Graduation controversy at Petaluma High

[rcecale]

It's a tradition that dates back centuries. The long robes and square hats high school and college graduates wear when they receive their diplomas became de rigeur in the 12th century, back when universities were still deeply intertwined with the church. In the last 700 years, thick wool robes have given way to lightweight polyester, but little else has changed. Every year across the country the cap and gown remain the dress of the day for millions of graduating students.

This year, however, the traditional dress of the graduate has become the center of a controversy at Petaluma High School.

Jim and Kim Kiernan decided to challenge the custom in the name of their son Steven, who just finished Marine boot camp. They'd like to see him graduate from Petaluma High School on June 11 in his military uniform......


....What does the Marine Corps think of all of this?

"The high school graduation is the high school's graduation," said Gunnery Sgt. Shane Maria, head of the Santa Rosa Marine recruiting station. "It's not our event. If the appropriate attire for the event is a cap and gown, then he'll be wearing a cap and gown."

A possible solution to the whole dilemma, "to pacify a lot of flames that have been brought up with veterans groups," would be for the high school to announce Kiernan's military status when they read his name, the Marine Sgt. said.

"The verbal recognition would be like smoking a peace pipe," he said.

Just kinda curious why the ACLU hasn't climbed all over this one.

Perhaps they're too busy shredding documents.

Randy

[bell]

did anyone stop to ask the kid what HE wanted?
i see quotes from the family and school but not the marine (steven).........

[Jeff Higgins]

Give them time and they will jump all over it. They are clueless enough. On a different high-school related note, they (the ACLU) did raise a rucuss over a local school whose mascot was named after a local Indian tribe, claiming it was "dissrespectfull". The tribal leader responded that they though it was an honor to have the school mascot named after them. It should have been between the tribe and the school. Same thing here; it should be between the Marine Corps and the school. If the Corps into which this young man is headed tells him to follow school tradition, he should respect them and the school and do as told. I'm sure he will, until some third party idiots like the ACLU get their mitts on this.

[Jared at Pelican Parts]

Is this really a big deal?

He wore a marine uniform BFD...

[rcecale]

I'd be willing to bet the Marine will opt to wear civvies under his robe, like everyone else. Wearing the robe over his uniform certainly isn't an option...against Uniform Regulations.

This young man is an achiever and probably wouldn't give the ACLU the time of day in this matter.

Randy

[rcecale]

Originally posted by Jared Fenton
Is this really a big deal?

He wore a marine uniform BFD...

The reason I posted this was more about the ACLU than about the Marine. If this was about some muslim wanting to wear a turban, instead of the mortar board, you can bet the ACLU would be all over it.

And no, I'm not "muslim bashing", I'm just using this "hypothetical" situation as an example.

Randy

[350HP930]

If the family and school are still working this out there is no reason to get the ACLU involved.

They step in when you need to go to court to fight for your constitutional rights, such as free speech which this marine could claim he is fighting for.

But then again this is likely a voluntary ceremony with rules. What's to keep a nudist from wanting to get his diploma naked, or a disruptive student wanting to wear a t-shirt that says 'school sucks'.

You should save your ACLU bashing for when there is actually a case that needs to be taken up that they refuse to join in on.

If you are going to criticize an organization its a lot better to do so when there is actually something to criticize.

Where do you get this stuff, from listening to rush limbaugh?

[rcecale]

Originally posted by 350HP930
You should save your ACLU bashing for when there is actually a case that needs to be taken up that they refuse to join in on.

I prefer to bash them when they stick their nose in where it doesn't belong. For instance, read Jeff Higgins' post above.

Your friends at the ACLU are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites who love to force their will on everyone else, but can't even follow thier own procedural requirements.

Have you taken the time to read my second link, or are you just running off at the mouth because it's something posted by ME?

Randy

[350HP930]

Originally posted by rcecale
I prefer to bash them when they stick their nose in where it doesn't belong. For instance, read Jeff Higgins' post above.

Your friends at the ACLU are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites who love to force their will on everyone else, but can't even follow thier own procedural requirements.

Have you taken the time to read my second link, or are you just running off at the mouth because it's something posted by ME?

Randy

For one, they only stick their nose in when people are denied of ther constitutional rights. Didn't you take an oath yourself at one point in your life to do the same? Why the double standard, are you a better person forcing your will on others with a gun as compared to lawyers fighting for people's rights via the legal system?

I also read your link. I have done some work for large legal firms and other companies with strong privacy concerns and a shredder is a commonly used device in many organizations.

If blowing out of proportion the fact that some of the people that work for the ACLU are sloppy in executing their document protection safeguards as well as protecting themselves from snooping is the best that you can do the conclusion is obvious.

ACLU >> rcecale

[rcecale]

Originally posted by 350HP930
Why the double standard, are you a better person forcing your will on others with a gun as compared to lawyers fighting for people's rights via the legal system?

Yes!

350HP930=doo doo

Randy

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by 350HP930
For one, they only stick their nose in when people are denied of ther constitutional rights.

This is a joke, correct? The ACLU are as political as they come and are so liberal that many in the country feel that they need to be abolished, myself included.

You see it differently, but they you see many things differently. The fact that many of us spent sometime in uniform to protect your right and ability to feel and say this should mean something but its forgotten a lot of the time.

If everyone would read the entire article, the Sgt. of this Marine said that he should "wear his uniform under his gown" and if he is a good Marine thats what he will do.

Joe A

[350HP930]

I dislike the fact that the ACLU never stands up for the second amendment, but there is another less than perfect organization that safeguards just that amendment after all.

If you and randy think that our constitutional rights are not worth protecting thank god you two no longer wear a uniform for any branch of our government.

[M.D. Holloway]

I think a bigger story was a few years back when a bunch of kids didn't wear anything under their robes - girls were included.

Where was that?

[rcecale]

Originally posted by 350HP930
If you and randy think that our constitutional rights are not worth protecting thank god you two no longer wear a uniform for any branch of our government.

You better be careful invoking the name of the lord, your buddies at the ACLU may come after YOU!

Case 1

Case 2

Case 3

Randy

[bell]

Originally posted by bell
did anyone stop to ask the kid what HE wanted?

no one answered my question.........

[rcecale]

Originally posted by bell
no one answered my question.........

From the article...

So off went Steven Kiernan to Marine boot camp in San Diego, with plans to complete training and be back in time to walk with his high school graduating class -- in his newly earned Marine dress blues.

It seems at one point he DID intend to wear his uniform. I guess we'll have to wait for Paul Harvey to give us "The Rest Of The Story."

Randy

[Joeaksa]

Originally posted by 350HP930
I dislike the fact that the ACLU never stands up for the second amendment, but there is another less than perfect organization that safeguards just that amendment after all.

If you and randy think that our constitutional rights are not worth protecting thank god you two no longer wear a uniform for any branch of our government.

A few of us fought to keep the rights for everyone, even for people like you who have no idea what they are worth. When you have been based overseas and see first hand how other countries treat their citizens, you have a much better respect for what we have here in America.

The ACLU is not impartial, course neither are most of the liberals.

If everyone would read the article, they would find out that the kid is not out of boot, and has talked to his parents twice while in boot, for a total of 10 minutes a call. He has no idea what is going on.

Joe A

[Stanley]

I really don't want to get involved in the whole ACLU argument. But I will add that the Marine has agreed to wear his cap and gown. However, when his name is called "private, U.S. Marine Corps" will be added after it. This was reported in the July 3rd Press Democrat (article is not online). The issue has essentially been resolved.

Sonoma County has really been in the news recently. First it was was the brawl at the rugby match, then we find out that deep throat lives in Santa Rosa, and now the Marine thing.

[jyl]

Originally posted by Joeaksa
A few of us fought to keep the rights for everyone, even for people like you who have no idea what they are worth. When you have been based overseas and see first hand how other countries treat their citizens, you have a much better respect for what we have here in America.

I've lived overseas, traveled as well, and can name quite a few countries whose citizens are treated as well as we are in the US. Pretty much all of Western Europe, for instance.

[bell]

Originally posted by Joeaksa

If everyone would read the article, they would find out that the kid is not out of boot, and has talked to his parents twice while in boot, for a total of 10 minutes a call. He has no idea what is going on.

i must've missed that.......