Boy loses court battle over being barred from pizza party

Minneapolis Star Tribune ^ | April 12, 2002 | Howie Padilla

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

You...are...a...Vikings...fan...not...a...Green...Bay...fan...Green...Bay...does...not...compute...

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Amen...

[chriservative]

It's a public school. Free speech rights went out the window with school prayer.

The kid was trying to be obnoxious and his castrada father is an idiot for suing.

You have absolutely no respect for our Constitution, do you? Even if you interpret the kid as being "obnoxious," he still has the Constitutional right to do so. Was the kid who wore the "straight pride" shirt to the rainbow school being "obnoxious" too? Let's see how you respond to this, seeing as how much you abhor homosexuals. Something tells me a double standard is going to come into play.

[AppyPappy]

There is no Constitution in the public schools. That was thrown out with school prayer.

[chriservative]

Wow! I totally agree with you, Pappy!

I bet the kid in question has a history of being obnoxious too. The kid got a good lesson as to the way mature people act. And being obnoxious and taunting people is not what mature people do. It would be no different to me if they were visiting the whitehouse, and one kid wanted to wear some protest shirt, or one that said "Bush Cheated" or something.

Would you say the same thing if I were to attend one of Gore's journalism seminars wearing a Free Republic "Sore Loserman" T-Shirt? Couldn't all the protests we went to during the election crisis be considered "obnoxious" too? That was basically the point wasn't it? To come up with snappy obnoxious chants and signs that would bug the hell out of him as he sat in his little mansion? Beware the double standard! Regardless of whether FR protests were obnoxious or not, they were Constitutionally protected. Same thing here.

[chriservative]

There is no Constitution in the public schools. That was thrown out with school prayer.

Pappy, sometimes I can't believe the thoughts that come out of your head. Are you saying that because school prayer was outlawed (which, I'll give you was a violation of freedom of speech), we shouldn't allow any freedom of speech in public schools? That is probably the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life. Beware the slippery slope, Pappy! You prove to be more of a liberal every time you open your mouth.

I agree with the thought that there should NOT be state-sponsored prayer in school. I do, however, support the moment of silence, so that Christians can say Christian prayers, Jews can say Jewish Prayers, Muslims can say Muslim prayers, atheists can twiddle their thumbs, etc. But something tells me you'd want every Muslim kid reciting the Lord's Prayer until the cows came home. Is it possible for you to formulate a valid argument EVER?????????

[HeadOn]

I agree with you, Pappy. (May I call you Pappy?)

This is not about "rights" at all. It's about being civil. It's about being polite. It's about being grateful because someone is doing something nice for you and your classmates.

Say somebody in front of the stadium offers me free box seats for my whole family, and I think he's the ugliest, worst dressed person I've ever seen. My momma taugt me to be gracious and say "thank you", not grab the tickets and ask why he doesn't get plastic surgery. Or, I could say, "no thank you", and walk away.

[HeadOn]

....but apparently, she didn't "taugt" me how to type very well....

[AppyPappy]

But something tells me you'd want every Muslim kid reciting the Lord's Prayer until the cows came home

Something tells me that you spend too much time imagining the thoughts of others and then attacking the fruit of your fevered imagination. Was "Strawman Arguments" a required course at Hoo U?

There is no right to free speech in school. It was thrown out with school prayer. I'm sorry that bothers you but it is true.

[FreeTally]

Would you say the same thing if I were to attend one of Gore's journalism seminars wearing a Free Republic "Sore Loserman" T-Shirt?

Not at all. You are an adult(I am assuming) and such seminars are open invitation. You represent you at such event. This was a school event. The prize for his school class was to visit the Minnesota Vikings for a pizza party. When he goes to the Vikings facility, he is representing the school, not himself. That is the important distinction. He did not win the prize, the school class did. The school has every right to dictate to the children attire and behavior durring off-campus trips.

There would be absolutely no justification for the school to allow him to wear a rivals jersey thus showing that the school supports the kids obnoxious behavior. Remember, he wanted to wear it in the picture too, and they would not let him. He already knew he was acting like a dufus. The kid already had it in his mind that he wanted attention. He wanted to be different. He wanted to be an obnoxious jerk off. For once, a public school taught a kid some manners.

When you are reperesnting someone else, they can dictate things to you, and its no "violation" of your free speech rights. I have worked for a few employers over the years where I had to wear "uniforms" of some sort, or had a shirt with their logo and name on it. They wouldn't be too happy if I went to bars and got drunk wearing their company logo. Fraternities and Sororities have similar rules about wearing their letters.

This isn't free speech. This is a school saying "NO!, You are not going to represent us if you are going to be a jerk".

[wku man]

The fact that a judge agreed to hear this frivilous, stupid-a** suit goes a long way to illustrate what's wrong with the legal system. This one should've never seen the light of day!

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

[gdani]

I have worked for a few employers over the years where I had to wear "uniforms" of some sort, or had a shirt with their logo and name on it. They wouldn't be too happy if I went to bars and got drunk wearing their company logo. Fraternities and Sororities have similar rules about wearing their letters.

Neither of those (employer, frat/sorority) involve the government

[gdani]

The fact that a judge agreed to hear this frivilous, stupid-a** suit goes a long way to illustrate what's wrong with the legal system. This one should've never seen the light of day

Tell me that when your kid is told he/she can't wear a "straight pride" shirt, confederate flag shirt, NRA shirt, pro-life shirt, etc.

It only seems ridiculous because we're talking about a Packers shirt. But if you peel away the layers it's the same principle.

[HeadOn]

Please see my post #47. Demanding the "right" to be discourteous is a real problem in this country.

[chriservative]

Well said. I didn't think of it from the "representative of a group" standpoint. I still think the issue is murky, but I see your side a lot more clearly now.

[chriservative]

There you go with your Hokie resentment again. And you call me juvenile.

[gdani]

Demanding the "right" to be discourteous is a real problem in this country.

The First Amendment, at it's core, is essentially about the "right to be discourteous". It wasn't adopted with speech about puppies and ice cream cones in mind.

There is, however, no right to "not be offended" as you seem to claim.

[chriservative]

Neither of those (employer, frat/sorority) involve the government

That is true. The aforementioned are all private organizations who have a lot more leeway in terms of freedom of association.

[AppyPappy]

I apologize for making light of your alma mater. I almost went to work there many years back

[Protagoras]

I do think it was kinda trivial to take this matter to court though. Talk about a waste of taxpayer dollars.

A perfect case for "loser pays" laws.