This is plain ridiculous, read this!

[Zack]

I dont ever get worked up over news, but this is plain wrong:
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local-beat/Students-Wearing-American-Flag-Shirts-Sent-Home-92945969.html



On any other day at Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, Daniel Galli and his four friends would not even be noticed for wearing T-shirts with the American flag. But Cinco de Mayo is not any typical day especially on a campus with a large Mexican American student population.

Galli says he and his friends were sitting at a table during brunch break when the vice principal asked two of the boys to remove American flag bandannas that they wearing on their heads and for the others to turn their American flag T-shirts inside out. When they refused, the boys were ordered to go to the principal's office.

"They said we could wear it on any other day," Daniel Galli said, "but today is sensitive to Mexican-Americans because it's supposed to be their holiday so we were not allowed to wear it today."

The boys said the administrators called their T-shirts "incendiary" that would lead to fights on campus.

"They said if we tried to go back to class with our shirts not taken off, they said it was defiance and we would get suspended," Dominic Maciel, Galli's friend, said.

The boys really had no choice, and went home to avoid suspension. They say they're angry they were not allowed to express their American pride. Their parents are just as upset, calling what happened to their children, "total nonsense."

"I think it's absolutely ridiculous," Julie Fagerstrom, Maciel's mom, said. "All they were doing was displaying their patriotic nature. They're expressing their individuality."

But to many Mexican-American students at Live Oak, this was a big deal. They say they were offended by the five boys and others for wearing American colors on a Mexican holiday.

"I think they should apologize cause it is a Mexican Heritage Day," Annicia Nunez, a Live Oak High student, said. "We don't deserve to be get disrespected like that. We wouldn't do that on Fourth of July."

As for an apology, the boys and their families say, "fat chance."

"I'm not going to apologize. I did nothing wrong," Galli said. "I went along with my normal day. I might have worn an American flag, but I'm an American and I'm proud to be an American."

The five boys and their families met with a Morgan Hill Unified School District official Wednesday night. The district released a statement saying it does not agree with how Live Oak High School administrators handled this incident.

The boys will not be suspended and they were told they can go back to school Thursday. They may even wear their red, white, and blue colors again, but this time, the day after Cinco de Mayo, there will be no controversy.

[SC Cheesehead]

Yeah, saw that, too.

PC = :bs:

:mad2:

[Motorhead350]

Just show up with this shirt next time.

[LIGHTNIN1]

Just heard it on the radio coming home.:mad2:

[Zack]

God damn Dominick As much as I appreciate the humor it aint right to post that pic here.

[GAMike]

This is a case of where educators input their own phobia's and fears, and then take action........

I bet the "offended" folks were only offended after the educator communicated through his handling of this incident that they should be offended.

Most of the Mexicans I know would have paid those 5 boys no mind at all.....

Some educators (and I use that term loosely) should learn how to choose their battles.

These are the situations that really irk me..... We all know people wear tee shirts /garments to make statements.... Thats why a year and half after the Presidential election, people still wear their "Yes we can" +++ shirts.

They make their statement/gloat whatever....... Its a free country, and freedom of speech needs to be protected. Regardless if you like the message or not. Educators & professers need to focus more on teaching...... Not influencing students.

Know your role........

[babbage]

Looks like they forgot this is America. Cinco de Mayo is a Mexican observance - NOT an American one. A little lawsuit will fix this crap nicely.

[duhtroll]

Pretty soon they are going to tell me I don't have the right to stay sober on St. Patty's Day.

I'm opposed to wearing American flags as apparel when the flag isn't properly displayed. But then again, I am more conservative than most when it comes to such things.

[Haggis]

I'm opposed to wearing American flags as apparel when the flag isn't properly displayed. But then again, I am more conservative than most when it comes to such things.

Exactly, the flag is not an article of clothing a chair to sit your fat stinking butt in nor a plate to eat off of.

But, the VP of that school was still wrong in saying it was because of an observance of a Mexican Holiday.

[Egon Spengler]

I'm opposed to wearing American flags as apparel when the flag isn't properly displayed. But then again, I am more conservative than most when it comes to such things.
I feel the same way, but after this happened, I would be going into that school with american flag bandana, shirt, and MC Hammer pants!

[Paul T. Casey]

Sad part is the Cinqo de Mayo is a celebration of some Mexican battle where they defeated the French, like that's a big deal.

[prchrman]

I tried to think of something funny or constructive to say on this but logic and reason has vacated my cranium after reading that.

[fastblackmerc]

Sad part is the Cinqo de Mayo is a celebration of some Mexican battle where they defeated the French, like that's a big deal.

Shoot.... everyone's defeated the French.

[Leadfoot281]

Pretty soon they are going to tell me I don't have the right to stay sober on St. Patty's Day.

I'm opposed to wearing American flags as apparel when the flag isn't properly displayed. But then again, I am more conservative than most when it comes to such things.

Agreed 100%.

Dang, I agreed with duhtroll. I'm going to step outside and check if my cats and dogs are sleeping together. :lol:

[Egon Spengler]

cats and dogs are sleeping together. :lol:

....Mass Hysteria!!

[LeoVampire]

This is a no win set up now a days. In America we are so worried about being politicly proper and not pissing anyone off everything gets screwed up from Holiday's on down the line.

And the kids are also taking advantage of this now knowing no one wants to upset the other for one reason or another.

Just like some of the schools in Waterbury this year did not allow anything specific to be displayed about Christmas fearing it would upset the kid's that do not celebrate the Holiday the same way.

We are all finding ways of picking new fights about something time and time again with each other.

The great melting pot America was is now turning into groups and individuals fighting for themselves and walking over anyone that dosn't agree with them and their way of life.

I don't know about any of you but when I was a kid growing up some of the city was sectioned off between Italians, Irish, French and so forth and no one walked through or hung around someone elses neighborhood unless they knew you and everyone hung their flags outside of thier home according to their nationality.

Seems to me now that those days are gone basicly we are finding new ways of doing the same thing but with words and personal attire and forcing others to recognze them other than showing over all respect for the country we live in and our pride in it.

[duhtroll]

1) Schools almost never come up with this stuff on their own - it likely was a parent complaint in the past - just like most school rules.

2) Prchrman - IIRC the flag should have the blue field on the left when displayed -- hence your avatar would be improper display. :P


I tried to think of something funny or constructive to say on this but logic and reason has vacated my cranium after reading that.

[Egon Spengler]

Napoleon Dynamite...
http://plutoniumblond.files.wordpress .com/2006/09/rkd2.jpg

[CBT]

:eek: Rediculous! I spent 20 years defending our flag!!! :mad2:I'm going to call that jackass. Personally, I like seeing it on clothing, it does not bother me and I do not see it as disrespectful. If you are burning the flag or wiping your ass with it, I have a problem with that. When I retired, I got to pick where I wanted my flag flown from, I picked the U.S.S. Constitution. I presented it to my mother at my ceremony. If she wanted to make a shirt out of it, or a Superman cape, I could care less, as long as it is worn with pride and no one told her she couldn't wear it because it might piss off some :censor: third world invaders!!! Grrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[prchrman]

1) Schools almost never come up with this stuff on their own - it likely was a parent complaint in the past - just like most school rules.

2) Prchrman - IIRC the flag should have the blue field on the left when displayed -- hence your avatar would be improper display. :P


I am truly sorry for the great oversight of stars left/stars right, is that the flag in the Smith? On the other hand I cannot even do avatars, my son did it :D

[PonyUP]

Political Correctness has run rampant for years, this is just the latest escapade. Educators are so scared about being sued in a letigious society that any perception of wrong doing becomes a federal case. As a society we just seem to overact to everything. Take the kid that got tasered the other night in Philadelphia for running on to the field of play. Many people seem to think this is an overaction but...

Monica Seles was stabbed and nearly killed by a spectator during a tennis match

Tom Gamboa, a 69 year old first base coach was beat down by a hillbilly father and son running onto the field of play. He now has permanent hearing damage because of this attack.

In every situation it just seems we ask ourselves one of two questions
1) Will I be sued for this?
2) Can I sue for this?

What a sad commentary on a possible great society

(I still want the jetpack I was promised when I was a kid)

[Zack]

I like our flag.

http://www.beyond.ca/i/4th-of-july-bikini-heidi-montag.jpg

http://fanyard.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/jessica-simpson-on-gq-cover-in-american-flag-bikini-dbu-pants-and-soldier-dog-tags.jpg

http://www.angelsunlimited.com/shop/media/BahaUSAStarsStripesBikini.jpg

[PonyUP]

A huge plus 1 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[GAMike]

I also agree that the flag is not an article of clothing....... If the teacher had phrased the concern about the situation using this argument, I don't think I could complain.
Exactly, the flag is not an article of clothing a chair to sit your fat stinking butt in nor a plate to eat off of.

But, the VP of that school was still wrong in saying it was because of an observance of a Mexican Holiday.

[LIGHTNIN1]

Things do get all out of proportion fast in this country anymore. I know there are police officers on this site and I am not talking about you. Yesterday I recieved a copy of my hometown paper, a town of 10,000. When I was growing up the town had 2 policeman and very little crime. The jail had a couple drunks and a few low level thieves. The county also had a sheriff and one deputy. We thought we were policed adequately. Today I think the same size town has 20 people in the police dept. On the front page of the paper was a picture of their SWAT TEAM. If a place has no need for a SWAT TEAM it is this place. This is an example of things being out of proportion.

[RR|Suki]

Isn't everyone here forgetting a few things. . .

1. this was on school grounds

2. the intention behind wearing the shirts/bandanas

Maybe looking up some school speech cases before posting some of these ridiculous comments is in order? Just saying. . .

[duhtroll]

It is not THAT big a deal - probably a pic got reversed in the making of the avatar. You are at least trying to show respect - I have much more of a problem with the "American flag thong underwear" which means it IS basically wiping someone's ass.

I didn't make the rules, but I follow them. People's personal opinions don't matter to me on this one. The rules are the rules and either you respect them, or you think you are better than the rules or think they don't apply to you. :(

My room used to store the flag for all of our home FB game and outdoor events. The boy scouts would raise and lower the flag in which case they would have to get the flag from me and return it when finished. If they ever brought it back improperly folded, they caught hell from me and I made them refold it.

Once they brought it back crumpled up in a ball and WET.

Nearly killed 'em.


I am truly sorry for the great oversight of stars left/stars right, is that the flag in the Smith? On the other hand I cannot even do avatars, my son did it :D

[SpartaPerformance]

That is absolutely horrible. The key word in that article is the holiday is for Mexican - AMERICANS!!!! Did the school officials not get that part? Funny but last month during the Greek independence day parade on 5th ave here in NY, the parade goers had both Greek and American flags in their hands waving both proudly!!!!

God bless America & Zito Ellas!!! See I can celebrate both!

[duhtroll]

Yeah? Well *I* have a problem with them wearing it!

Please repost the pics with the models not wearing the flag bikinis. Otherwise, you will be breaking the flag code.


I like our flag.

http://www.beyond.ca/i/4th-of-july-bikini-heidi-montag.jpg

http://fanyard.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/jessica-simpson-on-gq-cover-in-american-flag-bikini-dbu-pants-and-soldier-dog-tags.jpg

http://www.angelsunlimited.com/shop/media/BahaUSAStarsStripesBikini.jpg

[ImpalaSlayer]

wow i ****in hate people

[Zack]

Yeah? Well *I* have a problem with them wearing it!

Please repost the pics with the models not wearing the flag bikinis. Otherwise, you will be breaking the flag code.

LOL I cant remove them now that you quoted me.
Is this more your speed?

http://www.nofactzone.net/wp-content/images/colbertflag.jpg

[Bigdogjim]

The 5th of May is not Mexican Independence Day, but it should be! And Cinco de Mayo is not an American holiday, but it should be. Mexico declared its independence from mother Spain on midnight, the 15th of September, 1810. And it took 11 years before the first Spanish soldiers were told and forced to leave Mexico.
So, why Cinco de Mayo? And why should Americans savor this day as well? Because 4,000 Mexican soldiers smashed the French and traitor Mexican army of 8,000 at Puebla, Mexico, 100 miles east of Mexico City on the morning of May 5, 1862.
The French had landed in Mexico (along with Spanish and English troops) five months earlier on the pretext of collecting Mexican debts from the newly elected government of democratic President (and Indian) Benito Juarez. The English and Spanish quickly made deals and left. The French, however, had different ideas.
Under Emperor Napoleon III, who detested the United States, the French came to stay. They brought a Hapsburg prince with them to rule the new Mexican empire. His name was Maximilian; his wife, Carolota. Napoleon's French Army had not been defeated in 50 years, and it invaded Mexico with the finest modern equipment and with a newly reconstituted Foreign Legion. The French were not afraid of anyone, especially since the United States was embroiled in its own Civil War.
The French Army left the port of Vera Cruz to attack Mexico City to the west, as the French assumed that the Mexicans would give up should their capital fall to the enemy -- as European countries traditionally did.
Under the command of Texas-born General Zaragosa, (and the cavalry under the command of Colonel Porfirio Diaz, later to be Mexico's president and dictator), the Mexicans awaited. Brightly dressed French Dragoons led the enemy columns. The Mexican Army was less stylish.
General Zaragosa ordered Colonel Diaz to take his cavalry, the best in the world, out to the French flanks. In response, the French did a most stupid thing; they sent their cavalry off to chase Diaz and his men, who proceeded to butcher them. The remaining French infantrymen charged the Mexican defenders through sloppy mud from a thunderstorm and through hundreds of head of stampeding cattle stirred up by Indians armed only with machetes.
When the battle was over, many French were killed or wounded and their cavalry was being chased by Diaz' superb horsemen miles away. The Mexicans had won a great victory that kept Napoleon III from supplying the confederate rebels for another year, allowing the United States to build the greatest army the world had ever seen. This grand army smashed the Confederates at Gettysburg just 14 months after the battle of Puebla, essentially ending the Civil War.
Union forces were then rushed to the Texas/Mexican border under General Phil Sheridan, who made sure that the Mexicans got all the weapons and ammunition they needed to expel the French. American soldiers were discharged with their uniforms and rifles if they promised to join the Mexican Army to fight the French. The American Legion of Honor marched in the Victory Parade in Mexico, City.
It might be a historical stretch to credit the survival of the United States to those brave 4,000 Mexicans who faced an army twice as large in 1862. But who knows?
In gratitude, thousands of Mexicans crossed the border after Pearl Harbor to join the U.S. Armed Forces. As recently as the Persian Gulf War, Mexicans flooded American consulates with phone calls, trying to join up and fight another war for America.
Mexicans, you see, never forget who their friends are, and neither do Americans. That's why Cinco de Mayo is such a party -- A party that celebrates freedom and liberty. There are two ideals which Mexicans and Americans have fought shoulder to shoulder to protect, ever since the 5th of May, 1862. VIVA! el CINCO DE MAYO!!

[Egon Spengler]

Big Dog, That looks like plagiarism! hehehe

[Mr. Man]

I guess all you need to be a school administrator is a pulse.

[PonyUP]

Freedom of speech means not only defending the right of someone to raise the flag, but equally defending someone's right to burn that flag in protest. In other words, if someone wants to wear the American Flag as a thong, they have that right and that freedom.
Regardless of the teens intention behind wearing the flags, they have that right to display them as an American Citizen. Whether we agree with them or not, or whether we think it is in poor taste or not, it doesn't matter. If we are going to be a free society, we need to protect the freedoms of the stupid as well as any other American.
Otherwise what we are talking about is protecting the Freedoms of what YOU believe to be right as opposed to giving me the freedom to make up my own mind.

[RR|Suki]

Freedom of speech means not only defending the right of someone to raise the flag, but equally defending someone's right to burn that flag in protest. In other words, if someone wants to wear the American Flag as a thong, they have that right and that freedom.
Regardless of the teens intention behind wearing the flags, they have that right to display them as an American Citizen. Whether we agree with them or not, or whether we think it is in poor taste or not, it doesn't matter. If we are going to be a free society, we need to protect the freedoms of the stupid as well as any other American.
Otherwise what we are talking about is protecting the Freedoms of what YOU believe to be right as opposed to giving me the freedom to make up my own mind.

You are so wrong it hurts. Again, you need to go look up school speech cases. Kids in HS on school grounds DO NOT have the same freedom of speech as in a public forum. I really wish people knew something, anything about free speech before spouting off all sorts of nonsense. Free speech is not a general ability to do what you want, but has to do with the government's ability to curtail speech. Depending on forum the amount of freedom can change drastically.
So in a High School setting it matters very much what the intention is, whether or not it is in poor taste etc. :shake:

[Pat]

Thanks BigDogJim for the history of the date. I didn't know or remember any of that. At any rate the situation should not have been one of confrontation. Many of our states have multiple flags denoting certain historical realities. Can anyone say six flags over Texas.

If the intent of the students in question was to incite then that's another matter. Was the student body as a whole advised of the celebration and llmitations on display?

I think a lawsuit may only codify this Mexican celebration at the expense of American nationalism given the liberal bias of today's courts.

[Phrog_gunner]

I guess all you need to be a school administrator is a pulse.

Testicles are obviously not required. I might have to rethink my position and start supporting abortion, since the weak and stupid seem to be reproducing at greater rates.

[justbob]

I'd like to see someone try and put together an American independance day in Mexico schools. Lets see how that goes.........

[Bigdogjim]

I'd like to see someone try and put together an American independance day in Mexico schools. Lets see how that goes.........

Again you do not understand Cinco de Mayo


Go back and read my post. #32

[Phrog_gunner]

-- A party that celebrates freedom and liberty.



I can see no better way to celebrate freedom and liberty than not to allow an American, in America, to wear an American Flag.

[PonyUP]

You are so wrong it hurts. Again, you need to go look up school speech cases. Kids in HS on school grounds DO NOT have the same freedom of speech as in a public forum. I really wish people knew something, anything about free speech before spouting off all sorts of nonsense. Free speech is not a general ability to do what you want, but has to do with the government's ability to curtail speech. Depending on forum the amount of freedom can change drastically.
So in a High School setting it matters very much what the intention is, whether or not it is in poor taste etc. :shake:

So, you may disagree with my opinion, and thats fine, but an opinion can not be right or wrong. Does the school have the right to tell the students what to wear, sure they do, especially if it displays profanity. (were the students told ahead of time that wearing an american flag on cinco de mayo would violate a dress code?) There was a celebration, that these students chose to protest, I don't like the way they did it, and I certainly don't agree with it, but had it been on any other day it would not have raised an eyebrow. So let me ask this, and I really am not trying to start a fight here, it is not my nature and I'm not looking for an argument, but if mexican students displayed their flag in a school on the fourth of July, and were threatened with suspension unless they removed them, would you feel the same way?

If that's the case, that's fine we can agree to disagree.

[PonyUP]

However I followed your advice and I looked up cases. Here is the link, there is some interesting stuff there.

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/studentspeech.htm

[Phrog_gunner]

According to the Constitution of MY country, all people are created equal. So if the people wearing the American flag must take their flag off, then the people wearing any other flag must also take it off. Everyone should be treated equally. It's either ALL flags or NO flags, plain and simple.

[guspech750]

Again you do not understand Cinco de Mayo


Go back and read my post. #32
I dont need to Understand Cinco de Mayo!!! The day I move to Mexico then I will want to learn it. I live in America. I and all citizens have a right to wear a T-shirt or a hat with an American Flag on it in The United States of America on anyday of the year. You dont like it! Then those people should first go F*** them selves and then get the hell out of America. Just more Bullcrap that is draging this country deeper into the toilet!!
I would take the school district and all parties to court and fight for American rights!!!

[guspech750]

According to the Constitution of MY country, all people are created equal. So if the people wearing the American flag must take their flag off, then the people wearing any other flag must also take it off. Everyone should be treated equally. It's either ALL flags or NO flags, plain and simple.
:banana2::bows:

[Paul]

I like our flag.

http://www.beyond.ca/i/4th-of-july-bikini-heidi-montag.jpg

http://fanyard.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/jessica-simpson-on-gq-cover-in-american-flag-bikini-dbu-pants-and-soldier-dog-tags.jpg

http://www.angelsunlimited.com/shop/media/BahaUSAStarsStripesBikini.jpg


Thanks, Zack! I just love to gaze at our flag! :)

[RR|Suki]

So, you may disagree with my opinion, and thats fine, but an opinion can not be right or wrong. Does the school have the right to tell the students what to wear, sure they do, especially if it displays profanity. (were the students told ahead of time that wearing an american flag on cinco de mayo would violate a dress code?) There was a celebration, that these students chose to protest, I don't like the way they did it, and I certainly don't agree with it, but had it been on any other day it would not have raised an eyebrow. So let me ask this, and I really am not trying to start a fight here, it is not my nature and I'm not looking for an argument, but if mexican students displayed their flag in a school on the fourth of July, and were threatened with suspension unless they removed them, would you feel the same way?

If that's the case, that's fine we can agree to disagree.

I'm not disagreeing with you about anything frankly, back in my first year of law school the writing and research for that year was on this very issue.
I'm just advising that you do some reading and actually know something about the subject before saying silly things.
Once you know something about it, then we can disagree, until then there is 0 disagreement as far as I am concerned.

PS A mexican student wearing their flag on the 4th of July and what happened here may or may not be the same thing. The fact that you even asked that shows how far off the actual issue at play you really are. Get back to me after a year or so of reading.

[PonyUP]

I'm not disagreeing with you about anything frankly, back in my first year of law school the writing and research for that year was on this very issue.
I'm just advising that you do some reading and actually know something about the subject before saying silly things.
Once you know something about it, then we can disagree, until then there is 0 disagreement as far as I am concerned.

Whatever, fine I don't know anything. considering you don't know me or what my background is, that's fine. But I don't think my opinion is silly, and I did follow your suggestion and posted a link that I thought was interesting. However for you to imply that I don't know anything is the silly part, you have no idea what my history is, what I read before posting. However, I don't need to research to have a feeling or an opinion, and that's all this is. You have a different one, as is your right.

[PonyUP]

Petitioner John F. Tinker, 15 years old, and petitioner Christopher Eckhardt, 16 years old, attended high schools in Des Moines, Iowa. Petitioner Mary Beth Tinker, John's sister, was a 13-year-old student in junior high school.
In December 1965, a group of adults and students in Des Moines held a meeting at the Eckhardt home. The group determined to publicize their objections to the hostilities in Vietnam and their support for a truce by wearing black armbands during the holiday season and by fasting on December 16 and New Year's Eve. Petitioners and their parents had previously engaged in similar activities, and they decided to participate in the program.
The principals of the Des Moines schools became aware of the plan to wear armbands. On December 14, 1965, they met and adopted a policy that any student wearing an armband to school would be asked to remove it, and if he refused he would be suspended until he returned without the armband. Petitioners were aware of the regulation that the school authorities adopted.
On December 16, Mary Beth and Christopher wore black armbands to their schools. John Tinker wore his armband the next day. They were all sent home and suspended from school until they would come back without their armbands. They did not return to school until after the planned period for wearing armbands had expired -- that is, until after New Year's Day.
This complaint was filed in the United States District Court by petitioners, through their fathers, under § 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code. It prayed for an injunction restraining the respondent school officials and the respondent members of the board of directors of the school district from disciplining the petitioners, and it sought nominal damages. After an evidentiary hearing the District Court dismissed the complaint. It upheld the constitutionality of the school authorities' action on the ground that it was reasonable in order to prevent disturbance of school discipline. 258 F.Supp. 971 (1966).
On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit considered the case en banc. The court was equally divided, and the District Court's decision was accordingly affirmed, without opinion. 383 F.2d 988 (1967). We granted certiorari.
I.
The District Court recognized that the wearing of an armband for the purpose of expressing certain views is the type of symbolic act that is within the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. As we shall discuss, the wearing of armbands in the circumstances of this case was entirely divorced from actually or potentially disruptive conduct by those participating in it. It was closely akin to "pure speech" which, we have repeatedly held, is entitled to comprehensive protection under the First Amendment.
First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students. It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. This has been the unmistakable holding of this Court for almost 50 years.
In West Virginia v. Barnette, supra, this Court held that under the First Amendment, the student in public school may not be compelled to salute the flag. Speaking through Mr. Justice Jackson, the Court said:
"The Fourteenth Amendment, as now applied to the States, protects the citizen against the State itself and all of its creatures -- Boards of Education not excepted. These have, of course, important, delicate, and highly discretionary functions, but none that they may not perform within the limits of the Bill of Rights. That they are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes."
On the other hand, the Court has repeatedly emphasized the need for affirming the comprehensive authority of the States and of school officials, consistent with fundamental constitutional safeguards, to prescribe and control conduct in the schools. Our problem lies in the area where students in the exercise of First Amendment rights collide with the rules of the school authorities.
II.
The problem posed by the present case does not relate to regulation of the length of skirts or the type of clothing, to hair style, or deportment. It does not concern aggressive, disruptive action or even group demonstrations. Our problem involves direct, primary First Amendment rights akin to "pure speech."
The school officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, passive expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance on the part of petitioners. There is here no evidence whatever of petitioners' interference, actual or nascent, with the schools' work or of collision with the rights of other students to be secure and to be let alone. Accordingly, this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students.
Only a few of the 18,000 students in the school system wore the black armbands. Only five students were suspended for wearing them. There is no indication that the work of the schools or any class was disrupted. Outside the classrooms, a few students made hostile remarks to the children wearing armbands, but there were no threats or acts of violence on school premises.
The District Court concluded that the action of the school authorities was reasonable because it was based upon their fear of a disturbance from the wearing of the armbands. But, in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom -- this kind of openness -- that is the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society.
In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained.
In the present case, the District Court made no such finding, and our independent examination of the record fails to yield evidence that the school authorities had reason to anticipate that the wearing of the armbands would substantially interfere with the work of the school or impinge upon the rights of other students. Even an official memorandum prepared after the suspension that listed the reasons for the ban on wearing the armbands made no reference to the anticipation of such disruption.
On the contrary, the action of the school authorities appears to have been based upon an urgent wish to avoid the controversy which might result from the expression, even by the silent symbol of armbands, of opposition to this Nation's part in the conflagration in Vietnam. It is revealing, in this respect, that the meeting at which the school principals decided to issue the contested regulation was called in response to a student's statement to the journalism teacher in one of the schools that he wanted to write an article on Vietnam and have it published in the school paper. (The student was dissuaded.)
It is also relevant that the school authorities did not purport to prohibit the wearing of all symbols of political or controversial significance. The record shows that students in some of the schools wore buttons relating to national political campaigns, and some even wore the Iron Cross, traditionally a symbol of Nazism. The order prohibiting the wearing of armbands did not extend to these. Instead, a particular symbol -- black armbands worn to exhibit opposition to this Nation's involvement in Vietnam -- was singled out for prohibition. Clearly, the prohibition of expression of one particular opinion, at least without evidence that it is necessary to avoid material and substantial interference with schoolwork or discipline, is not constitutionally permissible. In our system, state-operated schools may not be enclaves of totalitarianism. School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students in school as well as out of school are "persons" under our Constitution. They are possessed of fundamental rights which the State must respect, just as they themselves must respect their obligations to the State. In our system, students may not be regarded as closed-circuit recipients of only that which the State chooses to communicate. They may not be confined to the expression of those sentiments that are officially approved. In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views. As Judge Gewin, speaking for the Fifth Circuit, said, school officials cannot suppress "expressions of feelings with which they do not wish to contend."

[Phrog_gunner]

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
Students do not leave their rights at the schoolhouse door.
To protest the Vietnam War, Mary Beth Tinker and her brother wore black armbands to school. Fearing a disruption, the administration prohibited wearing such armbands. The Tinkers were removed from school when they failed to comply, but the Supreme Court ruled that their actions were protected by the First Amendment.

http://www.uscourts.gov/outreach/resources/landmark_studentcases.htm

It didn't take me a year of reading to find that. This sounds like the exact same situation to me. But maybe Suki can shed some context "light" on the subject for us.

[RR|Suki]

Whatever, fine I don't know anything. considering you don't know me or what my background is, that's fine. But I don't think my opinion is silly, and I did follow your suggestion and posted a link that I thought was interesting. However for you to imply that I don't know anything is the silly part, you have no idea what my history is, what I read before posting. However, I don't need to research to have a feeling or an opinion, and that's all this is. You have a different one, as is your right.

What does your background have to do with having a mis-informed opinion due to incomplete info? I don't need to know anything at all about you to know that you don't understand the subject.

Heck you even seem to think that I have voiced any opinion at all on the subject. When in fact all I have said is that free speech applies differently to HS students during school hours than it does to normal people. Hell different interactions with the government and with the HS change what freedom of speech means.

PS Yes you do need to research to have an opinion, that's the largest problem with things like this, how can you form an opinion and get all pissed off about something without having a complete understanding of it? :confused:

[Phrog_gunner]

I'm late = FAIL :alone:


Pony, Suki isn't trying to make a personal attack on you. He and I have had a few discussions and he is just a straight forward kind of guy like I am, and I have never seen him make a personal attack.

[Ms. Denmark]

I'm not disagreeing with you about anything frankly, back in my first year of law school the writing and research for that year was on this very issue.
I'm just advising that you do some reading and actually know something about the subject before saying silly things.
Once you know something about it, then we can disagree, until then there is 0 disagreement as far as I am concerned.

PS A mexican student wearing their flag on the 4th of July and what happened here may or may not be the same thing. The fact that you even asked that shows how far off the actual issue at play you really are. Get back to me after a year or so of reading.Well there's at least one good thing about your respones......they never fail to reinforce my belief that there is a great deal of truth to the negative stereotype that lawyers struggle to live down. Could you be more arrogant and condescending? Wait, you're only 25 or 26. I shudder to think......:rolleyes:

[RR|Suki]

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969)
Students do not leave their rights at the schoolhouse door.
To protest the Vietnam War, Mary Beth Tinker and her brother wore black armbands to school. Fearing a disruption, the administration prohibited wearing such armbands. The Tinkers were removed from school when they failed to comply, but the Supreme Court ruled that their actions were protected by the First Amendment.

http://www.uscourts.gov/outreach/resources/landmark_studentcases.htm

It didn't take me a year of reading to find that. This sounds like the exact same situation to me. But maybe Suki can shed some context "light" on the subject for us.


LOL thanks for proving my point, that is the problem with not taking your time, when you actually know something about Tinker you realize how many times cases have gone up based on Tinker and been distinguished from it. :lol:

[PonyUP]

What does your background have to do with having a mis-informed opinion due to incomplete info? I don't need to know anything at all about you to know that you don't understand the subject.

Heck you even seem to think that I have voiced any opinion at all on the subject. When in fact all I have said is that free speech applies differently to HS students during school hours than it does to normal people. Hell different interactions with the government and with the HS change what freedom of speech means.

PS Yes you do need to research to have an opinion, that's the largest problem with things like this, how can you form an opinion and get all pissed off about something without having a complete understanding of it? :confused:

First of all, I'm not pissed off, but I can have an opinion without going to law school. I have read plenty of things regarding subjects like these, you just made the assumption that I didn't. I simply posted my feelings on the subject, you chose to respond. It may not have been intended that way, but your responses back to me seemed a little like a verbal attack. Which illiceted a like response from me. That is not my intention, and like I said I wasn't looking for an argument, but reather a spirited debate. You don't feel I have knowledge on the subject, therefore I would encourage you to not respond to my postings on the subject.

[Phrog_gunner]

LOL thanks for proving my point, that is the problem with not taking your time, when you actually know something about Tinker you realize how many times cases have gone up based on Tinker and been distinguished from it. :lol:


Well as smart as you are, you should easily be able to teach us lowly minions the precedents that have been set.

[RR|Suki]

Well there's at least one good thing about your respones......they never fail to reinforce my belief that there is a great deal of truth to the negative stereotype that lawyers struggle to live down. Could you be more arrogant and condescending? Wait, you're only 25 or 26. I shudder to think......:rolleyes:

Yeah you are 100% right, it's certainly more arrogant to advise looking something up before being all upset about it for the wrong reasons, than being all upset about infringement of rights which may not even exist. . .




First of all, I'm not pissed off, but I can have an opinion without going to law school. I have read plenty of things regarding subjects like these, you just made the assumption that I didn't. I simply posted my feelings on the subject, you chose to respond. It may not have been intended that way, but your responses back to me seemed a little like a verbal attack. Which illiceted a like response from me. That is not my intention, and like I said I wasn't looking for an argument, but reather a spirited debate. You don't feel I have knowledge on the subject, therefore I would encourage you to not respond to my postings on the subject.

If you take anything I have said to have anything to do with anything you said about your feelings I don't know what you tell you. Did you not say this:

"Regardless of the teens intention behind wearing the flags, they have that right to display them as an American Citizen. Whether we agree with them or not, or whether we think it is in poor taste or not, it doesn't matter."

That is just not so, no matter how you might wanna feel about it, it's just not reality, which is directly what I commented on. . . so if you feel like it was a verbal attack, I dunno what to tell you.


Well as smart as you are, you should easily be able to teach us lowly minions the precedents that have been set.

:lol:

[PonyUP]

Burnside v. Byars, 363 F.2d 744 (5th Cir. 1966)
Facts:
A group of public school students at an all-black school in Philadelphia, Mississippi wore "freedom buttons" to school to protest racial segregation in the state. The school principal ordered the students to remove the buttons. The principal believed that the buttons would "cause commotion" and "disturb the school program." When several students continued to wear the buttons, the principal suspended them for a week.
Issue:
Whether school officials could suspend students for wearing "freedom buttons."
Holding:
By a 3-0 vote, a Fifth Circuit panel held that school officials could not prohibit the wearing of the "freedom buttons" because there was no evidence that the buttons would have caused a substantial disruption.
Reasoning:
The record demonstrates that there was no commotion or disruption caused by the wearing of the buttons. "The record indicates only a showing of mild curiosity on the part of the other school children over the presence of some 30 or 40 children wearing such insignia." Because the wearing of buttons did not cause a disruption, the regulation preventing the wearing of such buttons is "arbitrary and unreasonable."
Majority:
"But with all of this in mind we must also emphasize that school officials cannot ignore expressions of feelings with which they do not wish to contend. They cannot infringe on their students' right to free and unrestricted expression as guaranteed to them under the First Amendment to the Constitution, where the exercise of such rights in the school buildings and schoolrooms do not materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school." (Judge Walter Gewin)

[RR|Suki]

Are you really even reading these? Read the last sentence in that last copy and paste. In fact I'll hook you up

read this from your own copy paste

They cannot infringe on their students' right to free and unrestricted expression as guaranteed to them under the First Amendment to the Constitution, where the exercise of such rights in the school buildings and schoolrooms do not materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school.

Then read what you said earlier

Regardless of the teens intention behind wearing the flags, they have that right to display them as an American Citizen. Whether we agree with them or not, or whether we think it is in poor taste or not, it doesn't matter."

[PonyUP]

http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/images/buttons/print_this.gif (http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1680&printer-friendly=y) Pyle v. School Committee of South Hadley, 423 Mass. 283, 667 N.E.2d 869 (1996).

Facts:
Two public school students wore several "Co-ed Naked . . ." t-shirts that school officials deemed vulgar. When school officials told the students they could not wear the shirts, the students sued in federal court.
The federal appeals court eventually asked the state supreme court to interpret a state law that seemed to give students greater protection than they receive under the First Amendment.


Issue:
Whether, under Massachusetts law, public high school students are free to engage in any expression they choose, even if deemed vulgar by the school, as long as the speech is neither disruptive nor school-sponsored.


Holding:
In a unanimous decision, the court held that Massachusetts law protects students' rights to engage in vulgar, non-school-sponsored speech as long as it does not cause a disruption at school.

Reasoning:
Massachusetts law provides: "The right of students to freedom of expression in the public schools of the commonwealth shall not be abridged, provided that such right shall not cause any disruption or disorder within the school." The state high court noted that this language is "clear and unambiguous." The statute contains no exception for vulgar or offensive expression that is not disruptive.
Majority:
"Our Legislature is free to grant greater rights to the citizens of this Commonwealth than would otherwise be protected under the United States Constitution." (Judge Paul J. Liacos)

[RR|Suki]

Same thing again, read post 60

[PonyUP]

Yes, they upheld the students rights to wear the T-Shirts. And what I wrote was a feeling on the subject, you took it like I was stating fact. Whatever, I have stated my feelings on it, I still hold those, I'm done. You can continue with your law lesson, though I haven't seen you state a single case that overturned Tinker, and they did just celebrate the 40th anniversary of that ruling 2 years ago. Perhaps you need to do more research before you spout off about people being right and wrong or ignorant or misinformed.

[RR|Suki]

Yes, they upheld the students rights to wear the T-Shirts. And what I wrote was a feeling on the subject, you took it like I was stating fact. Whatever, I have stated my feelings on it, I still hold those, I'm done. You can continue with your law lesson, though I haven't seen you state a single case that overturned Tinker, and they did just celebrate the 40th anniversary of that ruling 2 years ago. Perhaps you need to do more research before you spout off about people being right and wrong or ignorant or misinformed.

LOL not only have I not posted any cases, if you notice I haven't taken a position at all, for all you know I could support the kids 100% My only position is against assuming rights which do not exist.

However it still remains, that this:

Regardless of the teens intention behind wearing the flags, they have that right to display them as an American Citizen. Whether we agree with them or not, or whether we think it is in poor taste or not, it doesn't matter."
is not at all what Tinker stands for.

But now your position is that the statement above is only a feeling, so ok.

[Vortex]

Frankly, looks to me like those two kids were trying to stir the pot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8cCzltPD6Y

[RR|Suki]

Frankly, looks to me like those two kids were trying to stir the pot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8cCzltPD6Y

That got passed around the office today, gonna be a wild movie. must see

[Spectragod]

Sad part is the Cinqo de Mayo is a celebration of some Mexican battle where they defeated the French, like that's a big deal.

I wonder how they defeated the French? Invaded their country(i.e. sneak across the border) and put their welfare system into ruins? :confused:

[Phrog_gunner]

I wonder how they defeated the French? Invaded their country(i.e. sneak across the border) and put their welfare system into ruins? :confused:
:bows: classic

[ImpalaSlayer]

i think all this lawer talk is going to make my head explode!

[MrBluGruv]

I wonder how they defeated the French? Invaded their country(i.e. sneak across the border) and put their welfare system into ruins? :confused:

lmao, I did not see that coming when I first started reading the post.

[SpartaPerformance]

I wonder how they defeated the French? Invaded their country(i.e. sneak across the border) and put their welfare system into ruins? :confused:

OMG! That's soooo wrong, unfortunately it's true but soooo wrong. :beer:

[LIGHTNIN1]

i think all this lawer talk is going to make my head explode!

I had no idea this thread would create the stir it has.Just thought it was another news article when I read it this morning. But what did I know?:argue:

[CBT]

I'm feeling the love, are you's feeling it?

[Haggis]

Zack, the women are HOT no doubt here, but I find your pics of them wear the flag offensive; please remove them. Also please remove the pic of the dude with the flag wrapped around him, Thank you.

[CBT]

Zack, the women are HOT no doubt here, but I find your pics of them wear the flag offensive; please remove them. Also please remove the pic of the dude with the flag wrapped around him, Thank you.
You're going to hate my "Don't tread on me" thong....

[Paul T. Casey]

Back on topic...well not really.

[CBT]

Back on topic...well not really.

Well he's going to get tired real quick!

[MrBluGruv]

Well he's going to get tired real quick!


LOL, Chuck Norris, tired. :lol:

[dakslim]

Zack, the women are HOT no doubt here, but I find your pics of them wear the flag offensive; please remove them. Also please remove the pic of the dude with the flag wrapped around him, Thank you.

I couldn't agree more...I realize that the flag is just a "symbol" of our country but I was raised to have respect for our "symbol".

[duhtroll]

I find it interesting that none of the cases of students being attacked because of what they are wearing have been mentioned. I don't even need to post any as I am assuming every single person here can think of an episode of school violence which was predicated on "they are different than me."

When an administrator puts restrictions on dress codes, it is usually to protect students. When they say "they don't want a disruption," most of the time that is exactly the point.

I am rarely going to be seen defending administrators, and there are asses in every position, (usually management) but in this case the intentions are good.

Example. We allow no caps in school. I think it is a stupid rule but it hearkens back to the early 90s (in my tenure, maybe much earlier) when caps were worn in different ways to promote gang affiliation. Removing them all was the easy answer.

We also do not allow shirts with beer slogans or profanity nor "coed naked" shirts. And IIRC if it is in the school policy from day 1, no court can tell a school what their rules can be, within reason (like discrimination or something against state law or something). Parents can pay for private schooling if they do not like the rules in a public school.

I also find it irritating that the main reason people get away with such things is that "you didn't tell us we couldn't do it so now we get to be distasteful!" attitude. It shows some people have no respect for others and are just looking to see what they can get away with. That is why school rules are so widespread and restrictive.

School rules are reactionary.

If we had better parenting, we wouldn't HAVE to tell Johnny it isn't OK to wear a t-shirt from the strip club to 5th grade science.

And frankly, I think far too few complainers are willing to put their money where their mouth is. They want to complain about public schooling but then they send their kids there rather than pay for it themselves, or better yet, home school their own kids.

[Paul T. Casey]

In an attempt to bail Zack out, may I present......

[LIGHTNIN1]

I heard on the radio yesterday where this t-shirt flag story started there were marches in support of the flagwearers and that the protests got heated. Also that the school apologized for sending the kids home. It was on the radio so I don't know about how factual it was.Did anyone else hear that?

[CBT]

Who does this kid think she is drawing an American flag? Shame on her.



Student: Teacher Called Flag Pic Offensive

Obama Pic Praised, Parents Say



POSTED: 4:49 pm PDT May 10, 2010
UPDATED: 7:00 pm PDT May 10, 2010


SALINAS, Calif. --

A simple art project has turned controversial in Salinas after a student said her drawing of the American flag was deemed offensive, while another student's picture of President Obama was praised.


Tracy Hathaway said her art teacher at Gavilan View Middle School told her daughter she couldn't draw the American flag, calling the picture offensive.
Hathaway said they were floored when they heard the news and met with the teacher and principal at Gavilan View Middle School. When asked what she thought was offensive about drawing an American flag, the teacher didn't answer, Hathaway said.
The Hathaways now want an apology.
"From her teacher to just say 'I'm sorry for offending you' and saying this was 'offensive,' just a heart-felt apology is all I'm asking," Hathaway said.

http://www.ksbw.com/images/structures/buttons/button_enlarge.gif
http://www.ksbw.com/2010/0511/23512154_240X180.jpg
(http://www.ksbw.com/news/23512008/detail.html#)

The Hathaways said the issue isn't about race, but that racism has crept into the discussion after the school received more than 200 e-mails and phone messages, most of them containing hateful and racist comments.
"(Messages say) that we have violated that student's First Amendment rights and the so-called teacher needs to 'get the hell out of my country,'" said District Superintendent Mike Brusa.
Brusa also said another meeting is planned this week between the teacher, parents and Hathaway, and that an apology may be in order.
Although Brusa wouldn't discuss if any disciplinary action has been taken, or will be taken, the teacher involved wasn't on campus Monday.

[SC Cheesehead]

It just keeps on getting more and more ridiculous...

http://www.khou.com/news/Candy-Gets-Third-Grader-A-Weeks-Detention-93033319.html

Where the heck is this country heading? :shake:

[LordVader]

Well I hate to hijack this thread. But I like cars, especially four door "big cars". I like them in Black, I like them in Silver Burch, I them in DTR and in DPB. That's why I like to hang out in here, because of the cars. Not so much the politics. Thank you.

[Egon Spengler]

Well I hate to hijack this thread. But I like cars, especially four door "big cars". I like them in Black, I like them in Silver Burch, I them in DTR and in DPB. That's why I like to hang out in here, because of the cars. Not so much the politics. Thank you.
I haven't been following this thread at all lately, but decided to pop in this morning. I am surprised it is still open!

I love my flag and am not going to get in a debate over it. I am just going to say God Bless America!

[LIGHTNIN1]

It just keeps on getting more and more ridiculous...

http://www.khou.com/news/Candy-Gets-Third-Grader-A-Weeks-Detention-93033319.html

Where the heck is this country heading? :shake:

Public schools exist to teach children not to dictate what they eat, what religion they practice or do not practice, and what kind of car they drive after graduation. Kids eat candy, hamburgers, fries and drink pop, it is natural behavior. Teach the kids history, how to spell , math and otherwise leave them alone.:mad2:

[PonyUP]

Public schools exist to teach children not to dictate what they eat, what religion they practice or do not practice, and what kind of car they drive after graduation. Kids eat candy, hamburgers, fries and drink pop, it is natural behavior. Teach the kids history, how to spell , math and otherwise leave them alone.:mad2:

Well as long as they are being told not to drive imports after graduation, I'm okay with that part :lol:

[MiltownCvLx]

Saw this article on my daily browse through Officer.com

http://officer.com/web/online/Editorial-and-Features/Should-Flag-Burning-Be-Prohibited/19$31614

[CBT]

I believe this happened last year. Most people probably don't know that maritime rules say a national flag (all nations) flown upside down is a distress call and must be answered just like an SOS. So how do we rescue us?


Montebello High School in California
The protestors at Montebello High School took the American flag off the school's flag pole and hung it upside down while putting up the Mexican flag over it.

20376

20377

20378

20379