Now that is funny. Thanks for not taking this too seriously.

No, they should fire the school administrators who violated the girls privacy and First Amendment RIGHTS! I hope the lawsuit is a success and that they win enough to bankrupt the district!

just another example of the states desire to intrude into every aspect of ones life. Why? Because people are nosy snoops who mind everyones business but their own.

Maybe the male coaches those poor girls were forced to apologize too were caught fondling themselves to those racy pictures..who knows?

What the hell happened to parents taking care of raising their kids. When did it become OK for the school or anyone else to tell a kid what is or is not appropriate when they are not in school or on school property? Maybe we should spend more time telling parents to do their job instead of letting schools and polititions do it for them. This falls under the heading of free speech and is there fore protected by the first amendment. Obama has not been successful at removing the constitution YET. In three more years the situation may have changed, but right now we still have over half the bill of rights to protect us.

wait a minute- the pictures were taken OFF the site and circulated at school- so it affected the school- and come on- sophomores in lingerie and penis lollipops- the parents obviously abdicated.

BUD-8696478, you've got to be kidding! It's right-wing, religious nutjobs who want to tell people what they can or can't do with their own bodies. I guarantee you the school officials and coaches who are outraged by what these girls did are not Democrats, but are conservative Republicans who object to their perceived immorality of today's youth. I agree with you the school had no business punishing these girls; it's their parents responsibility. To say that Obama has created an atmosphere that would have schools act this way is completely off base. Bud, I bet you're against abortion and gay rights and would have no objection to letting the government intrude on the rights of people who are for these things.

Big deal, the girls were having some fun together. I am sure they never intended these pictures to be circulated. And, lets not forget, they were not the ones who circulated the photos. Maybe the person or people responsible for circulating the photos should be the ones punished, as they were obviously the ones whose behavior interfered with school activity. For all of you, "where are the parents?; The parents. . ."Please, you obviously do not have kids nor were you ever teenagers. Everyone goes through some sort of rebellion at all ages. During teen years, much of it is harmless sexually oriented fun. Big deal! This has nothing to do with parents or parenting.

I believe that what the girls did on their own time, outside of school, is their own business. It wasn't posted, by them, on a school site or linked to, by them, from a school site. End of Story in my book.

And for Leah-DMB above, NO. Minors in lingerie is NOT kiddie porn. If it were you'd have to arrest every parent that ever took a photo of their child in undies or less, including those fun extortion-ready childhood bath photos. Not to mention every business selling children's clothes. It's the ACTIONS, not simply the attire, that constitutes kiddie porn. THOSE folks, BTW, should meet their maker as soon as possible IMHO.

For those asking what businesses can do this, Many Businesses have clauses whereas their employees' actions outside of work cannot be detrimental to the image of the employer. This is, of course, used mainly as a sure-fire way to release employees committing crimes. It does also include some government jobs such as teaching, law-enforcement officials, and so forth.

For bob5ford and bud,

First I am tired of having to educate people on the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Did we see Congress mentioned in the article? No. Just the stupid ruling of a right-wing Supreme Court. (Now THAT is taking away freedoms.)

Local governments have many restrictions on what some call free speech. Your blaring Toby Keith music is fine in my locale, until it can be heard fifty feet (which I think is way too far even, how about 5) away from your vehicle. Likewise with others' bass-thumping hip-hop and (c)rap. There are many restrictions on what many call free speech. But you have to remember your freedom stops where mine starts.

Still, this case is total BS!

Finally Bud, Obama's mission is to RESTORE the Constitution since Dumbya and Dicky SHREDDED the damn thing. Go back into your birth(er)-hole.Not to mention their violations of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, and 10th amendments (The Bill of Rights) to the Constitution.

The problem is that they may have set it to private but someone copied it/ print it and spread it around in school, then the officials should at least sit them down and discuss the situation. Once it went around in the school... it became school concern.

I don't think punishment was the way to go. But at least the school could have taught a valuable lesson on the truth of Internet privacy and how such photos, even if marked private can get into the wrong hands. Sometimes it takes these little lessons being pointed out that shows us how stupid we can be. Yes as teens we did stupid things... but if we were caught, we didn't get by with them. We at least got a scolding.

"It's the actions, not simply the attire, that constitute kiddie porn."

While there may be some grain of truth to this, did you even read the article? The girls were pictured licking a lollipop that was phallic shaped! How can that not be taken in a sexual context?

Furthermore, a perv pedophiliac may use any picture of a child for his own gratification. In that case any picture could be considered porn. It's not necessarily porn based on what's in the picture, but what it's used for. In the case of these girls, in lingerie, licking penis shaped lollipops...what do you think they were intending to do with those pictures? Certainly nothing rated PG!

If the school wants the right to monitor my kid, I'm going to get a movement together to monitor the teachers. If I find a teacher taking an alcoholic drink, going to a bar, or doing anything that I in my infinite wisdom, deem unsuitable for someone who is around children to do, I will come down hard.

Fair enough?

I would kick your kid out now by your attitude.

I'd have you fired for yours.

Hell, your anti-American, freedom-hating attitude belongs in another country.

Proves you should never post anything you would not want your Grandmother to see.

To participate as a representative of an institution in extra curricular activities, the institution should and does have an right to set standards of behavior. If all you want to do is go to school, attend class and graduate; then no, outside behavior is not the responsibility of the school to police. But if you want the extras, you need to comform to the standards set.

I would agree with that, but if they arent allowed to participate in the sports, why the apology and the counciling? So in part, yes i agree. They must go with the policies laid down or the sports. But the counciling is over the line.

What other behavior will schools decide doesn't conform to their standards?

Sorry, once you go down this slope you're on course for school systems to become parents.

Cowbell1975...I compeltely agree that what kids do after hours and away from the school is generally none of the schools business. I will qualify that by saying that many outside activities do have a way of affecting the school. For example...if the entire school became preoccupied with what a few students posted to the extent that it interfers with school operations...then that would maybe bring the issue into the schools realm of responsibility. But that does not appear to be the situation here.

However...what made me respond to your post was this: "If they did on school grounds on a school computer, then maybe they would have grounds..."

If it happened on school grounds or using school computers...then there is no "maybe" about it. That would definately make it the schools business...especially since the school could potentially be held liable for the consequences.

An old military saying is that you don't give someone the responsibility to do something without also giving them the authority to do something.

rewd1: Sorry, once you go down this slope you're on course for school systems to become parents.

Are you familiar with the phrase "in loco parentis"? It means "in the place of a parent". That's what this entire legal issue is about, and it's already established case law. Schools have the right to act in the place of a parent in at least some circumstances.

(duplicate post removed)

If students were looking at the pics, and disrupting class, those students should be punished for the disruption. What happens away from the school is none of their damn bussiness! I didn't see any mention of students being punished for dirupting class so I believe the school overstepped their responsibility. Let the parents decide what is acceptable for their kids.

As I stated in another post While the girls should face some punishment forcing them to apologize to an all male coaches board is at the very best borderline sexual harassment and I am inclined to believe it is full sexual harassment and should be persued as such. Also the teacher or student who passed the photos to school staff should be punished for passing "pornographic material" if the principle and others feel that is what the pictures are as the article seems to state.

What does participating in extracurricular activities (funded by taxpayers) have to do with standards of behavior outside school. If the student is straight-A, and behaves in school, what right do they have to judge anything? And where is the line they can't cross drawn and who draws it? I'm waiting for the school district that comes up with the standard of behavior that says they must go to church once a month to become a cheerleader. Hey, isn't that a standard of behavior?

While we're on the subject are teachers, adminstrators and staff being held to the same 'set of standards'? Are they fired if they do something on the internet the school doesn't like?

These students are minors, and so have only limited constitutional rights- including freedom of speech and the press particularly at school, and in any school related event- and this is disgusting behavior meant to attract attention- so the ACLU as usual is way off base- these girls really do need counselling or PARENTS!!!

Disgusting behavior, doctorsteph? Judgemental much? These were teenaged girls behaving like.....imagine this...teenage girls. What they do out of school is none of the schools business. The facebook page was set to private...someone copied the pics and gave them to someone at school...thats the person who should be punished, for stealing the pictures and distributing them....

It is not the schools job to raise these kids. Or yours.

No, it is not the schools job to raise these kids. However, to participate in EXTRA curricular activities (thuse the extra) it is a privilage not a right. Standards for participation can be set and held for those wishing to participate. Just because you want something, doesn't mean you get it. Even when provided by the government. Good example, Medicaid medical coverage, there are criteria that the government has set and if you don't meet that criteria, you don't get it. We (the people) elected those officials to set those parameters.

What we're forgetting here is that this is a public school. Our tax dollars pay for this and kids are compelled to attend. That doesn't mean they get to give up their rights as individual people to make the school happy. What the school did was out of line. They overreached their authority.

If it had been my daughter, the Coach's Board would have been apologizing to her.

2wylde- judgemental LOTS- and frankly the criminalization of JUDGEMENT is one of the problems here. This was not considered teenage girl behavior jst a few years ago, in fact this type of bevaior( penis lollipops) was reserved for wedding showers and bachelorette parties. The inference is that the lingerie was more than just baby-doll pJs. This is a cry for attention and I do not believe for a nanosecond that they did not INTEND for this to get out to show how grown they are.

"Sorry, once you go down this slope you're on course for school systems to become parents."

Exactly. They are already telling parents what they can and can't bring for lunch. Including what type of bread you send, or god forbid, if you include a cookie once in a while.

If they would. But let institutions set parameters of deportment in order to represent the institution, this unfortunately includes what you do away from the institution.

Underwriter. You are deficient in mind and should live in communist China.

I appreciate your freedom to say what you would like but freedom comes with responsibility. I don't want someone telling what I can and can't do. However, if a choice is placed before me and there are standards that need to be followed to have that choice, then my choice to participate becomes a decision that I will follow those standards. If I don't want to follow the standards, then I choose not to participate. Not a Communist or Socialist ideal but one of democracy. But once again, thanks for sharing.

The institution is a public tax-payer supported one that students are compelled to attend. All the programs in a school are public ones paid for by the tax-payers and the community. They don't get to decide what student behavior should be outside of the school environment as a representation of the school. Bottom line is that student behavior outside of school doesn't have anything to do with the way the institution is represented. The school in this case is just making themselves look foolish by trying to control their students when they are beyond their control.

Underwriter, the constitution says otherwise, thankfully.

Wow, forget about terrorists. Why do Americans hate us for our freedoms?

this is not a moral issue but a to live by issue where what you do, influences who you associate with and they should have some say in what behavior they want to accept.

What is your definition of "moral"? Why should a school be involved in anything except teaching. if it does not directly affect the individuals in- school behavior

artcc - Morals are the internal guides that you as an individual control your life with.  Deportment/laws of a governing body are what they (the body and individuals in that body) set for your being a representative of that body.  i.e. we as citizens approve the individuals (elected officials) who set laws for the overall society to follow.  A school or team has the ability to set regulations for being a member of that team.  As it is a choice by you the individual to participate, then you as the individual need to comply with what regulations are set to participate.  No one is saying that you cannot take stupid pictures and post them for the world to have access, they are saying that if you choose that behavior, you do not represent our institution in extra curricular activities.  Some things that we want to do have requirements (not morales) in order to participate.  Choose what you want to participate in and then follow the requirements.  Just like becoming a doctor or any other profession, you have to meet a standard to perform the functions.

Problem is, the definition of "morals" is totally subjective. And these girls are not "representatives" of the school. They are individuals. They are compelled by law to attend school and the school simply doesn't have the right to tell them what behavior is "moral" or not "moral" outside of the school environment. I know we like to think that those "codes of conduct" are somehow enforcable in a public school, but they are not and for good reason. Because they are completely subjective and arbitrary. If they want to control student behavior then let them give up public funding and become a private school. Then they can enforce all the silly rules they want.

"this is not a moral issue but a to live by issue where what you do, influences who you associate with and they should have some say in what behavior they want to accept"

Good, then parents will start watching teachers and administrators - monitoring their online activity like facebook and myspace pages, and so on, and watching to make sure they aren't going to bars or clubs, kissing non-spouses in public, and so on.

After all, it goes both ways. People of "low moral character" shouldn't be teaching our kids.

How soon before they can't take their own medicine any longer, when they realize they won't be able to have a drink or get laid?

Morality is not the school's job. It belongs to the parents. I think we're putting entirely too much responsibility onto the schools, expecting them to RAISE children. No wonder Johnny can't read!

I know in our schools they have so many "behavior" related programs (to say nothing of the no-no to cookies programs) that they miss valuable education time.

This is also an issue for teachers/coaches. They should set certain CLASSROOM/TEAM standards and enforce them, but if the students are NOT in the classroom and NOT representing the school (i.e. at a school sponsored event), the responsibility reverts to the PARENTS. (Exception: illegal behavior can and should have consequences as that is breaking an established societal norm.)

While I don't PERSONALLY approve of these girls' behavior, I'm not their mother. Had I have been their mother, *I* probably would have taken away some of those things.

But since the girls apparently didn't break the law, didn't use school time and/or equipment -- it's not the school's business.

But there was no damage to the school's reputation. It was over reaching and arbitrary.

There IS no difference between real and cyber life any more. It's one and the same.

However, these girls did nothing illegal. They were merely stupid. Had they done something ILLEGAL, you might have a point. Curtailing extra curricular activities for illegal activity has some validity. What is illegal is basically a mutually accepted societal norm.

But who decides what "stupidity" is within in their "set parameters" and what "stupidity" is not? That, my friend, is the PARENTS role, not the school's, not the government's and definitely not yours.

If the gov. hadn't gotten right in the middle of American families and started telling them they can't spank their kids and if taxes weren't so high that both parents had to work to make ends meet,one parent could stay home and take care and teach these kids morals.The gov. is actually the culprit here. think about it.

Please explain how the school was put at risk. If this had happened during a school function, I would be right there with you. But it did not. It happened during a recess from school during which time the students were not responsible to or representing any portion of the school.

"The same people who argue that it is none of the schools business, would be up in arms if the pictures or contacts would have been madefor the purpose and use of a Pediphile and a possible meet."

Certainly I'd be "up in arms" about it. But it then becomes a POLICE matter. The school doesn't have responsibility for it.

"We need direction--"

Do we? Seems that's been done before .. needing direction. Hitler and Stalin come to mind. They felt the people of their countries "needed direction" to think right as well.

Ed - You are confusing the issue. It was the "other kids" passing these pictures around that interfered with the school's ability to teach, not these girls.

These pictures may follow them around, but that's their choice, not yours. Stupidity is not illegal. Subjective, yes, but not illegal.

The school needs to bud out.

mr.g right on. the disruption of the "school" was the violation of a trust the girls gave to those with permission to view the picturs, not the taking of them.as a side note, are there no female coaches there or is it a "mens club" and thats why the "girls" are singled out?

Unfortunately in todays society many kids spend more time with their teachers than they do their parents. And when they are out of school many kids of this age are still not around their parents. If the school feels that they should interfere with a situation like this I personally am all for it. Obviously, the parents weren't doing their job when: a. the pictures were taken or b. when they were allowed to be put on the internet. How can we fault the school system for wanting to help parent our kids when it becomes so apparent that many parents aren't up to the task. I hope that when my kids are in school I am fortunate enough to send them to a school where the teachers care enough to worry about my girls even when they aren't in school.

Sorry, this is a cry for attention. And I will bet a month's salary that these girls continued to add friends until someone 'violated their trust' and circulated them at school. Ya'll need to reevaluate girls these days!!

This was during summer vacation! The school has no business in this! When I was in school teacher and school administration's kids were the worst behaved and got away with it. They need to tend to their own houses and kids.

What the school should have done was discipline the students who were passing the pictures around. Did they receive any type of disciplinary action? That actually occurred during school and on school grounds. Where was the discipline for that?

Then don't ask to participate in extra curricular activities representing the school. Simple.

This is an issue to be addressed by the parents not the state. Now if we allow for the state to interfere into our private lives once, then. Where does it end? By allowing the state to interfere in this matter regardless of moral subject, then. What next? The next time, you decide to repair your car and you open up a beer and have a few with your neighbors whom came over to help you, then in your back yard you bring out a cooler full of beer, then. Does this give the police the right to kick down your door because more than one individual is sitting in your yard drinking a beer on your private property, because your morally correct neighbor is utterly offended and decides to call the police? Now does this give the police cart blanche to drag you off to dizneyland when you and your other neighbors are peacefully assembled on private property having a few suds? No. Now if I decide to drag out the sterio at three in the morning and invite seventy to hundred of my friends in a apocryphalic drunk fest, then yes then I'm violating the law and violating my ability to act like a responsible adult in the eyes of my neighbors.

In this case, the State of Indiana can not only run this up their flag pole but up tight into an area where the sun never shines. I am sure you can guess that physical location. Mr G also gave directions to the same general area in question.

I agree Mr. G. Personally, I see no difference in pictures of girls in underwear and pictures of girls in bathing suits at the beach-neither of which should involve the school.

Also, I don't see any harm in them representing the school by playing sports. Can we compare their "dirty" pictures with a member of the football/baseball/soccer team impregnating someone, or being caught with alcohol?

Other students who "misrepresent" the school with outside actions are never subjected to public apologies and counseling, and it's ridiculous that these girls not only had their privacy invaded (and an apology forced), but now they can't participate in sports? Absurd

I agree Mr. G. Personally, I see no difference in pictures of girls in underwear and pictures of girls in bathing suits at the beach-neither of which should involve the school.

Also, I don't see any harm in them representing the school by playing sports. Can we compare their "dirty" pictures with a member of the football/baseball/soccer team impregnating someone, or being caught with alcohol?

Other students who "misrepresent" the school with outside actions are never subjected to public apologies and counseling, and it's ridiculous that these girls not only had their privacy invaded (and an apology forced), but now they can't participate in sports? Absurd

Extra curricular activities are part of the school environment and are also paid for by tax payers and community members. Students have every right to participate and those programs don't have any right to dictate student behavior outside of the school activities.

The funny thing is that we know this policy the school follows is imbalanced and hypocritical.

Succinctly put Mr. G.

It's funny, because the only reason this became an issue was because the school made it one. And now they are being sued. If they had dealt with it appropriately, possibly that wouldn't be happening.

EXTRA curricular - The school is not setting morals for the girls to live by. They are setting standards that they feel will influence the reputation of the school. Go to school, get good grades, get a diploma do something outside school that can become a disruption to the school or impact what the school deems appropriate to participate in EXTRA activities, don't do the EXTRA activities. Be just a girl and let the parents teach morals.

It's a PUBLIC school. And the reputation they are developing is one that says we are a punitive and invasive educational institution. The students have every right to participate.

And it may be EXTRA curricular, but there are reasons they offer those activities outside of them being EXTRA activities.

Participation in extra curricular activities are just that EXTRA. If I cannot read music and am unwilling to put forth the effort away from school, I shouldn't be allowed to be in the band. If I am representing the school, I can be held to a higher standard for the EXTRAs in which I want to participate. Having participated in several EXTRA sports, band, and debate in public school, I had no problem with that team setting standards for behavior in or out of school nor should anyone else. We need to reteach personal responsibility and that actions have consequences that can and will affect our lives. Society establishes rules that impact each of us in ways that we do not want to be controlled. No different here. Act the part or don't participate. Go to school and get an education, don't participate in sports.

I would agree if it was limited to the actual school based activities. What the school is trying to do is dictate behavior outside of its activities and said behavior is subjective and arbitrary. The behavior they were participating in had nothing to do with the school and caused no injury to the school. This is dangerous ground to tread on and could easily be expanded to include ANY type of activity the school thinks is out of line, including but not limited to political affiliations, religious affiliations, charitable or voluntary work or any variety of activities. The school was out of line.

pstatthesystem while I don't completely support Peggyann in that morals are the responsibility of parents to teach. I agree with your comments that if you don't like what someone else is doing, use the democratic process that we have and elect different officials who will pass the laws that you want or hire the individuals that have your ideas in setting deportment. However you would like to do this, democracy does allow for change based upon what the majority (who vote) would prefer. I would prefer smaller government and less intrusion in private lives, but that isn't what is always what is in societies best interest.

Underwriter, you say you want smaller government and less intrusion into public lives, yet you support what this school is doing?

What is "in society's best interest" is a subjective issue. I don't think the school invading these girl's privacy is in "society's best interest".

Seems you have a conflict.

The school did not invade these girls privacy. What was posted became public the moment that it was circulated around the school. And yes, "society's best interest" is subjective, but we put people in charge to make those decisions. If you don't agree with the decision or the majority don't agree, get someone else appointed or elected to represent your views. Don't remove personal responsibility of the girls for their behavior.

I'm not removing personal responsibility. The problem is the school doesn't have the right to enforce their code outside of the actual activity.

The other thing you forget is that "we", the taxpayers, don't get to decide which coaches are hired for sports and other activities.

Sorry, teachers are NOT there to raise your child. Raise your child yourself and worry about his/her morals.

It seems the school did more to make an issue of this than any of the students did.

First, the only reason this became an issue was because the school made it one. And while some people might attack the school for this issue, at least the school could have been able to tell those people they have no authority to deal with the problem outside of the students who were distributing the pictures.

The school dealt with this all wrong.

And we expect them to provide moral and character education? Seems to me they're not doing much better than the parents of the kids themselves. But then again, they are parents just like anyone else, right?

They dress in lingerie and lick penis candy and that makes them immoral? Sounds to me that just makes them silly little teenagers. People do skankier things for Halloween. And they win prizes for it.

Now, did they blow the football team on a class trip? You might be able to say that is immoral.

However I absolutely agree with your statements that the students are not necessarily representatives of the school so much as the school is a representative of the state. That is an excellent observation.

Colleges and employers do it all the time. Private organizations don't need to worry about unconstutional searching of facebook pages.

Absolutely true science- people need to realize there is no privacy- and you can even lose licenses over what you post- be careful- geo orwell was right