Posted on 02/10/2007 3:04:28 PM PST by Stoat
By Martha Deller
McClatchy Newspapers
(MCT)
DALLAS - Two Burleson High School students filed a federal lawsuit Friday against the Burleson school district over a year-old incident in which school officials denied them the right to carry Confederate battle flag purses to school.
Attorneys for the Southern Legal Resource Center prepared the lawsuit on behalf of Aubrie Michelle McAllum and Ashley Paige Thomas, who contend their constitutional rights were violated in January 2006 when school officials prevented them from carrying their new purses to school.
The teens were not punished for carrying the purses, but were sent home when they refused to turn them over. They were also told not to bring them to school again. The next day, when they returned to school with the purses wrapped in black cloth marked "censored," they were again sent home.
The lawsuit alleges that the district selectively applied the dress code by singling out the Confederate flag for exclusion while permitting students to wear other controversial symbols, including the swastika.
After a lengthy appeals process in which the girls' attorneys attempted to get the district to lift the ban on the flag attire, the federal lawsuit is seeking a declaration that the girls' rights were violated, removal of any disciplinary action from their records and unspecified monetary damages.
The suit names high school principal Paul Cash as well as school trustees.
I would absolutely love to, but where I live it's common for people who dare to put Republican bumper stickers on their cars to have their tires slashed or the doors keyed. I'm guessing that if I were to wear a Confederate flag I would first be beaten to death by a crowd of smelly, flea-infested Marxist hippies who would then go to my house and burn it to the ground.
I will proudly wear the Confederate flag in my heart and will display it ASAP when I am able to escape this hellhole.
"sigh"
Nice. :)
Thank you...I'm delighted that you approve :-)
That took some American Pride Gusto! Way to go ladies!
Agreed, they do us all proud.
"Condi has a conference with the Burleson School Board"
Don't blame me....I voted for KINKY!.....LOL!
Austin is also known as "Moscow on the Colorado" or the "Peoples Republic of Austin"
Here's a picture of the limp-wristed school principal named in the lawsuit:
Here's his contact info if you are so inclined:
Paul Cash, (817) 551-1065, 11701 South Fwy, Burleson, TX 76028, pcash@burlesonisd.net
Every time the democrat confederate flag is dragged into the MSM, another nail in the coffin of conservatism is pounded!!!
You raise a very good point.
The "Pledge of Allegiance" codifies and seeks to cast in stone for the students who are asked to recite it, the politics of Daniel Webster and the Yankee industrialists, whose political program consisted of three basic premises:
This was the real significance of Webster's construction, or should I say "re-imagining", of the Union. Everything else was window-dressing.
The Framers, needless to say, did not share Webster's bullyboy conception of the Union (and its self-proclaimed champions and keepers, as a group) as master of the People.
Seen in that light, your point is well taken that the locution "the American Civil War" as a descriptive term of art actually biases the discussion. However, in general usage the term has been accepted for generations now throughout the country, and so I wouldn't make too big a deal of it until and unless I had successfully demonstrated by rational exposition the falsity of Webster's and Lincoln's position. That exposition is the essential work of anyone who wants to show American history in a clear light.
Defense of the usage "War Between the States" is in order, I think. I also think it is always necessary for clarity in argument, to object to the use of the words "rebellion" and "insurrection" to describe secession and the war of conquest which followed.
Not if conservatives arrest the lying hands that are doing the pounding!
Opponents of constitutionalism and conservatism have always tried polemically to "bracket"* them with the Ku Klux Klan. The bracketing is a lie, and it is necessary for conservatives to point it out, as these two young women have done.
* Propagandist's term of art for nonlogical conflation or equation of one idea or group with another, for manipulative effect.
Is it just me? Or does he really look like Poppy?
If someone can't see the incredible harm that the confederate flag does to the conservative cause, then that person is part of the problem.
Oh, no apologies needed! I was poking fun at all the caricatures ppl have had about Texas, not at you!!!
Tejas means friendly, as you no doubt know. We love company. Gotta say though, we're somewhat rowdy in San Antonio. We party from Fiesta [April] through Diez y seis [September.]
Aside: I don't really like when it's called San Antone, but I don't like when people say Ha-wa-ya for Hawaii or nuke-u-lar for nuclear. I don't like when someone is called 'invalid.' There's nothing about handicaps that 'invalidates' a person. Quirks of Frou.
"If someone can't see the incredible harm that the confederate flag does to the conservative cause, then that person is part of the problem."
But if the girls want to wear Che t-shirts or MalcomX caps , that would probably help the conservative cause?
We're talking about the successful vilification of the conservative movement by the MSM and not throwing gasoline on the fire.
The Founders were convinced that slavery was on its way out. They were also committed to the union.
Secession and the expansion of slavery were radical ideas which would have changed our continent as much as anything Lincoln did.
It's because they lost that the leaders of the rebellion can be painted as conservatives.
Had they won, we'd be discussing how they killed off the "old republic."
You can't get slavery out of the way that easily. At the time of the civil war, there was absolutly movement of any kind in the Confederate states to abolish slavery. In fact, just the opposite was true and the entire Confederate cause was built around expanding slavery which the North opposed. See article IV, Section 3 of the Confederate Constitution to understand what it was all about.
(3) The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several Sates; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form States to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory the institution of negro slavery, as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected be Congress and by the Territorial government; and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories shall have the right to take to such Territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the States or Territories of the Confederate States.
It was all about expansion, and if they Confederacy had suceeded, they would have expanded --- the pressures of a rapidly expanding slave population would have forced them to do so, or die.
Exactly - just finished reading "The Real Lincoln" and that lays out the historical facts for Lincoln's successful attempt to turn the United States into what Alexander Hamilton wanted all along.
http://www.amazon.com/Real-Lincoln-Abraham-Agenda-Unnecessary/dp/0761536418
Lincoln was a BAD man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.