Does the right to free speech stop at schoolhouse door?

Post Reply New Topic

No? :/

My school's had a crapload of issues with this. Some girls (honor students btw) got threatened with suspension for wearing little colored bracelets, like the kind you'd buy in one of those plastic bubble machines for a quarter. Apparently they were used in some circles to represent sexuality and stuff, which the girls were unaware of. The courts ruled that the suspension would be lifted if the girls stopped wearing the bracelets.

THEY WERE LITTLE COLORED BRACELETS. THE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE ANYTHING WRITTEN ON THEM.



Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Sure.

But what's really strange about my school is that people wear Jesus shirts and Christian paraphenalia all the time and noone says anything.



So basically it's alright to piss all over the whole "Seperation of Church and State" thing, but if you wear a 25 cent bracelet that some 12-year old a***hole on the internet claims signifies that you like it up the ass, well that's just unacceptable.

first lets get the government to not run public schools. problem fixed

Technically I don't view an absolute right as existing here for students. For one thing, children really do not have rights other than that of being treated properly(not being abused and all that stuff). That is why your mom can tell you not to cuss in her presence and enforce that. When at school, the school ultimately has a level of authority with some similarity to that of the parent. Some school rules are stupid and those should be dealt with, some aspects of school education itself are also unliked, however, the students in school really do not have rights.

"Separation of church and state" is a common metaphor that is well recognized. Equally well recognized is the metaphorical meaning of the church staying out of the state's business and the state staying out of the church's business. Because of the very common usage of the "separation of church and state phrase," most people incorrectly think the phrase is in the constitution. The phrase "wall of separation between the church and the state" was originally coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptists on January 1, 1802. His purpose in this letter was to assuage the fears of the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists, and so he told them that this wall had been erected to protect them. The metaphor was used exclusively to keep the state out of the church's business, not to keep the church out of the state's business.

The constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Both the free exercise clause and the establishment clause place restrictions on the government concerning laws they pass or interfering with religion. No restrictions are placed on religions except perhaps that a religious denomination cannot become the state religion.

However, currently the implied common meaning and the use of the metaphor is strictly for the church staying out of the state's business. The opposite meaning essentially cannot in be found in the media, the judiciary, or in public debate and is not any part of the agenda of the ACLU or the judiciary.

This, in conjunction with several other factors, makes the "separation of church and state" metaphor an icon for eliminating anything having to do with Christian theism, the religion of our heritage, in the public arena. One of these factors is the use of the metaphor in place of the actual words of the constitution in discourse and debate. This allows the true meaning of the words in the constitution to be effectively changed to the implied meaning of the metaphor and the effect of the "free exercise" clause to be obviated. Another factor facilitating the icon to censor all forms of Christian theism in the public arena is a complete misunderstanding of the "establishment" clause.

Media sensationalism gets to the heads of the administration. There are gangs, ne'er-do-wells, and mass murdering youngsters everywhere. Youths can't be trusted.