Follow Up: School backs off claim that Pro-life Message = Swastika

TMLC ^ | 1-29-2003 | editors

[Notwithstanding]

School backs off claim that Pro-life Message = Swastika; Ban on Student’s Pro-Life Clothing Lifted Wed, Jan 29, 2003

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center declared victory today, after school officials at Abington Junior High School in Abington, Pennsylvania, abandoned their decision to censor a student’s pro-life message. The school principal had earlier ordered the student’s pro-life t-shirt turned inside out because it was equivalent to the display of a swastika.

Responding to a demand letter from the Law Center, attorneys for the school district agreed that the student “has a First Amendment right to wear the pro-life shirt,” and asked that the letter serve as written assurance of that fact. The t-shirt displayed the messages, “Abortion is Homicide. You will not silence my message. You will not mock my God. You will stop killing my generation. Rock for Life.”

Thomas More Law Center Attorneys had sent a four-page letter challenging the school policy, and demanded that the school take immediate action to provide written assurance that the student be permitted to wear the pro-life shirt to school. The Law Center explained that the student’s speech did not cause any substantial and material disruptions to the workings of the school and that there was no legal basis on which to restrict his speech.

Edward L White III, Associate Counsel with the Thomas More Law Center, commented, “Too often public school officials forget that the First Amendment protects student pro-life messages. We are pleased that the school has quickly corrected its mistake and has acknowledged our client’s First Amendment right to wear the pro-life t-shirt to school.”

[freekitty]

They should since it was a ridiculous accusation in the first place.

[WOSG]

Idea for a TShirt to wear to the Academy Awards

ABORTION IS NOT THE ANSWER

What do you think??

[toenail]

"As Many Abortions As Possible" [FR thread]

[Notwithstanding]

good news ping

[yonif]

Good news in the fight for life.

[ELS]

A First Amendment bump

[Lancey Howard]

bttt

[GovernmentShrinker]

I certainly agree that a public school student should be allowed to wear a pro-life t-shirt or button, unless the school's dress code prohibits any type of message being worn -- and I'm totally pro-choice. BUT after reading the full text of the message at issue, I tend to side with school officials that it is inappropriate (though the principal who said it's comparable to a swastika is obviously a lunatic).

The aggressive "you will do this, you will do that" language does sound somewhat threatening, not to mention utterly disrespectful of opposing viewpoints -- there's a sort of implied threat to interfere with opponents' freedom of speech and action. "You will not mock my God"? Um, so what happens when another kid responds by walking up to the wearer and saying "your God is a stupid fairy tale". Is the wearer threatening to silence her opponents' speech while at the same time asserting that "you will not silence MY message"?

Personally, I don't think schools should be letting kids wear any kind of statements or slogans at all, because once you allow some in the name of "free speech", it's impossible to prohibit really vulgar and inflammatory stuff. On what legal basis does this school prohibit the wearing of swastikas or T-shirts saying "too bad Hitler didn't finish the job" or "slavery should never have been abolished" or "virginity is unnatural -- let me help you lose yours"?

[Notwithstanding]

Given the fact that kids in pubic schools wear trashy slutty clothes and trashy and insulting language all over their clothes, your argument is just silly.

If the morals of this nation can be mocked by these kids clothing, then certainly those same morals can be championed.

[OldFriend]

Your argument is specious in the first place, and in the second place, ABORTION STOPS A BEATING HEART......what could be more heinous than a pro choice message?

[Polycarp]

Bump-ping!

[GovernmentShrinker]

Perhaps if you had actually READ my argument, you'd have seen that I specifically don't support allowing kids to wear trashy and insulting language on their clothes. In fact I think they should all be wearing uniforms, which have been shown to promote civility and better discipline in schools.

[F16Fighter]

"Personally, I don't think schools should be letting kids wear any kind of statements or slogans at all, because once you allow some in the name of "free speech", it's impossible to prohibit really vulgar and inflammatory stuff."

The horse was out of the barn twenty something-odd years ago on permitting vulgarities on t-shirts, but suddenly this kid, with this message, today was to be made an example of??

If one is intellectually honest about its assessment, this was nothing BUT blatant selective censorship by an avowed pro-abortion organization, the NEA -- no ifs, and or buts about it.

[Notwithstanding]

Perhaps you could acknowledge that pubic schools genrally don't restrict trashy clothes and slogans, and therefore the pro-life t-shirts are not the demons you pretend them to be.

[gitmo]

The aggressive "you will do this, you will do that" language does sound somewhat threatening ..."

How is that threatening?

[GovernmentShrinker]

What's "specious" about it? The mere fact that you don't like it hardly meets the definition of specious.

I don't think you'd be too supportive of a student being allowed to wear a similarly worded message if the content promoted a position you disagreed with. How about a shirt that says: “Religion is Suicide. You will not silence my message. You will not pray to any God. You will stop evangelizing my generation. Rock for Atheism.” Should religious students really have to tolerate that from their schoolmates? I don't think so.

[copycat]

On what legal basis does this school prohibit the wearing of swastikas or T-shirts saying "too bad Hitler didn't finish the job" or "slavery should never have been abolished" or "virginity is unnatural -- let me help you lose yours"?

Or "McCarthy was right."

[GovernmentShrinker]

As I said in my original message, I don't think that pro-life messages in general should be prohibited, as long as other types of messages are allowed. But I do think this particular message, which goes way beyond stating a position, or stating "I believe ___" and "I will do ____", to telling other people "You will not ____" should not be allowed. See my take on a similarly worded message with a very different point of view in post #18. Does it really sound okay to you?