I disturb myself sometimes.
When I heard reports about the Supreme Court’s rulings involving schools a couple weeks ago, I don’t like how I reacted.
I did manage to ignore the obsession people seemed to have with the more religious of the two. Timed to coincide with the Pledge of Allegience debate, I have a hard time disbelieving it wasn’t intended to overshadow greateer things.
But as for the ruling that legitimized random drug testing in extracurricular high school activities, I said “Why not?”
Why is it permissable to require drug testing as a requirement to participating in extracurricular drug testing?
The ruling was based on ‘Special Needs’ exceptions. The idea behind these exceptions was that some people are in positions so critical and dangerous that they should be examined that they can complete their duties safely and not endanger the public. These people are allowed to quit their jobs rather than face examination.
What does your average high school student do that fits this description?
In professional sports, athletes are often tested to ensure that they are not recieving an unfair advantage due to drug or biologicals use. These people are allowed to quit their jobs rather than face examination.
Again, how does this effect high school students? Will millions of dollars be at stake if East Bumpafuck defeats West?
But participation in extracurricular activities is often considered in college admissions. Try making it through school without participating in something? Do you believe that the definition of extracurricular activities won’t eventually be extended to school dances and graduation parties?
If schools are meant to prepare youth for the real world, why are they subject to searches that no free person would submit to? Or is it more of a matter of time before you could be subject to such a test?