Monday, September 24, 2018

Suspension Over Prom

by D. E. Carson (writer), , May 13, 2009

The victim mentality is alive and well in America.

You know the story of Tyler Frost.  He’s the high school senior who attended his girlfriend’s prom and was suspended from his own school because of it.  He attends a private Christian school, she attends a different school.  The principal of the Christian school told Frost that if he attended the prom he would face suspension for violation of the school’s no dancing policy.

Frost went anyway.

He was then suspended from his school and will not be able to take his final exams on time nor will he be allowed to graduate with the rest of his class.

Based on his demeanor during his interview with Harry Smith on CBS’s The Early Show, it appears that Frost knew the consequences of his actions and chose to attend the prom with his girlfriend anyway.  Frost even said that he believed going to the prom was “worth the risk.”  He also called it “the right decision” and seems to have no regrets about making the decision.  It was a very adult thing for him to do – weigh the consequences and make your decision.

But don’t expect Frost’s step-father to be quite so mature.

During their appearance on The Early Show , Frost’s step-father got up and left in the middle of the interview but not before saying on national television that there would be a lawsuit against the school in the future.

Now wait just a minute here.

According to Frost, the school has a contract that the student and parent must sign and in that contract is the stipulation that there is to be no dancing.  The school is a Christian school and there are some Christian denominations that frown on dancing.  That is the school’s right.  If the school is private and run by a church, that church has the authority and the right to ban any activity that it feels is contrary to its tenets and beliefs.  The step-father knew this going in as did Frost and yet both have taken very different attitudes toward the outcome.

The step-father obviously supported Frost’s decision to violate the contract and attend the dance and had no problem with that.  However, when the school exercised its rights under the contract, the step-father became agitated and is now threatening to sue the school.

What is the real lesson being taught here?  It certainly isn’t, “act like an adult and take responsibility for your actions and face the consequences of actions that violate rules.”  The lesson the step-father is teaching here is, “if you disagree with something in a contract, violate that contract and then sue the hell out of the other party to get your way in the end.”

Is this America?

Somebody needs to take that step-father aside and slap the snot out of him.  Frost knew what he was doing violated the school’s policy and he willingly accepted the consequences.  But the step-father is having none of it.  The step-father is essentially saying that even though Frost knowingly and willingly violated the terms of the contract with the school, he shouldn’t be held responsible for violating a term in the contract with which he does not agree.  Contracts are meant to be agreements between two parties that say, “you do A, B and C, we will do X, Y and Z.”  That’s why there are contracts because people stopped being true to their honored word and started changing deals in mid-stream.  If you don’t like a contract, no one ever forces you to enter into it.  You have the right to walk away from a contract if you do not or cannot agree with it before you sign it.  That is why you should always READ a contract before you sign it.  That way you know and understand what you are signing.

It’s people like Frost’s step-father and their blood-sucking moron lawyers that are why litigation is such a big business in America today.  Chances are that even if this does make it to trial and there are monetary damages awarded, the shark…er…lawyer will get most of the money.  If the judge who gets his or her hands on this case does anything with it except throw it out and have the step-father and his screw-up…er…lawyer thrown in the slammer for contempt of court, then that judge deserves to be yanked off that bench so fast that his chair screws itself right into the floor.

Young Mr. Frost is learning a valuable lesson here.  His step-father is being stupid and lousing it up.

About the Writer

D. E. Carson is a writer for BrooWaha. For more information, visit the writer's website.
Want to write articles too? Sign up & become a writer!

3 comments on Suspension Over Prom

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By L DeSilva-Johnson on May 13, 2009 at 01:21 pm

Wow, how did I miss this story! (in the news, too) -- nice article, DE, and brings us some really interesting questions about personal responsibiltity vs. institutional "honor" and other rules and codes that are meant to enforce but totally end up doing the opposite... so aggravating.

PS: anyone else thinking about Footloose right about now? anyone?

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By D. E. Carson on May 15, 2009 at 12:24 am

PS: anyone else thinking about Footloose right about now? anyone?

As I was writing this, I was trying to figure out how to work the name of the movie into the headline of the story.  And the whole time I kept hearing the song in my head.  Then I was also thinking of a town not far from where I grew up that could have been the inspiration for the movie.

On the other hand this entire incident is just typical of small minded people with "christian" values.

Um, please tred lightly here, you're on the verge of implying that all Christians are "small minded people."  Incidentally, I know some very progressive, Christian-minded people.  Those just happen to be the ones who don't get caught up in the legalistic garbage that make rules about no dancing in private, church-run schools.

D.E., You are right in calling him out on his behavior.  

Thanks, Deano...and that's a sincere thanks, not one of my usual snarky ones.  I should hope that it costs him if he pursues it -- unless he enlists the help of the ALCU. Then all bets are off.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: -1
By D. E. Carson on May 20, 2009 at 07:37 pm

Hey Deano, that was a neat trick, you're second comment is timestamped BEFORE the first one!  How'd you pull that one off?

People are right to ignore Friedman on courts regulating the markets.  The courts have no place regulating the markets.  That's the consumer's job.  Perhaps you've forgotten that the courts are to interpret the law, not legislate from the bench.

 Report abuse

Add A Comment!

Click here to signup or login.

Rate This Article

Your vote matters to us