Originally posted by King Kandy
No, there's been a multitude of supreme court rulings saying if you spread a message with no value to free speech, that is likely to cause trouble, then schools can censure it. The most recent one being Morse v. Frederick.
Wearing a Swastika doesn't fall under that category in of itself. Now, a shirt saying "kill the Jews", that would likely be different.
Public school officials may legally prohibit speech that disrupts the school environment. Wearing clothing bearing the American flag on Cinco de Mayo is no different than wearing clothing bearing Bible verses condemning homosexuality on the National Day of Silence; the purpose is to antagonize other students. It is disruptive, and the school was within its rights to ask the students in question to change or go home.
Originally posted by King Kandy
Also, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier and Bethel School District v. Fraser show what you are saying to be totally false.
Neither of those have anything to do with wearing a symbol (ie a Swastika).
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Public school officials may legally prohibit speech that disrupts the school environment. Wearing clothing bearing the American flag on Cinco de Mayo is no different than wearing clothing bearing Bible verses condemning homosexuality on the National Day of Silence; the purpose is to antagonize other students. It is disruptive, and the school was within its rights to ask the students in question to change or go home.
While I agree those students were likely being jackasses, your comparison is faulty.
American flag is just a flag. While anything condemning homosexuality on a day specified for LBGT is very specific in nature. Now, if those kids had "go back to Mexico on their shirts, then I can see a comparison and grounds for their suspension.
Originally posted by King Kandy
No... they have to do with freedom of expression, which symbols are included in.
First of all, the Swastika isn't a Nazi invention, but fine, as I don't really care too much about the Swastika angle, as it's really irrelevant here and it's distracting away from the issue here.
Originally posted by Robtard
It does, but it's very selective.
I agree with you, but it seems to be getting worse. In one sense, we are so politically correct that we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings...especially foreign cultures. In another sense, the U.S. seems to be turning into a more totalitarian state with legislation such as the Patriot Act and attacks on the the Constition itself. The first amendment, as I mentioned, is not looked upon favorably by many politicians and judges in this country.
With the attack on the National Day of Prayer, religion is slowly being persecuted in this country. We don't want to offend any atheists, so we have to do away with national prayer? We don't want to hurt anyone who doesn't believe in God, but at that same time...we're offending those that do believe in God. America was founded upon the principle...Freedom OF Religion...not Freedom FROM Religion. Just because there is a national day of Prayer..does not mean atheists are forced to participate. That is just..politically incorrect. In any case, that is off topic. The point is...I agree with you. We shouldn't be worried about the petty things in life. We should concentrate harder on the major problems in this country...like the economy.
Originally posted by Robtard
While I agree those students were likely being jackasses, your comparison is faulty.American flag is just a flag. While anything condemning homosexuality on a day specified for LBGT is specific. Now, if those kids had "go back to Mexico on their shirts, then I can see a comparison.
robtard, from a legal perspective, students who attend schools (like most high schools) sign away certain rights that are guaranteed to everyone normally. that includes not wearing anything that can be potentially disruptive. teachers have the right to judge any article of clothing to be disruptive. in that big stack of papers you sign for your kid to turn in at the beginning of the school year, one of the things you sign involves that. i think in california its related to the zero tolerance act or something.
Originally posted by Tattoos N Scars
I agree with you, but it seems to be getting worse. In one sense, we are so politically correct that we don't want to hurt anyone's feelings...especially foreign cultures. In another sense, the U.S. seems to be turning into a more totalitarian state with legislation such as the Patriot Act and attacks on the the Constition itself. The first amendment, as I mentioned, is not looked upon favorably by many politicians and judges in this country.With the attack on the National Day of Prayer, religion is slowly being persecuted in this country. We don't want to offend any atheists, so we have to do away with national prayer? We don't want to hurt anyone who doesn't believe in God, but at that same time...we're offending those that do believe in God. America was founded upon the principle...Freedom OF Religion...not Freedom FROM Religion. Just because there is a national day of Prayer..does not mean atheists are forced to participate. That is just..politically incorrect. In any case, that is off topic. The point is...I agree with you. We shouldn't be worried about the petty things in life. We should concentrate harder on the major problems in this country...like the economy.
Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
robtard, from a legal perspective, students who attend schools (like most high schools) sign away certain rights that are guaranteed to everyone normally. that includes not wearing anything that can be potentially disruptive. teachers have the right to judge any article of clothing to be disruptive. in that big stack of papers you sign for your kid to turn in at the beginning of the school year, one of the things you sign involves that. i think in california its related to the zero tolerance act or something.
I know and agree. But it isn't that simple in this case. Two sets of kids were wearing flags/patriotic material, why was one allowed and the other not, considering neither were offensive in nature.
Originally posted by Robtard
I know and agree. But it isn't that simple in this case. Two sets of kids were wearing flags/patriotic material, why was one allowed and the other not, considering neither were offense in nature.
i agree with you. its completely idiotic that only the kids with the American flag shirts were punished.
Originally posted by King Kandy
Things don't have to be explicit... that's just plain not how it works, what's important is the intention and the message it's likely to get across.
Again, that was other people than the wearers making it out to be as such. Unless I'm wrong and those kids were chanting "go back to Mexico"?
But it doesn't seem the case, they were just wearing shirts that had the US flag, in America no less.
Originally posted by Robtard
I know and agree. But it isn't that simple in this case. Two sets of kids were wearing flags/patriotic material, why was one allowed and the other not, considering neither were offense in nature.
Originally posted by King Kandy
I see where you are coming from, but the truth is...someone is always going to get offended by something. It's not possible to make everyone happy...and to not hurt feelings on occasion. Life doesn't work that way. People need to learn to suck it up and move on...if they don't like it.(On minor issues)
its already been established that legally they can do that.
doesnt make it right though.
if youre afraid of nationalism sparking a conflict, get rid of it completely. dont allow either side to flaunt their ethnicity. but dont punish group one, who's only crime was doing the same thing as group 2, purely for the sake of avoiding group 2's potential butt hurt.