"Going Steady"

Read the two page picture below and discuss. Both sides have some fairly good points, so this should be good.

Click me for the quite large picture!

 

In all honesty, I think this is complete bullshit.

As soon as I read it was for a Christian School, the bell went off in my head.

People have the right to date whoever they want, and quite honestly, Studies and school should not interfere with peer relations unexcused. (Unless it's bullying and they get called in). I just don't think it's fair that they get suspended for having a non-volatile, crazy relationship.

Also, a "steady" relationship is completely arbitrary. What constitutes a "steady" relationship? How does the school know they have no intention to marry, or if they are a frequent couple without invading their privacy? What constitutes a "prolonged" relationship? Would it be better/different if the girls were all whores and it was like musical whores/chairs? And would it be different if every two months they broke up for a day or two?

All of these ways to classify a "steady" relationship are completely arbitrary, and no punishment should be able to be given for participating in something which is not defined clearly.

 

They clearly define what the consider "steady dating":

 

Sounds like far-right socially conservative nonsense to me. I also laughed at the J. Edgar Hoover reference at the beginning, considering that he was a cross-dresser.

 

I know, that's why I posed my questions:

Also, a "steady" relationship is completely arbitrary. What constitutes a "steady" relationship? How does the school know they have no intention to marry, or if they are a frequent couple without invading their privacy? What constitutes a "prolonged" relationship? Would it be better/different if the girls were all whores and it was like musical whores/chairs? And would it be different if every two months they broke up for a day or two?

All of these ways to classify a "steady" relationship are completely arbitrary, and no punishment should be able to be given for participating in something which is not defined clearly.

Their definitions are not concrete or precise.

 

Their definition is fairly specific and it is easy to know if you are in a steady relationship. So, their definition is fairly clear. What do you want? Exact dates and things? Every definition of steady dating is going to have arbitrary numbers involved. Secondly, every school invades the privacy of students. Its kind of hard to keep what you are doing private and thus other students will find out and any teacher that isn't a moron will figure it out soon after that.

All of that's besides the point though...

 

Yes, every teacher will figure it out, but teachers shouldn't be looking to figure it out, they shouldn't be looking for it, if you know what I mean. They have other things to worry about other than student relationships.

And yes, I do want exact dates, or the punishment would be sooner/later for each person. But who is to decide these dates? And who is to say that dating one month is different than dating one month and a day?

I'm arguing that 1). There is no way to really define "steady dating" without some arbitrary numbers, and 2). Because there is no way to define steady dating without being arbitrary, and because this is an invasion of student's privacy, there should be no consequence on "steady dating"

 

Regardless of all that, this thread was more about steady dating vs non steady dating (if that's what you want to call it).

 

As a writer, this paper is complete shit. It's backed with absolutely no evidence to show that teens involved in an intimate relationship is destroying moral character. It merely assumes that such is true based on pure speculation.

As a freedom-ringer, I would say that anyone imposing on a persons right to pursue happiness of any kind is an insult. If two people wish to engage in whatever activity to make themselves happy then that is their constitutional right. While the school has the right to deny them access to the facilities for not adhering to their rules, I would suggest that the school flies in the face of constitutional freedoms by placing restrictions on such...

But whatever, private schools operate under a different faculty. They produce the controlled masses that control others...

 

Can I throw in a point?
I'm not trying to invoke anything, but marriages that are formed by consent by the parents are a large percentage higher more likely to not end in a divorce,
so, that being said, choosing your own partner without any constraint results in less moral stability on average.