom is teaching responsibility.

A uniform may look neat, but it's not the only thing that looks neat.

And if you'll notice, even male lawyers are not required to wear uniforms. Courtroom attire has a long history behind it, which is why female lawyers have more freedom in how they dress than male lawyers - when the stodgy but unspoken rules were developed, women were hardly ever lawyers, but now they are and if you look at female lawyers even on TV, you'll see that they have a wider range of clothing than male lawyers. None of that should matter in schools, where the expectations on the students are less formal and less a matter of tradition.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dictating to 17 year olds what color clothes to wear is not teaching them responsibility. Setting clear rules for appropriate dress and expecting them to follow those rules while at the same time maintaining personal freedom is teaching responsibility

Correct!! Unfortunatly no one at KHS taught that difference in the last 30 years.

This is not a bad thing. They are going to have to conform to the rules when and if they enter the workplace.

[Guest Guest]

Are you seriously quoting a comedian??? Airport security does no good!!! Your an idiot.....comparing uniforms to 911, are you kidding me. Uniforms are going to be worn at the HS regardless of the dramatics of some people's opinions. deal with it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Do you know for a fact that uniforms will be worn?

[Guest Guest_Truth_*]

Are you seriously quoting a comedian??? Airport security does no good!!! Your an idiot

You should learn how to spell "you're" before you call anyone else an idiot, idiot.

.....comparing uniforms to 911, are you kidding me.

Questions end with question marks, idiot.

Uniforms are going to be worn at the HS regardless of the dramatics of some people's opinions. deal with it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sentences start with capital letters, idiot.

[Strife767]

Dictating to 17 year olds what color clothes to wear is not teaching them responsibility. Setting clear rules for appropriate dress and expecting them to follow those rules while at the same time maintaining personal freedom is teaching responsibility

Precisely.

[Guest William Hoyt]

Will school uniforms be worn in the KHS / Grace Methodist Annex ?

[Guest Guest]

Actually you can. Use the Israeli model.

Most of the security we have is a joke. Everyone working the airports knows that.

For example, confiscated liquids are thrown in a big buckets. Does anyone seriously believe that if we really thought the liquids are dangerous we would just throw them in large buckets?

You'd never get anyone to work there if they really thought they are sitting next to buckets of explosive liquids.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We can't use the Israeli model because assh**es like you will claim we're profiling.

[Guest Guest]

Are you seriously quoting a comedian??? Airport security does no good!!! Your an idiot.....comparing uniforms to 911, are you kidding me. Uniforms are going to be worn at the HS regardless of the dramatics of some people's opinions. deal with it

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And I love how people like to throw in the old race card. I wonder when the last time George Carlin was ever in an airport. "To make white people feel safe". What does that even mean. Maybe he should have peeked his drunken head out from behind his first class seat and see who exactly is flying in these planes. He has no clue, why quote such an ass?

Anyway, when Harrison decided to go to uniforms, they held a PTA meeting and took a vote. It was the biggest turnout for a PTA meeting ever. They had to hold it in the high school auditorium. The results were approximately 25 adults against, 180 for uniforms. It was the best thing to happen there. And this is the reality, it has absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. If kids didn't leave the house looking like wh***es and wannabe gang bangers, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Times have changed and we can't leave it up to the parents to steer their children into dressing appropriately. That is the reality.

[Guest Guest]

Doesn't everyone who has a job with some level of responsibility have a "uniform" of sorts. My husband is an engineer and he is expected to wear a WHITE shirt, tie, slacks, shoes, and it's recommended that he keep a jacket in his office for meetings. My son works at Giants' Stadium - he has several uniforms that he must wear when he goes to work depending upon the function. When I worked at Shop-Rite (years ago) I had to wear black slacks, white top, and the awful yellow and black smock-jacket. My brothers (one works in HVAC and one is an electrician) wear uniforms to work. Does anyone argue that their personality and creativity are being stunted? You say the highschool students aren't going to work, but rather to school. I say, what are we preparing them for if not the work world? What a wonderful country that the worst problem we have is to worry about what our children will wear to school each day! Have a great school year!

[Guest Paul]

Doesn't everyone who has a job with some level of responsibility have a "uniform" of sorts.  My husband is an engineer and he is expected to wear a WHITE shirt, tie, slacks, shoes, and it's recommended that he keep a jacket in his office for meetings.  My son works at Giants' Stadium - he has several uniforms that he must wear when he goes to work depending upon the function.  When I worked at Shop-Rite (years ago) I had to wear black slacks, white top, and the awful yellow and black smock-jacket.  My brothers (one works in HVAC and one is an electrician) wear  uniforms to work.  Does anyone argue that their personality and creativity are being stunted?  You say the highschool students aren't going to work, but rather to school.  I say, what are we preparing them for if not the work world?  What a wonderful country that the worst problem we have is to worry about what our children will wear to school each day!  Have a great school year!   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A public school is not a private employer, or an employer of students at all. Adults choose their place of employment. By contrast, everyone is expected these days to obtain at least a high school education on penalty of non-employability later on. The public schools are the default providers of that education and must remain open and accommodating to everyone regardless of race, creed, national origin, religion, etc. The students are in effect the consumers, and in general it is not appropriate to dictate dress to one's consumers. There are exceptions: e.g., while churches may dictate to their "consumers" how to dress while in church, the public schools are not churches; attendance in the local public school is nearer the mandatory end of the voluntary-mandatory continuum, and that makes the uniform very different that the one McDonald's requires its employees to wear. There's also the matter of the message being sent to young people about where the proper role of government ends. That's why it's different.

I wish the worst problem we had to worry about was what our children will wear to school each day. Our opposition to uniforms is not about the clothing. It is about the creeping incursion into private life at a time when freedom is (a) threatened by developments in the world like the global economy and ( threatened by the culture of fear that has arisen since 9/11/01. And it's about the assumption that personal liberties may be curtailed by majority vote; that's not how our system works, and it's very troubling that the school board and much of the community seems completely blind to this being an issue at all. It is when they community is blind to these kinds of issues that we are in danger of losing all our freedoms --- not just this freedom, but the bigger freedoms like the right to habeas corpus. If you don't see that as an issue after all that has happened since 9/11/01, then I ask you to read on the subject and think about it, because our culture is changing and not for the better in my opinion. This is about the attitude of the community, and what I'm seeing from the responses is that the people who insist on uniforms don't even think there's an issue here. That's the most troubling part of this: the assumption that the majority can in all cases dictate to the minority, and the willingness to call me a dictator for vigorously expressing what I truly believe.