I wonder if he would be treated the same way if his shirt said
"I will not accept that Rosie O'Donnell wants to take away my 2nd amendment rights" and on the back "Owning a gun is a fundamental right"
My bet is nothing would happen
"My free speech is not the same as your free speech" ALERT
Seems to me that the kid can "tolerate" the homosexuals in the school, but they can't "tolerate" his opinion.
Without school uniforms, kids should be able to wear whatever the heck they want.
WASHINGTON, D.C., November 3, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court today asking the court to expedite its decision on whether to hear a case involving a California high school student prohibited from wearing a T-shirt at school expressing his biblical views on homosexual behavior. “The opportunity of students to exercise their First Amendment rights should not be lost because the students graduate before the court rules,” said ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb. “One of our clients has already graduated and the other will soon. We hope the court will expedite its decision so that she has the opportunity to exercise her constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech.”
Sixteen-year-old student Tyler Harper filed suit against the Poway School District for violating his freedom of speech rights, after the school told him he could not wear a t-shirt with the words, “Be Ashamed, Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned” on the front and “Homosexuality is Shameful” on the back. “Additionally, by deciding to hear the case now, the court can consider it at the same time as Morse v. Frederick, a similar case also before the court. The 9th Circuit, which ruled on our case, ruled on that case, too, but in a conflicting manner,” McCaleb explained. The motion filed with the court today argues that “these cases send conflicting messages: speech that may be offensive or derogatory toward Christians is permissible under Frederick, but speech that may be offensive or derogatory toward homosexual conduct is not permissible under Harper. Similarly, speech that conflicts with a school policy against pro-drug messages is permissible under Frederick, but speech that conflicts with a school policy against ‘harassment’ on the basis of sexual orientation (i.e. any negative or offensive speech) is not permissible under Harper. These cases provide the Court an ideal opportunity to clarify an increasingly muddled area of constitutional law.”
A US federal appeals court in April upheld a 2004 ruling by U.S. District Judge John Houston in San Diego that found in favour of the school board. The ruling said Harper’s shirt was “denigrating” to homosexuals and their lifestyle, and “injurious to gay and lesbian students and interfered with their right to learn.”
Read full text of the motion filed today in the Harper v. Poway Unified School District
http://www.telladf.org/UserDocs/HarperExpedite.pdf.
Court Upholds School Ban on “Homosexuality is Shameful” T-Shirt
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/apr/06042105.html
California Student Sues School over Punishment for Wearing "Homosexuality is Shameful" T-Shirt
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/jun/04060310.html
ADF attorneys ask U.S. Supreme Court for expedited consideration of “T-shirt” case
WASHINGTON — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund filed a motion with the U.S. Supreme Court today asking the court to expedite its decision on whether to hear a case involving a California high school student prohibited from wearing a T-shirt at school expressing his biblical views on homosexual behavior. “The opportunity of students to exercise their First Amendment rights should not be lost because the students graduate before the court rules,” said ADF Senior Counsel Gary McCaleb. “One of our clients has already graduated and the other will soon. We hope the court will expedite its decision so that she has the opportunity to exercise her constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech.”
“Additionally, by deciding to hear the case now, the court can consider it at the same time as Morse v. Frederick, a similar case also before the court. The 9th Circuit, which ruled on our case, ruled on that case, too, but in a conflicting manner,” McCaleb explained. The motion filed with the court today argues that “these cases send conflicting messages: speech that may be offensive or derogatory toward Christians is permissible under Frederick, but speech that may be offensive or derogatory toward homosexual conduct is not permissible under Harper. Similarly, speech that conflicts with a school policy against pro-drug messages is permissible under Frederick, but speech that conflicts with a school policy against ‘harassment’ on the basis of sexual orientation (i.e. any negative or offensive speech) is not permissible under Harper. These cases provide the Court an ideal opportunity to clarify an increasingly muddled area of constitutional law.”
The full text of the motion filed today in the case Harper v. Poway Unified School District can be read at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/HarperExpedite.pdf. ADF attorneys filed their appeal with the Supreme Court on Oct. 27 (www.telladf.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3902).
Well, they finally did it -- a teen seeking attention via a t-shirt has finally made it to the big time.