Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Clint N. Suhks
The boys ... say their constitutional right to free speech was violated.

They can wear the shirts (just not on school grounds). Their constitutional right to free speech was not violated.

12 posted on 04/18/2005 10:24:37 AM PDT by newgeezer (Just my opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: newgeezer
They can wear the shirts (just not on school grounds). Their constitutional right to free speech was not violated.

Arbitrary application to what might be considered a threat is in violation to free speech. Even the dumbest knuckle dragging Liberaltarian knows that.

20 posted on 04/18/2005 10:31:14 AM PDT by Clint N. Suhks (WARNING: EXPOSURE TO THE SON MAY PREVENT BURNING.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: newgeezer
Their constitutional right to free speech was not [emphasis original] violated.

Fair enough. I have no doubt that this enforcement is arbitrary, and unfair. The first means of redress is to appeal to whatever entity has authority over this decision making process. The next best option is the replacement of the school board, superintendent, or other elected officials who have authority in this matter. I won't hold my breath.
25 posted on 04/18/2005 10:39:28 AM PDT by andyk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: newgeezer

They can wear the shirts (just not on school grounds). Their constitutional right to free speech was not violated.
_____________________________________________________

Maybe but their equal protection rights were almost certainly violated as the GOVERNMENT school allowed people of one point of view to wear their opinions but sanctioned people of an opposing point of view. These are the victims of the government thought police in this case not the lawyers. They hire lawyers because they do not know the nuances of the law.


32 posted on 04/18/2005 10:51:50 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: newgeezer

Yes, it was. Look over in the religion forum from 4/14 and there's another story dealing with another such incident. It cite the court decision and how to set the school straight (no pun intended). If it's a public school, unless it can be shown that the shirts were obscene or otherwise created a REAL distraction, they can't stop them. A private school would be another matter.


33 posted on 04/18/2005 10:52:49 AM PDT by beelzepug (Parking For Witches Only--All Others Will Be Toad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: newgeezer; Clint N. Suhks

<< The boys ... say their constitutional right to free speech was violated.

They can wear the shirts. [Just not on school grounds]

Their constitutional right to free speech was not violated. >>

Of course it was.

To paraphrase the Amendment: The government owns the school and may pass no law proscribing the free speech of any FRee Man. [American] Including the most unpopular speech -- which Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve shirts most decidedly are not!

[Unless, of course, the user of the speech in question is the employee of and thus IS the government -- "professor" churchill, say -- in which case it is the government's duty to fire his lying arse!]


38 posted on 04/18/2005 11:02:10 AM PDT by Brian Allen (I fly and can therefore be envious of no man -- Per Ardua ad Astra!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: newgeezer
They can wear the shirts (just not on school grounds). Their constitutional right to free speech was not violated.

The US Supreme Court ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S.Ct. 733, 21 L.Ed.2d. 731 (1969), that students "do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate" and that the First Amendment protects public school students' rights to express political and social views.

44 posted on 04/18/2005 11:13:01 AM PDT by BlackRazor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: newgeezer

If the School had a day of silence ON SCHOOL GROUNDS then these boys have a Constitutional right to wear their T shirts on school grounds. What good for the Fruit is good for the Straight.


45 posted on 04/18/2005 11:14:12 AM PDT by sgtbono2002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: newgeezer

Oh you are so right- any student loses all their rights the
moment they walk on to school property. Their parents have NO rights on school property. And the public school system
today militates against Christianity and the moral ethic that guided this nation from 1760- 1960. some puke faced public defender insisted in a Court of law that his client
was innocent of vandalism of my car--because everyone knew
the school had determined my son should try the homosexual
lifestyle -and "maybe it[the vandalism] was done by someone who knew my son was gay." To his credit the Judge had it stricken . I am so happpy I was out of the Courtroom
when this incident occurred -or I would have disrupted the
proceedings by beating some sense into the faggot attorney.


54 posted on 04/18/2005 11:49:22 AM PDT by StonyBurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson