Student opposition to civil unions disrupts SWHS

Journal Inquirer ^ | 04/16/05 | Candace Taylor

[SShultz460]

There and with speechcodes at the university level.


I do like that you have libs who are putting on a National organized protest or what have you and a few Conservative students get sent home. I'm glad i'm not in school any more because i'd be causing trouble all the time.

[Lindykim]

A 'safe zone": That's GSLEN commie-speak for "we own the schools aka indoctrination camps."

[general_re]

Bethel and Hazelwood have subsequently and substantially (IMO) watered down Tinker, however:

It does not follow, however, that simply because the use of an offensive form of expression may not be prohibited to adults making what the speaker considers a political point, the same latitude must be permitted to children in a public school. In New Jersey v. T.L.O., we reaffirmed that the constitutional rights of students in public school are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings.
...
Nothing in the Constitution prohibits the states from insisting that certain modes of expression are inappropriate and subject to sanctions. The inculcation of these values is truly the "work of the schools." The determination of what manner of speech in the classroom or in school assembly is inappropriate properly rests with the school board.

- Bethel School Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986)

Tinker said from the outset that the schools have a vested interest in controlling "disruptive" speech. Who determines what's "disruptive"? Well, according to Bethel and Hazelwood, the school itself determines what's "disruptive".

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

"He told the boys they could continue to wear the shirts as long as they didn't become a distraction to others."

So let me get this straight, these students are free to express their opinion. But if the pro-gay lobby in our public education system makes enough noise and distracts the educational process, then these students can no longer wear the tee shirts?

Can you imagine if all we had to do to deny the rights of others was to create a distraction?

And it seems like the entire "day of silence" is a distraction in itself. This movement tells students not to speak in class? Does this not interfere with the educational process?

Kudos to these students for having the backbone to exercise the rights that others exercise.

[DouglasKC]

Now if a person who is against homosexuality would have carried on and harrassed those participating in a "day of silence" then would they have had to stop being silent? Or if someone is emotionally distraught by the Gay-Straight alliance club then would they have to disband the club?

[OhioAttorney]

Bethel and Hazelwood have subsequently and substantially (IMO) watered down Tinker, however . . .

Yep, I agree. Nevertheless, the rationale is still that the (public) school has to have a valid educational purpose for practicing censorship, not that 'minors' don't enjoy Constitutional protection at all. It's the latter view that I've been surprised to encounter on this forum.

[OhioAttorney]

This one limits Tinker too, by allowing drug searches. Again, though, the rationale isn't that minors (or even students) don't have Constitutional rights.

[general_re]

Nevertheless, the rationale is still that the (public) school has to have a valid educational purpose for practicing censorship, not that 'minors' don't enjoy Constitutional protection at all.

True enough, but unfortunately, I think it's going to be tough to fit this into even the limited rights students enjoy.

[upchuck]

The queers are a bunch of wussies:

• "I didn't feel safe at this school today," said Diana Rosen, who is co-president of the school's Gay-Straight Alliance.
• Rosen said that when she first saw the shirts, she "almost didn't believe it." She became very upset, crying and spending most of the day in administrators' and guidance counselor's offices. She also got into several arguments, she said.
• Alex Goldberg, a member of the Gay-Straight Alliance, said his classmates have a right to their opinions but took it too far. "School is supposed to be a safe zone for everyone," he said. "It's crossing the line when you target other people."

Please bear in mind they are feeling unsafe, crying, arguing and targeted by some T-shirts.

Gee, I wonder what the queers reaction would be if they were really threatened?

I trust y'all realize these histrionics* just help the queer's cause. They are just poor victims :)

* Theatrical arts or performances.

[GeekDejure]

No offense meant. I suppose I should have said, "We." As in, "We need to screech about everything, to show them how stupid liberals look."
=======

Oh no... no offense taken. Guess I wasn't that clear in my rambling. I'm just frustrated by the continuous complaining of those with mind numbing liberal mentality... and the continuous attacks by the tax funded ACLU to destroy everything morally right and decent in this country !!! ;-))

[upchuck]

Terrified queers ping.

[OhioAttorney]

[U]nfortunately, I think it's going to be tough to fit this into even the limited rights students enjoy.

If by 'this' you mean the T-shirts described in the article, I think you're probably right. The kids might have an equal-protection argument, but it probably won't trump the school officials' decision.

It's too bad; my personal preference would be to allow all the shirts (and welcome to American public discourse, kids).

[GeekDejure]

Terrified queers ping.

=======

As time goes by, the vile anti-social behavior of Queers steadily gets worse and worse . . . as this current FReeper article demonstrates !!! Therefore, allow me to repeat my own personal rant one more time:

Oak Hay, so I'm very disturbed and continually puzzled about how a small bunch of contrary to nature freaks can destroy our entire civilization . . . BUT DAMMIT, THEY'RE DOING IT !!!

These unsavory and unclean sub-human creatures delight in ramming their urine exhaust pipes into the rectal relief tubes of young boys (and of each other) !!! They brag and crow loudly about their filthy behavior !!! They demand access to our young and innocent children ... so they can commit sodomy and oral sex acts upon them !!! Then they scream and holler...

"Homophobe"

... when we seek to save our children from their filthy and immoral activities !!!

WHY IS THIS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE IN THIS ONCE-FREE REPUBLIC ???

DO WE NOT HAVE THE RIGHT AND MORAL DUTY TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN FROM SLIME LIKE THIS ???

[Mrs. Shawnlaw]

The parents of these boys are obviously raising them right!

The boys should sell the shirts on CafePress and make some money on it. Capitalism AMD non-pc, a beautiful double-whammy!

[Mrs. Shawnlaw]

oops. AMD=AND

[general_re]

Well, I'm not sure that I would allow any conceivable t-shirt slogan in the schools ;)

...but I would certainly draw the line in such a way that this particular shirt, and expressions of opposing views, were permissible. It seems to me that these are students on the verge of joining the adult world - allowing them to gain an adult understanding of public discourse is certainly a worthy educational goal.

[SaveTheChief]

But other students say they felt threatened by the shirts, which also quoted Bible verses pertaining to homosexuality

The battle cry of the perverted secular humanists.

[Hildy]

I have a T-shirt that says:

WHITE does not mean racist
HETEROSEXUAL does not mean homophobic
MALE does not mean sexist

I bought it in a very trendy store in La Jolla about ten years ago. I'm sure you couldn't get it now. When I wear it out, I always get thumbs up!

[OhioAttorney]

Well, I'm not sure that I would allow any conceivable t-shirt slogan in the schools ;)

My bad. By 'all the shirts' I meant 'all the shirts at issue in this matter', including the pro-civil-union signs and the 'Adam and Steve' shirts. I'm sure I could certainly dream up some T-shirt slogans I wouldn't want the school to permit.

...but I would certainly draw the line in such a way that this particular shirt, and expressions of opposing views, were permissible. It seems to me that these are students on the verge of joining the adult world - allowing them to gain an adult understanding of public discourse is certainly a worthy educational goal.

That's essentially my take on it as well -- it seems like an opportunity missed. If we're gonna make 'em go to public schools (and thereby make the First Amendment an issue), why not show them what the First Amendment is supposed to be for?

[doberville]

". . .I didn't FEEL safe. . ."

EXCELLENT! Right to the heart of the matter!