High School Bars Student From Wearing an Anti-Same-Sex-Marriage T-Shirt

I'm no legal expert but I support the school in this case.
Freedom of speech is not a license to promote intolerance and hate in teaching environment.

 

I agree.

 

Nah, ACLU is right. While I certainly don't agree with this guy's message, he does have a right to express it. Freedom of speech is very strictly defended by the American constitution- more strongly than in other Western countries. Even in the case when there was this really obnoxious church protesting at the funeral of a soldier, their right to freedom of speech was upheld despite its negative and hurtful message to the parents of the dead soldier.

The problem in saying that hurtful speech can be banned is that anyone who disagrees with you can come and claim that your speech caused them pain.

I have to agree with ACLU because I would like to have my right to denounce right wing Christians even if my sometimes loud protest hurt their religious feelings. And since I want that right, I have to accept that others I disagree with must get it too.

 

So in theory, a racist person could wear a T-shirt with a black person in chains and some whitty phrase about how "being black is a shame", or, "blacks should be slaves"?

Okay, somthing is wrong with sociaty.

 

Just because you don't like what they have to say, does not mean they don't have the right to say it. There's a speech from The American President that sums it up fairly nicely.

 

I'm with the ACLU. There was nothing particularly offensive on the shirt. He's just being a jerk, and we can't stop him from doing that.

 

Last time I checked, it doesn't matter what the student's human rights are in a school. By enrolling in said school, they agree to obey the rules set forth by the school board. Free Speech is one of those things that although it still exists in school, it is trumped if it breaks one of the rules you agreed to abide by. You can pursue more, but it won't get anywhere, other than a judge telling you that you can find another school that suits your needs.

It's no different than the religious schools kicking gay kids out. They agreed to the rules, and as such, they have to abide by them. Is it right? No. Is it the school's right? Yes.

Just like it's a businesses right to deny service to anyone they choose. School currently is considered a privilege, not a right, at least in the US. As such, they fall under a business, who can deny service to anyone they deem inappropriate.

If the principal/school board deem it inappropriate, action can be taken by them. The only time things have been reversed is from public backlash, which honestly, I don't see happening in this case.

 

Yep, that's legal and protected under the First Amendment. There are various hate groups that are allowed to have rallies (and police must protect them), and pass out their bigoted pamphlets.

The right to free speech exists to defend and protect unpopular speech, because by its unpopular nature that's the speech that's targeted and silenced. Popular speech doesn't need to be protected and defended.

It's how that crazy pastor who wanted to burn the Koran, despite the fact doing so would have caused riots and put thousands of American lives in danger in Afghanistan, was legally allowed to do it even though it was putting peoples lives in jeopardy. He had the right to burn the Koran if he wanted, and there was nothing the government could do - in fact, the government was legally required to defend his right to do it.

These things aren't bad, though. Because freedom of speech also allows those who oppose their actions to stand up, denounce them, call them bigots, and generally socially ostracize them.

So, rather than viewing it as a bad thing, I encourage bigots to stand up and be counted. I want to know your names, your faces, and who you associate with. If you're a business and you're engaged in supporting bigotry, I want to know so I can avoid shopping there and tell others to avoid it as well. If you're a little bigoted brat like this kid, I want the opportunity to tell his friends that they should distance themselves from him - socially ostracize him - because he is a bigot. When or if he gives up his bigoted ways, repents his former actions and words, then he can be welcomed back into the fold.

So, I'm with the ACLU on this one. Civil Liberties need to be protected for everyone.

Just because you have the right to say something doesn't absolve you of the consequences. Bigots can and are held accountable for their words and actions. It's just not the role of the government to do it.

 

The T-shirt situation is defensible with that argument, but expelling gay students is certainly not, any more than expelling black or Hispanic students is defensible with that argument. That is to arbitrarily target students and punish them for fundamental physical and behavioural traits, which is totally illegal and unacceptable.

 

the purpose of the 'day of silence' is to break through the intolerence and hatred.

the reason this kid wore the shirt was to attack a whole section of the student body, and spread intolerence and hatred.

its not equal.

 

Indeed.

 

I remember a thread a while ago about some kid wearing an like "Jesus was not a homophobe" and everyone cheered him. Then this kid wear's another inflammatory shirt and everyone wants him removed from school.

How about schools remove both these kids from school for sporting political shirts meant to disrupt the learning process for the other kids?

 

I know it's silly but I just find it annoying when ACLU still helps those on the opposite side of equality

 

How about realising that the first kid wore a t-shirt promoting love and acceptance and the kid in this case wore a shirt in support of ignorance and intolerance?

 

I do realize that? My point still stands. Schools already have a ton of authority to decide what will be allowed within school. Both kids were making political statements designed to get a rise out of the media and/or other people in the school.

 

Well, that's what equality IS. Everyone gets the same treatment.

 

Unfortunately, Stephen Harper is taking one big axe to that. Human rights commissions can no longer take cases of hate speech, leaving only criminal cases approved by the AG.

Repeal of Section 13 leaves only Criminal Code to deal with hate speech - thestar.com

---------- Post added 15th Jun 2012 at 09:02 PM ----------

How is "Jesus is not a homophobe" inflammatory?

 

This is where I take the opposing view. I'd certainly be worried if MOST of the students, or even an extremely large number of them wore such shirts. My worry would be for LGBT students and their feelings of safety and acceptance within the school.

However, this is just one little brat. I think it is good for EVERYONE to be reminded why the Day of Silence even exists. Allowing him to wear that shirt is a reminder to everyone that there is a need for a Day of Silence because of people like him.

If I were a teacher and that kid were in my class, I'd ask him to stand up. I'd ask him to discuss his views with the class, and I'd question him in an effort to get him to probe his beliefs. I'd also question him in front of the class, so that his beliefs can be exposed. Simple questions such as, "Do you think your shirt is offensive to other students?" "How does that make you feel?" "How do you think it makes other students feel?" "Do you have any LGBT friends?" "How do you think it makes them feel?" "What do you think about the high suicide rate among LGBT youth, and do you think acts such as wearing a shirt like yours contribute to the climate?"

I'd then ask another student, one that I know is articulate and supportive of LGBT rights to stand up, and discuss their view. I'd ask them questions as well; the questions would be based off the answers the other student gave to my questions of him. For example, if he said, "I don't believe my shirt contributes to an anti-gay climate, because people choose to be gay." I'd have the opportunity to ask the pro-LGBT student, "X said that his shirt doesn't contribute to an anti-gay climate at school, do you agree with that?" "X said that being gay is a choice, do you agree with that?"

Then I'd open up the discussion to the rest of the class, and we'd dig deeper into the topic of the Day of Silence, and whether or not we need to create a safe environment for all students.

I think this is healthy and is good for everyone involved. It forces the student who wore the shirt to deeply probe and examine his beliefs and reasons for wearing the shirt. It also exposes his beliefs and reasons to the rest of the class, who would ideally see them for what they are: wrong and bigoted. I'd then hopefully create a deeper understanding of the reason behind the Day of Silence and the need to create a safe environment at school for LGBT youth, and bring on board most if not all of the kids in the classroom.

Would some parents be pissed? Undoubtedly. However, I could easily thank the student who wore that shirt, because I could then stand before the Administration and say, "All views were addressed in the classroom. Everyone got a chance to speak. It was a civil discussion where no name calling was allowed, and people got to hear both sides of the argument and examine things in depth."

I'm not afraid to have my views challenged, because I believe they are right. I'm not afraid to defend them. In a debate situation with an honest non-biased audience, I think I have the chance of pulling more than half to my side. Certainly, in the above hypothetical scenario there would be students who may have never thought deeply about the issue before until I brought it up.

So, I don't really see his actions as negative or harmful. I see it as a chance for everyone to learn and grow, including him.