Not Jayem, Gordon.

Get used to it. The skunks have invaded the henhouse. MBP

Ok... Here's my post: "Principal Gordon, JM, and the entire community WILL honor military enlistees, both at graduation and at the awards ceremony. The real issue here is not whether they will or will not be recognized, but rather how that recognition is observed, and who determines it. The rules regarding graduation regalia have been established, and are ground in appropriateness and fairness. Again, the military enlistees will be honored; both at graduation and at the awards ceremony! So let’s set a good example for these future “heroes”, who will undoubtedly be asked to enforce military policy created for a common good but may not be popular, by saying thank you, saluting, and moving forward." TB

This would mean that student should be allowed to wear the pins of the sororities and fraternities they plan to join, as well as the trades and masonic symbols of the careers they plan to be in, etc. Yet we know most will not complete college, will switch career goals, etc. Principal Gordon has done the correct thing here. The military is a future event, not something done while in high school. Leave high school graduations to high school accomplishments.

I respect what people in the military do and the sacrifices they make, but why do they deserve some privileged position where no one can dare enforce a rule without the threat of being "recognized?" It's a rule, the rule applies to everyone, and I'm not sure why future military enlistees feel that they are somehow above that rule.

It's not a high school principal's job to be patriotic, it's a high school principal's job to make sure our children are educated properly and to enforce a set of rules for graduation (among other things). He is doing his job, and the fact that military people feel they deserve an exception to this rule seems to imply that they think there is some privilege gained by being employed to defend your country over going to college or choosing any other career path.

If a high school student had a job in law enforcement after graduation, would she be allowed to wear an honor cord? What about something in childcare? What about mothers or fathers? These are all noble callings that have nothing to do with high school accomplishments, should they be allowed to wear honor cords as well? Or is it just enlisting in the military that gains some privileged position that doesn't have to follow the rules that the other students have to follow?

Bravo, I totally agree with your comment Mr. Simms.

Ok... Here's my post: "Principal Gordon, JM, and the entire community WILL honor military enlistees, both at graduation and at the awards ceremony. The real issue here is not whether they will or will not be recognized, but rather how that recognition is observed, and who determines it. The rules regarding graduation regalia have been established, and are ground in appropriateness and fairness. Again, the military enlistees will be honored; both at graduation and at the awards ceremony! So let’s set a good example for these future “heroes”, who will undoubtedly be asked to enforce military policy created for a common good but may not be popular, by saying thank you, saluting, and moving forward." TB

...and for whatever reason these men and women decide to serve their country, God bless them! Clearly you are a person who looks down on them as clearly inferior to you as a person, and in their value to society, which speaks volumes about you (as if using an anonymous name didn't already say plenty).

Why limit conformity to tassels? Why not allow them to wear a different colored robe from the rest of the graduates? Or maybe a military uniform? And maybe people who have received scholarships to play Division I football can wear helmets instead of the graduation cap.

Every school draws the line at conformity somewhere - otherwise students would wear t-shirts and jeans to graduation (or worse). Singling this principal out because he draws the line a little further toward uniformity than others doesn't mean that other principals haven't drawn the line as well and it doesn't mean that there isn't a good reason to do so.

Because ignoring the ruling of a "higher rank" in the situation is what the military is all about, right? Wonderful lesson there...

Simple. The other students earned their tassels. Every time you "give in" and give away, it lowers the value and accomplishments of those who actually did the work (already).
If he wants to wear it under his gown, or put it on after the ceremony, go for it. The school has a policy in place to make the program as special and dignified as possible. Just because he is doing a great thing, doesn't make it a part of that school's program. I hold Eagle Scouts in high regard, but their accomplishment isn't a part of the High School program either; hence we don't see scout sashes over the gowns, as one example. And in this example, the work was done while in H.S.

Can't you see how celebrating one student's post-high school plans while not allowing other students to celebrate theirs takes away from the others? If I was accepted to a prestigious university and wasn't allowed to celebrate my accomplishment while students who joined the military were allowed to celebrate theirs I would likely feel that my achievements were lessened.

And like COD said, the kid signed a piece of paper. While I obviously respect and appreciate the service and don't wish to diminish the sense of duty that these students must have, being accepted to a prestigious university is possibly more closely related to high school accomplishments than pledging to join the military.

Where do you draw the line? Does the kid that is going pre-Med get a special future Med Student tassel? What about the kid joining the Peace Corp, or accepted into the Police Academy, or Firefighters Academy, or a seminary, or whatever. It's not about taking away anything from the others, it's about not turning graduation into a bigger circus than it already is. And it's about keeping the focus of graduation on achievements, as in stuff that has actually been accomplished while the kids were in high school. The military already has a well established system in place to recognize soldiers for the achievements.

If it is that important to mom he can carry the tassel in his pocket, so it goes through graduation and is therefore special, or something. Then he can put it on after the fact for the pictures if that makes his mom feel better.

It is not offensive; and this is where this discussion is getting interesting. What is offensive about telling a student to follow the rules? Are we discussing offensive or are we discussing following the protocol for a H.S. Graduation ceremony. It has nothing to do with military; it has to do with the rules of graduation. A student wants to wear something he didn't earn (yet). Don't make this a anti-military, or freedom of speech or anything more than it is. Who is offended? More importantly, why do we care if they are? The rules say high school sanctioned 'garb' only. Our H.S. doesn't allow the students to even change their headboards (although some get away with modifications once seated). It is very simple, the student asked for special consideration and was told no. What other community groups, special interests, companies, etc would provide chords, sashes, etc. for their recipients to wear if it was allowed? There are all kinds of senior award ceremonies, signing events, scholarship events, etc for each student to get recognized for. If he wants to wear the chords, keep them in his pocket, put them on after the ceremony.

Are you deliberately mischaracterizing the debate? No one's offended by him wanting to wear a cord, but he's not allowed to under the rules. He's also not allowed to wear a baseball cap, a t-shirt saying "I'm with stupid", chaps, or basically anything other than the cap and gown (and appropriate clothes underneath obviously). These are the rules and I'm not sure why we're even debating why he (or anyone) wasn't given a special dispensation to violate them.

Would you support him wearing a pro-Obama t-shirt? Or an anti-war sandwich board? Or a pro-life button? Or a visor representing him being pro-choice?

Actually I would defend this student: He asked permission, and was told no. He (or his mom or both) took it up to the next level. There is nothing wrong with asking. What it really comes down to is how he handles it from here: If he follows some of the advice on this blog "Just wear it anyway", then yes, I would say he will have an eye opener of a time at Parris Island. Nothing wrong with asking. Asked, denied. move on. Don't attack the principal for having the experience and knowledge to say no, don't blame the school board for backing the principal. In a few years, lets invite the young man back to speak before J.M. about his experiences and life lessons. Until he has some, follow the rules and celebrate what he has accomplished (Boys State for one) and let's look forward to more accolades from him in the future.

Did you serve while in high school? Otherwise your points are moot. High School graduations celebrate achievements, not plans.

Again, the rationale is that there is a certain amount of uniformity required at commencement ceremonies. They wear caps and gowns, they don't wear cut-off jean shorts and t-shirts. Every graduation ceremony you've been to has these rules, it's just a matter of a different line being drawn.

Care to answer my questions now? Would you support him wearing a pro-Obama t-shirt? Or an anti-war sandwich board? Or a pro-life button? Or a visor representing him being pro-choice? Where would you draw the line?

Let me push this line of reasoning a little further: is there any negative impact that will result from the students all wearing different colored robes to graduation? Everyone can pick their favorite color and wear that. Or maybe I would prefer to wear a helicopter beanie instead of the traditional cap. How would that negatively impact good order and discipline?

What if I preferred to wear a nice suit to graduation instead of the robe? Why can't I do that? Or maybe just a collared shirt and slacks?

There has to be a bright-line test somewhere Matthew, otherwise the rules can be enforced arbitrarily. The principal is enforcing the rules in a consistent manner, and I would think someone who serves in city government would support such behavior rather than picking and choosing favored groups that can received privileged treatment based on who they are.

So you are then saying that it is up to each and every person to determine which rules they feel are legitimate based on their own analysis (aka their opinion)? I suppose he should also disregard what his superiors tell him to wear at boot camp, and instead wear his sneakers and a t-shirt, since that does not violate your logic. I'm sure that would go over well...

To answer your last question first. Wearing the wrong color uniform could easily result in your untimely death from friendly fire. Admittedly, probably not as big an issue today as it was in the past.

The entire point of the American school system is to teach compliance and uniformity. The high school commencement ceremony is a little late to be getting worked up about it. I don't have any vested interest in this issue. My son skipped high school (actually he skipped k-12 completely) and will be starting college in the Fall. I'm rarely in the position of defending the public school system.

A come-as-you-are commencement ceremony wouldn't really bother me. You are still just as graduated at the end. However, there is a long and established tradition of doing it the way we do it, and just about everybody involved seems to like it that way. I can think of examples where exceptions could be made for individual recognition. If he ran into a burning building and saved 10 classmates, for example. Signing his name to the enlistment papers does not rise to that level.

Would everyone at least talk to the correct subject? This is not a tassel...lol

I would agree with you on most points, except to say that the decision to enlist itself is a far more noble endeavor than finishing boot camp in my opinion. He has weighed the options, and decided to take the risk and join anyway, that is the noble part. Finishing boot camp is an accomplishment of the highest order, but the nobility lies in deciding to serve. That said, I think the Principal acknowledging those who have enlisted is a nice gesture to recognize that as well.

I think the decision to enlist is a whole lot easier then making it through bootcamp. many people make that decision to enlist but the hardship of bootcamp breaks them. It weeds out the weak.

Agreed. Furthermore, there is no other group, that I have seen, that is singled out for recognition at graduation... not students pursing medicine or teaching or nursing or social work or fire and police service... all honorable pursuits that make and keep our country strong and safe, and that have many times called for the sacrifice of life and limb. The military enlistees will be honored; and it is a good and right thing to do! With all ceremony there is protocol... sometimes we like it, sometimes we don't. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective) we can't always have our way.

totally agree.

This whole thing has nothing whatsoever to do with a tassel, it is an honor chord (an additional chord worn around the neck, normally for distinctive achievements I think). The tassel is normally representative of the school colors. The problem would be that they were told "no", and respect would dictate they abide by that.

Agreed. Furthermore, there is no other group, that I have seen, that is singled out for recognition at graduation... not students pursing medicine or teaching or nursing or social work or fire and police service... all honorable pursuits that make and keep our country strong and safe, and that have many times called for the sacrifice of life and limb. The military enlistees will be honored; and it is a good and right thing to do! With all ceremony there is protocol... sometimes we like it, sometimes we don't. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective) we can't always have our way.

I would worry by your comments what this country is becoming as well...advising people that their opinion is unwelcome and invalid because they do not meet your requirements for having the qualifications to provide a comment. I know plenty of those who serve/have served, and not one of them would ever tell someone their opinion is not valid unless they have served as well. In fact, they all serve to protect that very freedom.

@Roger Torres. I'm touched that you apparently set up an account on Patch for the express purpose of insulting me. Really, well played. You are clearly a fine human being with much to add to the public discourse.

Awesome! And everyone leaves happy...OK, some will always find something to complain about, but the important people should be happy...

Aw great. Now people have to go to TWO ceremonies? Geez, all that wasted gas will kill the environment. . . (just kidding, of course!). What a happy ending to a silly dispute!

Nice! Thanks, UMW :)

This has nothing to do with the discussion. No one is arguing the military deserve respect, are needed, etc. No High School student is a military asset. They must get through basic training. This is a discussion about honoring a future military person vs honoring the accomplishments of the high school students. Stop muddying the water.

Roger, this is more than a blog. This is the real deal here. Welcome to Fredericksburg Patch. Come often, and enjoy the conversation and debate.

This, undoubtedly, is the best comment yet on the issue. Your clarity and perspective enlighten the issue for all. This should be the final answer to an emotional issue that seems to have acquired a life of its own to run forever. For the record, I support all of those who serve in all branches of the military and support them well, having a past history that backs this statement. And I'm not running for City Council. Again. Either.

I agree with you in believing in the first amendment and democracy. However, in terms of this issue, I think sight has been lost. At no point in time was the first amendment criticized or questioned. I merely posed the question of whether or not the parent and/or student followed the chain of command within the school district. Principals are not the final say in a district unless authorized to have the final say. This authorization comes from the district's administration.
As far as democracy, I am not entirely sure why this is attached to this argument. A school district, somewhat similar to the military, is not a democracy. It has a chain of command, that does not require a vote to establish a decision. Truly, the only aspect of a school district that is democratic is the school board. Again, I will remind you that I posed the question of whether or not all decision makers were involved. If the family only asked the building level principal, then no, not all decision makers were involved.
I can certainly appreciate the passion presented for this issue. On the surface, it may appear to be a very simple question with an easy solution. Unfortunately, for a school administrator and district, these types of situations frequently pose implications that are more complex, requiring thoughtful consideration for a diverse population of individuals.

At no point in time, in the five points that were made, did I accuse people of "playing politics" who did not agree with the decision and expressed their opinions. My accusation, as you refer to it, was in reference to bypassing others involved in the decision-making process so as to present the issue to a body that would be covered by the press. The building principal is not the end of the line for the chain of command in a school district. Additionally, the School Board is not the next in line of that chain.
I support questioning issues with rational thinking and discussion. I would never, nor have I ever, teach a child to stay silent when he/she disagrees with something. What I find ironic about your argument is that this young man made a commitment to an organization that teaches and promotes the adherence to a chain of command. When this chain of command is not adequately followed, there is a breakdown in efficiency and performance.
I encourage you to read through the points that I made in my initial post again. I believe you have added some of your own beliefs to it, yet implied they were mine.

Except the young men do not have any "military credentials". They have signed up. They haven't been through boot camp; they are not soldiers--may never even show up for boot camp.

The issues with Principal Gordon on beside the point. Giving a speech about the future, is not the same as celebrating the future. The honors, chords and items worn by the graduates are for things already earned.

Now that UMW has stepped in, the young men will not only get recognized at their graduation, but will have their own special service, too.

Not for journalism it isn't unless he is an actual medical doctor. AP Style, which is the style guide for most newspapers, says you only use DR. for medical doctors. He Principal Gordon to me, and bless him.

I think there are proper channels to follow when resolving issues. In terms of finding solutions to problems, going through the proper channels is important for parents, too. I also think there is a bit of a quibbling over wording...has to-needs to..the sentiment of following the logical path of authority is there. The parent certainly does have every right to speak to the school board; as you stated, it is a freedom of speech. The school board meeting was one available forum to do so.
It is unfortunate that you make the assumption that some of those in the higher levels of the school district would not listen. Have there been instances where these individuals did not listen that would support this assumption? To some, not agreeing with is the same as not listening to.
As far as the chain of command might not have gotten to the issue in time; I think that is a little exaggerated. A phone call and request to meet with a representative of the central office administration does not take long. Perhaps this would allow further explanation of the rationale behind not allowing this particular honor cord (as well as other items to be used as examples), and allow for meaningful discussion regarding the issue. Parents often times, but not necessarily this parent, consider a situation just in terms of their child and not in terms of the future implications of decisions,which, is understandable. It is not their job to consider these implications, it is the district's job.