Seventh Grader Sues School Over Right to Wear Pro-Life T-Shirt

[Addendum]

The only opinion that matters would be the school board has defined as obscene.

But like I said, not all school boards define what is obscene. They leave it up to the individual schools who draw up their dress codes.

 

[Figs]

I don't think that uniforms solve all problems. I never said that they would.

But do you have any idea what school would be like if you didn't wear uniforms. Frankly you don't have much in the way of a non-biased view.

I do. I went from Kindergarten all the way to High School not having to wear uniforms. There was never any outrageous violence or fights due to what someone was wearing. Just like the majority of the time in life when your at school most fights were started due to popularity issues in regards to personality and attitude.

 

[Tally Man]

And there was no complaints from students over the shirt.

I'm not sure if complaints are the only measure of what was considered disruptive by the courts or whoever else. Still while kids don't shed their constitutional rights when they enter the school door, school administrators have greater latitude to restrict speech than the government does. So my basic point is that unless the school can show that the kid was causing a disturbance in some way they don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[StorminNorman]

But like I said, not all school boards define what is obscene. They leave it up to the individual schools who draw up their dress codes.

And, again, those dress codes must be within the constitution. It will be very difficult for the school to make the case that a picture of a fetus is obscene - and they are the ones who have the burden in this scenario.

 

[Addendum]

Technically, the school is the defense and those who bring the suit, in this case the parents, have the burden of proof. If they present a weak case, the school does not have to prove anything at all.

However, once the school presents their case, then the burden of proof falls on them.

 

[StorminNorman]

Technically, the school is the defense and those who bring the suit, in this case the parents, have the burden of proof. If they present a weak case, the school does not have to prove anything at all.

However, once the school presents their case, then the burden of proof falls on them.

The case the parents can make is rather simple. Tinker vs. the Des Moine School board defends a student's freedom of expression and is accessible with a quick vague google search. Subsequent rulings indicate the lawful restriction of student speech requires a defense of obscenity or if the clothing in question could promote disorder or violence.

The parent's case is incredibly simple.

That's why the true burden in this case will be on the school to defend it's action.

 

[Wiseman]

I'm planning on getting a shirt that says "God is Fake. Deal with it."

Maybe you should get a shirt that says "disappointment since 1994" with a big arrow pointing up

 

[Addendum]

The case the parents can make is rather simple. Tinker vs. the Des Moine School board defends a student's freedom of expression and is accessible with a quick vague google search. Subsequent rulings indicate the lawful restriction of student speech requires a defense of obscenity or if the clothing in question could promote disorder or violence.

The parent's case is incredibly simple.

That's why the true burden in this case will be on the school to defend it's action.

Meh.

It's not a big deal for me whatever happens in this case since I have no investment in any of the participants.

 

[Majic Walrus]

I do. I went from Kindergarten all the way to High School not having to wear uniforms. There was never any outrageous violence or fights due to what someone was wearing. Just like the majority of the time in life when your at school most fights were started due to popularity issues in regards to personality and attitude.

Then you have no knowledge of what it would be like to wear uniforms. You also have a biased view.

Since when I said that you said that it solves all of the problems?

Since here:

I always get pissed when people thinks that uniforms is the "magic" way of getting people to get along.
NEWS FLASH!~ It doesn't!

My school would pretty much be the same except ... huh ... no uniforms.
And frankly, you don't either.
I have right to be baised, I KNOW how uniform in schools work and ... you don't.

I didn't say that you didn't have a right to be biased I just said that because it invalidates your personal experience as an argument. You haven't had experiences with and without school uniforms so you really can't speak to how they other option would affect you.

And also, you probably shouldn't make assumptions. I wore uniforms for several years in junior high school.

 

[Majic Walrus]

Because obscenity is still a valid restriction of freedom of speech that applies in society outside of school grounds.

Yes - because allowing yourself to be offended by a pro-life shirt demonstrates a lack of maturity. Again, the teacher is an employee - the student is not. [/quote]

Personal opinions are just that. Personal opinions. You shouldn't fire someone for having ones that aren't like yours.

And I place more value on the individuals rights.

I dig.

No. The School Board would set rules to define obscenity.

So if the school board determines that her shirt is obscene?

The issue is different, but the logic in this instance is similar.

I agree. It's a good argument. The importance of the right to bear arms is far different than the right to stylin' threads.

 

[Suirou]

Since here:

I always get pissed when people thinks that uniforms is the "magic" way of getting people to get along.
NEWS FLASH!~ It doesn't!

All i see is "a "magic" way of people to get along" not "solving all of problems"

I didn't say that you didn't have a right to be biased I just said that because it invalidates your personal experience as an argument. You haven't had experiences with and without school uniforms so you really can't speak to how they other option would affect you.

And also, you probably shouldn't make assumptions. I wore uniforms for several years in junior high school.

Actually, I went through K-1st grade without uniform.
(and I remembered not being judged on what I wear) [/sarcasm]

So serve you right for making an assumption too.
Although, I did say that I wore uniforms through "elementary to high school", I should've been specific on what grade when I start wearing uniforms, my bad.

 

[CelticPredator]

I hate fetus's. They scare me. I'd be disturbed if someone wore a shirt with fetuses all over it....*shudder*

 

[SuperFerret]

Not only do I find this story, and the dozens of others like it, hilarious, but I also find this whole argument over school uniforms to be funny as well.

Everyone knows the only purpose that public schools have is to provide lunch. If you actually learn something from the foolish adults yammering at you before and after the meal, more power to you.

 

[SuperFerret]

Those students whose education would potentially be disrupted have no hope at a real future anyway.

 

[Majic Walrus]

All i see is "a "magic" way of people to get along" not "solving all of problems"

I inferred your actual meaning.

Actually, I went through K-1st grade without uniform.
(and I remembered not being judged on what I wear) [/sarcasm]

So serve you right for making an assumption too.
Although, I did say that I wore uniforms through "elementary to high school", I should've been specific on what grade when I start wearing uniforms, my bad.

Not really, I attend public schools that requires uniforms, all of the way from elementary to High school.

That sounded to me like all of your school career. Although I stand by my previous comments. First graders and kindergartners aren't exactly like high schoolers.

 

[Addendum]

First graders and kindergartners aren't exactly like high schoolers.

Although both have the same level of maturity

 

[Suirou]

I inferred your actual meaning.

That sounded to me like all of your school career. Although I stand by my previous comments. First graders and kindergartners aren't exactly like high schoolers.

How can you inferred my actual meaning if I didn't mean it that way?

How can you take me seriously even if I use [/sarcasm] at the end?

Although both have the same level of maturity

up:

 

[StorminNorman]

Yes - because allowing yourself to be offended by a pro-life shirt demonstrates a lack of maturity.

Yes. It is. When you allow a student wearing a pro-life shirt impact your teaching ability, it demonstrates a severe lack of maturity.

Personal opinions are just that. Personal opinions. You shouldn't fire someone for having ones that aren't like yours.

And if she keeps it personal, then there is no problem. But allowing the opinions of your experience (especially the opinion of your 7th grade student) offend you demonstrates that you are not cut out to be a teacher.

So if the school board determines that her shirt is obscene?

That would be a rather hard outcome if it's in their textbooks. Yes - I understand the "not in the kindergarden text books" but ruling something "obscene" goes beyond age appropriateness.

I agree. It's a good argument. The importance of the right to bear arms is far different than the right to stylin' threads.

I do not believe the right to bear arms is more important than freedom of expression.

 

[Bill]

I do not believe the right to bear arms is more important than freedom of expression.

Unless you're using your right to bear arms to defend your freedom of expression.

 

[CelticPredator]

BEAR ARMS...OMG...lol.

 

[CelticPredator]

Goddamnit....

 

[Majic Walrus]

How can you inferred my actual meaning if I didn't mean it that way?

How can you take me seriously even if I use [/sarcasm] at the end?

What you said indicated to me that you were being sarcastic yes, sarcastically pointing out how I thought that uniforms would fix all problems. You sounded facetious.

Frankly it's neither here nor there, I'm not going to argue semantics anymore.

Yes. It is. When you allow a student wearing a pro-life shirt impact your teaching ability, it demonstrates a severe lack of maturity.

You're dragging out of something that I didn't intend for you to. I don't think that a teacher would necessarily find this shirt offensive, but rather could find dress offensive and as such uniforms could be beneficial.

And if she keeps it personal, then there is no problem. But allowing the opinions of your experience (especially the opinion of your 7th grade student) offend you demonstrates that you are not cut out to be a teacher.

Still personal opinions can offend you without you wanting to be offended and can very well stay personal forever but still affect your teaching ability.

That would be a rather hard outcome if it's in their textbooks. Yes - I understand the "not in the kindergarden text books" but ruling something "obscene" goes beyond age appropriateness.

Not necessarily. That's why they don't teach sex ed to 1st graders.

I do not believe the right to bear arms is more important than freedom of expression.

Again we're not talking about the complete removal of the freedom of expression.

 

[Suirou]

What you said indicated to me that you were being sarcastic yes, sarcastically pointing out how I thought that uniforms would fix all problems. You sounded facetious.

Frankly it's neither here nor there, I'm not going to argue semantics anymore.

*looks in dictionary*

Main Entry: fa·ce·tious
Pronunciation: \fə-ˈsē-shəs\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French facetieux, from facetie jest, from Latin facetia
Date: 1599
1 : joking or jesting often inappropriately : waggish <just being facetious>
2 : meant to be humorous or funny : not serious <a facetious remark>

Okay, that's smart of you not to argue with me anymore since I was just being facetious.

 

[Majic Walrus]

*looks in dictionary*


Okay, that's smart of you not to argue with me anymore since I was just being facetious twice.

Fix'd.

 

[StorminNorman]

You're dragging out of something that I didn't intend for you to. I don't think that a teacher would necessarily find this shirt offensive, but rather could find dress offensive and as such uniforms could be beneficial.

Like what type of dress? In either case, a teacher finding something offensive isn't a reason to restrict a child's freedom of expression. Especially if obscenity is restricted already.

Still personal opinions can offend you without you wanting to be offended and can very well stay personal forever but still affect your teaching ability.

And such people do not make for good teachers.

Not necessarily. That's why they don't teach sex ed to 1st graders.

And this is not comparable to teaching sex ed to a 1 grader.

Again we're not talking about the complete removal of the freedom of expression.

No, but you are talking about hacking off a significant limb.