Kilt controversy nearly keeps johnston county teen from attending his prom

[Tobus]

Telling people to simply follow the rules because no one is forcing them to participate is such an awful cop-out. All what that does, is it simply sends the message that the rules are correct, above reproach, and that "authority" should never be questioned, no matter how correct or incorrect it may be. Why, yes. That WOULD make everyone's life a whole lot easier if they didn't have to put up with all these annoying, rebellious teenagers. But I've never been the one to sit with the sheeple, either. I think it's admirable and courageous when people (especially young people) stand up for what they think is right.

I usually agree with this sentiment (trust me, I'm usually the last person to advocate obedience), but I think there's a time and a place for it. This isn't a question of morality or social justice. Refusing to sit at the back of the bus as an act of civil disobedience for the purpose of protesting racial segregation is not quite the same thing as showing up to the prom in a kilt. Let's not make this more than it is.

For one thing, there's a difference between an adult challenging the authority of another adult, and a child challenging the authority of a parent or teacher or other authority figure. Kids should be taught morals and ethics, and should know when an authority figure should be challenged based on that. But encouraging children to challenge authority just for the sake of challenging authority (or because they personally disagree with the rules) is not a good thing. Kids need to be taught to respect their parents' authority, and the authority of other adults who their parents designate - which in this case includes the prom people. Once they're adults, they're free to challenge authority for whatever reason they want. But when they're kids, they first need to learn respect for authority. That's what living in a society means.

Secondly, they need to learn the proper channels for challenging something they disagree with, or that they think is wrong. Showing up to the prom, knowing that one may be breaking the rules, and without having attempted first to kindly ask the question, is not the right way. This kid, just like many others before him who have brazenly shown up to prom wearing something that they knew (or should have known) would likely get them refused, went about it the wrong way. Acts of civil disobedience, trying to cause a stramash, or even doing something that is likely to cause a scene, should never come before a mature, peaceful, and respectful attempt to ask for the rule to be changed.

In other words, this kid had plenty of other more intelligent ways to approach this. Instead, he chose to just show up in a kilt. And then, when refused (as he should have expected he might be), he chose to make a stink in the media about it. If that's the way we're teaching kids to handle themselves, we have some big problems in society.

[Liam]

I usually agree with this sentiment (trust me, I'm usually the last person to advocate obedience), but I think there's a time and a place for it. This isn't a question of morality or social justice. Refusing to sit at the back of the bus as an act of civil disobedience for the purpose of protesting racial segregation is not quite the same thing as showing up to the prom in a kilt. Let's not make this more than it is.

For one thing, there's a difference between an adult challenging the authority of another adult, and a child challenging the authority of a parent or teacher or other authority figure. Kids should be taught morals and ethics, and should know when an authority figure should be challenged based on that. But encouraging children to challenge authority just for the sake of challenging authority (or because they personally disagree with the rules) is not a good thing. Kids need to be taught to respect their parents' authority, and the authority of other adults who their parents designate - which in this case includes the prom people. Once they're adults, they're free to challenge authority for whatever reason they want. But when they're kids, they first need to learn respect for authority. That's what living in a society means.

Secondly, they need to learn the proper channels for challenging something they disagree with, or that they think is wrong. Showing up to the prom, knowing that one may be breaking the rules, and without having attempted first to kindly ask the question, is not the right way. This kid, just like many others before him who have brazenly shown up to prom wearing something that they knew (or should have known) would likely get them refused, went about it the wrong way. Acts of civil disobedience, trying to cause a stramash, or even doing something that is likely to cause a scene, should never come before a mature, peaceful, and respectful attempt to ask for the rule to be changed.

In other words, this kid had plenty of other more intelligent ways to approach this. Instead, he chose to just show up in a kilt. And then, when refused (as he should have expected he might be), he chose to make a stink in the media about it. If that's the way we're teaching kids to handle themselves, we have some big problems in society.

Wow... Twice I am in basic agreement with Tobus.

[Father Bill]

So where is the kindness, thoughtfulness, and generosity in this situation... on either side?

[tpa]

So where is the kindness, thoughtfulness, and generosity in this situation... on either side?

Wasn't going to mention that, but for a Christian do, the Christian element seems to be sadly lacking. From the wording of the original article it would seem that the lad had no idea that his kilt might not be acceptable and if, as it says he has, he has worn it on many other occasions, presumably locally, then I see no reason why he should. However it is the suggestion that he wears it with trousers which is the real killer. It is either based on ignorance or B mindedness and neither is excusable in the eyes of the law. In my school days it would have been the haircut that got him thrown out.

[Tobus]

So where is the kindness, thoughtfulness, and generosity in this situation... on either side?

Are you kidding? They could have simply turned him away and told him to come back when he was properly dressed. Instead, they offered several solutions for him, they gave him free photos, and one of the sponsors left to buy him some dress pants, presumably with their own money. They did everything possible to accommodate this young man so that he could still attend his prom (short of bending their rules, of course). I think they went well beyond the call of duty. Their statement was kind-hearted and apologetic, while still holding to their rules. I commend them for being as sensitive about it as they could.

There were plenty of cold-hearted ways they could have said no. But they acted with kind hearts, generosity, and, quite literally, charity.

[Tobus]

However it is the suggestion that he wears it with trousers which is the real killer. It is either based on ignorance or B mindedness and neither is excusable in the eyes of the law.

This isn't Scotland. Most folks here know nothing of kilts. So yes, ignorance. But what does the law have to do with this?

[Father Bill]

Tobus, no, I'm not kidding. Their response after the fact was indeed kind, but their reasoning lacked something here, so get off your high horse; it's getting offensive stepping in the droppings.

[Tobus]

We're just having a conversation here, and disagreeing civilly. But if you're going to use the bully pulpit as a moderator to shut down opposing viewpoints and accuse me of being offensive (while referring to my replies as feces, no less), then fine. I've said my piece. You win.

[Father Bill]

While I am a moderator, I am first a member, and if it was intended civilly, then I apologize. It certainly didn't feel that way.

[Liam]

We're just having a conversation here, and disagreeing civilly. But if you're going to use the bully pulpit as a moderator to shut down opposing viewpoints and accuse me of being offensive (while referring to my replies as feces, no less), then fine. I've said my piece. You win.

Here however I do not agree my friend, nor do I with the Padre...