|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
06-25-2007, 11:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
free speech takes a hit
The U.S. Supreme Court tightened limits on student speech Monday, ruling against a high school student and his 14-foot-long "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner.
Schools may prohibit student expression that can be interpreted as advocating drug use, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. Joseph Frederick unfurled his homemade sign on a winter morning in 2002, as the Olympic torch made its way through Juneau, Alaska, en route to the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. Frederick said the banner was a nonsensical message that he first saw on a snowboard. He intended the banner to proclaim his right to say anything at all. His principal, Deborah Morse, said the phrase was a pro-drug message that had no place at a school-sanctioned event. Frederick denied that he was advocating drug use. "The message on Frederick's banner is cryptic," Roberts said. "But Principal Morse thought the banner would be interpreted by those viewing it as promoting illegal drug use, and that interpretation is plainly a reasonable one." -----glad my kids will be out of public school soon!! so now the public school system is to be allowed to trample the constitution...well, not like that gets taught in our system anyway, along with geography. locker searches (unreasonable search and seizure), drug testing of athletes(the same...) and now this.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln 
|
|
#2
06-25-2007, 11:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
don't see any problem with it at all really.
this guy is free to take his message to the people most anywhere really. in this case there isn't even a message that he was trying to express, it was merely a stunt. that someone at the school thought it was inappropriate for a school sponsored function seems rational. I don't see the threat to free speech coming from this.
|
|
#3
06-25-2007, 01:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I suspect if the banner read, "Clap Hands For Jesus", it would have been fine...and therein lies the problem! I guess requesting Jefferson Airplane's White Rabbit at the prom would be a no no as well?
__________________
"Always be yourself...unless you suck!"
|
|
#4
06-25-2007, 02:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Just seems kinda silly that this issue took up the time of the supreme court.
|
|
#5
06-25-2007, 02:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Though I don't advocate drug use, it seems the issue was that this kid wasn't on "school property" but was at a "school sanctioned event".
I wonder what the ruling would have been if the banner read "waterboarding for Jesus". http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlates...734501,00.html
|
|
#6
06-25-2007, 03:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'll add this. I find this decision today by the Supreme court to be of much greater concern, as it clearly is in violation of the "establishment clause" in the Constitution.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews
|
|
#7
06-26-2007, 05:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
no, it may not be the best example of rights being trampled--but it's one of several rulings lately that gives me and others pause. and of course many feel that any chipping away of rights weakens the constitution. i agree. altho most would say that what the boy did was silly, or inane, or somehow promoted drug use ( i wouldn't go that far, i think he did it to get attention, and it worked), and that they found it offensive (have to wonder, what if it had said bong hits for bozo the clown?) it is his right to express himself--whether his stance is popular or not. and the constitution is designed to protect the unpopular view. it kills me whenever people say majority rules. it does NOT rule. the constitution was written to protect the minority, as majority rule can quickly become mob rule.
__________________
Books serve to show a man that those original thoughts of his aren't very new at all. Abraham Lincoln
|
Hybrid Mode
