Strip Search of High School Student Ruled Illegal

[Treznor]

[
Here's another question however; Who decides what is right and what is wrong?

Ayn Rand, duh. Don't you know ANYTHING?

So our overlord is a rotting Russian corpse?

If she could find a way, she would be.

[Sdaeriji]

Here's another question however; Who decides what is right and what is wrong?

That is a Pandora's Box question, LG.

[Conserative Morality]

If she could find a way, she would be.

You should familiarize yourself with the writings of the eminent Russian American sex kitten, philosopher, and zombie overlord Ayn Rand.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Here's another question however; Who decides what is right and what is wrong?

That is a Pandora's Box question, LG.

Yep.

[Treznor]

Here's another question however; Who decides what is right and what is wrong?

That is a Pandora's Box question, LG.

Not as much as you think. While we have the mistaken impression that society works that out for the common good (with the occasional spanking for trying to claim certain minorities don't get to participate), Bluth in his Objectivist glory knows that he alone gets to decide what's right or wrong for himself, and that whatever he decides has no bearing on anyone else. He has the right to carry a fully-equipped automatic weapon loaded with armor-piercing bullets for his own protection if he so decides it's right for him. If, in the process of defending himself against a door-to-door salesman a bullet should happen to pass through the salesman and strike an innocent passerby, that's not his problem. He was only doing what's right for him, and that's the only thing that matters.

If she could find a way, she would be.

You should familiarize yourself with the writings of the eminent Russian American sex kitten, philosopher, and zombie overlord Ayn Rand.

I have, as much as I care to. Then the nausea overcame my desire to torture myself, and I had to stop.

[Neo Art]

I have, as much as I care to. Then the nausea overcame my desire to torture myself, and I had to stop.

Seriously. Believe it or not, it gets even WORSE once you get past the table of contents.

[The Cat-Tribe]

Your second has a kernel of truth but ignores the issue at hand -- whether the school officials in this case should be liable for damages for their actions. Sorry, but law has some relevance there.

No, they should be held liable for damages based not upon the law but upon more important principles of right and wrong.

As it happens, the law is right in this case. But they're not liable for damages because of "the law," they're liable for damages because they were wrong regardless of the law.

In this bizarro world of yours, who decides who is liable of damages and based on what criteria and authority?

I'd love to hear Bluth Corporation's answer to my reasonable question.

[Sdaeriji]

In this bizarro world of yours, who decides who is liable of damages and based on what criteria and authority?

I'd love to hear Bluth Corporations answer to my reasonable question.

The Universe.

[Treznor]

I have, as much as I care to. Then the nausea overcame my desire to torture myself, and I had to stop.

Seriously. Believe it or not, it gets even WORSE once you get past the table of contents.

Okay, thanks for the information but you really need to stop now. I was right in the middle of eating lunch.

[Samatolian City-States]

I agree with the majority opinion in this case. I don't find the fact that some random child tattled on another probable cause for making her strip down to nothing.

Then again, you never can tell with those gym teachers.

In this bizarro world of yours, who decides who is liable of damages and based on what criteria and authority?

The same people who always have: The judges and lawyers of the civil litigation system. I'd say there's a good case for emotional damages, sexual harassment, stuff like that. I'm not a lawyer though, so I don't know the exact terms.

[Neo Art]

In many ways I have found "Atlas Shrugged" to be much like "the Necromonicon". A text of such pure and concentrated evil that even opening the cover threatens your very soul. Except that instead of having their soul pulled into a vile dimension to be devoured by Ancient Old Ones for all eternity, those that gaze upon its words run the risk of becoming objectivists.

Which in many ways is actually worse.

[Greed and Death]

now my dream of being a school security guard is ruined.

[Sdaeriji]

In many ways I have found "Atlas Shrugged" to be much like "the Necromonicon". A text of such pure and concentrated evil that even opening the cover threatens your very soul. Except that instead of having their soul pulled into a vile dimension to be devoured by Ancient Old Ones for all eternity, those that gaze upon its words run the risk of becoming objectivists.

Which in many ways is actually worse.

"Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."

[Treznor]

In many ways I have found "Atlas Shrugged" to be much like "the Necromonicon". A text of such pure and concentrated evil that even opening the cover threatens your very soul. Except that instead of having their soul pulled into a vile dimension to be devoured by Ancient Old Ones for all eternity, those that gaze upon its words run the risk of becoming objectivists.

Which in many ways is actually worse.

"Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."

[Soheran]

"Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."

What is the origin of that quote?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

In many ways I have found "Atlas Shrugged" to be much like "the Necromonicon". A text of such pure and concentrated evil that even opening the cover threatens your very soul. Except that instead of having their soul pulled into a vile dimension to be devoured by Ancient Old Ones for all eternity, those that gaze upon its words run the risk of becoming objectivists.

Which in many ways is actually worse.

"Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."

Yay!

I must have a name for this quote.

[Sdaeriji]

"Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."

What is the origin of that quote?

I wish I knew.

[Poliwanacraca]

Pfft, the other involves orcs, and is awesome.

[Treznor]

"Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."

What is the origin of that quote?

I'm not sure. I find it here and everything seems to point back to that. It originated just this year.

[Sdaeriji]

"Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other involves orcs."

What is the origin of that quote?

I'm not sure. I find it here and everything seems to point back to that. It originated just this year.

Yeah, I picked it up off the And Zoidberg TV Trope.

[Ifreann]

In many ways I have found "Atlas Shrugged" to be much like "the Necromonicon". A text of such pure and concentrated evil that even opening the cover threatens your very soul. Except that instead of having their soul pulled into a vile dimension to be devoured by Ancient Old Ones for all eternity, those that gaze upon its words run the risk of becoming objectivists.

Which in many ways is actually worse.

If you summon C'thulhu, you'll be eaten. If you summon Ayn Rand you'll equal A. THE HORROR!

[Deus Malum]

In many ways I have found "Atlas Shrugged" to be much like "the Necromonicon". A text of such pure and concentrated evil that even opening the cover threatens your very soul. Except that instead of having their soul pulled into a vile dimension to be devoured by Ancient Old Ones for all eternity, those that gaze upon its words run the risk of becoming objectivists.

Which in many ways is actually worse.

Except that copies of Atlas Shrugged ACTUALLY EXIST. This makes it infinitely worse than a fictional book.

[UNIverseVERSE]

I'm not sure. I find it here and everything seems to point back to that. It originated just this year.

I looked through that, and I followed a (rather interesting) link in the comments, to this. Holy crap.

[Fartsniffage]

Ah, ok. So it's both illegal AND unconstitutional. That makes sense.

Erm, not...ok, here's the thing. The constitution is law. Breaking the law is illegal. By definition then, when the government violates the constitution they are breaking the law, and thus acting illegally.

It's not "both illegal and unconstitutional". "illegal" means "in violation of the law". "unconstitutional" means "in violation of the constitution". Anything done unconstitutional is, by definition, illegal. "unconstitutional" is just, if you want to think in mathematical terms, a "subset" of illegal, in that it refers to the specific law being broken, namely, the constitution.

Sorry if this has already been asked but if something is unconstitutional then isn't it misleading to say it is illegal as I assume there are laws against things that aren't mentioned in the constitution? I.E. something can be illegal but not unconsititutional but not vice versa?

[Deus Malum]

Ah, ok. So it's both illegal AND unconstitutional. That makes sense.

Erm, not...ok, here's the thing. The constitution is law. Breaking the law is illegal. By definition then, when the government violates the constitution they are breaking the law, and thus acting illegally.

It's not "both illegal and unconstitutional". "illegal" means "in violation of the law". "unconstitutional" means "in violation of the constitution". Anything done unconstitutional is, by definition, illegal. "unconstitutional" is just, if you want to think in mathematical terms, a "subset" of illegal, in that it refers to the specific law being broken, namely, the constitution.

Sorry if this has already been asked but if something is unconstitutional then isn't it misleading to say it is illegal as I assume there are laws against things that aren't mentioned in the constitution? I.E. something can be illegal but not unconsititutional but not vice versa?

My understanding is that he's not saying that it's "not both" so much as he's saying that something unconstitutional is by definition illegal, as violating the constitution is an illegal act.
The best analogy I can think of off the top of my head is that what he's saying is equivalent to saying that something is a square, and that being a square falls within the subset "rectangle" and it's redundant to say something is "Both a square and a rectangle." If it's a square, it's by definition a rectangle, and if it's unconstitutional it's by definition illegal