Re “The ‘boobies' boo-boo,” Opinion, Aug. 21

Roger Weaver writes a clear and compelling piece explaining why the court made it more difficult for schools, but he misses the point entirely. The school, teachers and administrators missed a teaching opportunity when they sought suspension as the means of correction for the two middle school girls who wore the bracelets.

Why didn't the school counsel these girls to make a more formal and more appropriate statement about the need for breast cancer research? Adolescents are greatly concerned about social identity and their emerging sexuality. They need schools and parents to work together to guide them as they mature.

Adolescents are ready to take action. Why couldn't the adults involved have found positive action the girls might have taken? Could they have led a donation drive for breast cancer research?

Instead, the adults found attorneys to argue their positions. That is a waste of public funds.

Aren't schools supposed to teach controversial subjects? Why shouldn't middle school students learn better behavior with guidance from parents and the school?

John Roach
Carlsbad

Weaver should perhaps read his dictionary. The word “booby” has several different meanings, such as “stupid person” (hence booby prize), “classroom dunce” and “a class of birds.”

To ban a bracelet saying “I boobies!” would be rather ridiculous since the wearer may be in favor of protecting birds.

Also, if the author thinks that wearing such a bracelet will somehow contribute to a hostile environment for young girls, he hasn't spent much time outside his principal's office. The problem existed long before the bracelets and, thanks to popular culture, will continue even without the bracelets.

Gary Page
Hemet

More letters to the editor ...