Tee Shirt Banned, Liberty vs Order?

[hal bidlack]

at this link (http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Midwest/02/19/antibush.tshirt.ap/index.html) you will find a story about a 16 year old Michigan kid who had his Tee Shirt banned, due to a picture of President Bush with a label calling him an international terrorist.

The school has a large Arab-American population, and the school felt there was a danger presented by such a shirt.

Now, the Supreme Court has rules on prior restraint, but it has also ruled that schools are special places and can have additional protections.

So, you are the principal, do you ban the shirt?

[Aoidoi]

If I'm the principal, I go for a public flogging followed by cutting off the miscreant's hands. I feel martyrdom is the best way to protest. It would teach the kids the value of standing up for what they believe in.

Good thing I'm not a principal.

;)

(this absurd post brought to you be the letter 'R' and the fact that it's the end of the workday and my mind has already left the building)

[corplinx]

Don't ban the tshirt, impose uniforms.

I would like to meet the parents who though that was appropriate school wear. Back when I was in school, the Malcolm X fashion craze was going on. This one kid wore a "you have your X, I have mine" dixie flag tshirt to school.

This sort of tshirt trolling only serves to distract students from learning. Instead of trying to figure out what tshirt messages are appropriate and how short a skirt can be before its obscene, just impose uniforms. Take away having to decide whats inappropiate altogether, every decision could turn into a court case.

If they don't want to wear the uniform, then they dont' have to go to a government school.

[Brown]

The shirt was no worse than other crap that students are permitted to wear.

Trivia: I used to work for the guy who successfully argued the Tinker case to the Supreme Court.

[corplinx]

I remember when I had to close my button up sweater while wearing a "Im Bart Simpson, Who the Hell are You?" tshirt in high school because another kid had to turn his inside out after they noticed. For the younger folks reading this, it used to be cool to wear that shirt for about 6 months back in the early nineties.

[subgenius]

I am a civil libertarian. The shirt can and should be banned for the distraction factor alone. The fact that worse shirts are allowed elsewhere doesn't make that right. Kids are there to learn, not for a fashion show or to make provocative statements. This school is in Dearborn a few miles away and where one of my brothers lives. It has, I believe, the largest Arabic population outside of the Middle East. The shirt can easily be misconstrued a number of ways and especially in these times could easily lead to violence, let alone just being disruptive.
Everything is a matter of degree.
Just as the schools have a right and duty to prohibit immodest clothing, they have a right and duty to maintain some semblance of order with respect to any other public displays.
I think they should ban all clothing with writing or pictures, because it becomes too hard to make a judgement on every piece of clothing.
I wore a small black armband to my all white high school the day after Martin Luther King was murdered, and that got me several comments and confrontations, even though that kind of discreet display I believe should be protected.

[kittynh]

I keep reading about lots of high schools banning all sorts of tshirts. One school kicked a kid out because he was wearing a "KORN" t'shirt. I mean a band name for goodness sake! Ozzy shirts are banned at the local public high school here. Of course the teachers were wearing them!

the head at the school where I work imposed a "No belly button" rule! and for some reason, no hats indoors (then one child under went chemo, so everyone got to wear hats so she wouldn't feel out of place).

[Nasarius]

I don't get it, sub. Why should we restrict the freedom of minors? Is it "disruptive"? Maybe. Does that justify a ban on freedom of speech? Would you support restrictions on speech in universities? They are, after all, places intended for education. These are *public schools* we're talking about, and as far as I'm concerned, the government has no right to tell them what they can't say just because they're minors.

I proudly wore my crossbuster shirt (see avatar) a number of times during high school. I never got any complaints about it, but there's no way I would have let the school stop me from wearing it without a fight.

[subgenius]

They can and do have the right to run an orderly school. Is yelling in school free speech? Wearing a clown outfit? Bells? Nudity? Free speech in the street is different than free speech in schools. You do believe in restrictions of some kind don't you? What would they be?

[PogoPedant]

I think it's funny that this is even an issue in the land of the free. Is it 'the land of the free to fall in line'?

[subgenius]

Originally posted by PogoPedant
I think it's funny that this is even an issue in the land of the free. Is it 'the land of the free to fall in line'?
Not fall in line, draw the line.
Where would you?

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by subgenius
They can and do have the right to run an orderly school. Is yelling in school free speech? Wearing a clown outfit? Bells? Nudity? Free speech in the street is different than free speech in schools. You do believe in restrictions of some kind don't you? What would they be? Drop the yelling and nudity strawmen - we're talking about a T-shirt with a slogan on, obviously an item that is not prohibited.

In other words, it is the slogan itself that has been banned, not slogans in general.

Who's going to decide which is OK and which is not? 'I love Jesus' goes, but 'I love Satan' is prohibited? :confused:

[subgenius]

I said I was in favor of banning them all.
The other "strawmen" were in response to a suggention that speech in school can't be restricted.

[PogoPedant]

Originally posted by subgenius

Not fall in line, draw the line.
Where would you?

Was I the principle, I'd demand my students to abide the laws of the land. Do you really think that a joke, even a politically laden one such as the one in question, can seriously derail an entire school? In Norway there has as far as I know, never been a ban like the one described. Still Norwegian students listen to their teachers, do their homework, and pass their exams. Are American students so inferior that they need uniforms in order to look up from each other's torsoes? I think you should give them more credit than that.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by subgenius
I said I was in favor of banning them all.
The other "strawmen" were in response to a suggention that speech in school can't be restricted. True, you said:

I think they should ban all clothing with writing or pictures But then you also said:

I wore a small black armband to my all white high school the day after Martin Luther King was murdered, and that got me several comments and confrontations, even though that kind of discreet display I believe should be protected. Which is showing, already, that it is a hopeless task to decide which ways of expressing something should be banned and which shouldn't.

No picture T-shirt allowed, but a black armband is OK. :confused:

What about a picture of Jesus on my backpack? Or the devil?

Shouldn't the freedom of speech should also cover whatever we want to have on our T-shirts - as long as it is not calling for someone to act illegally it's OK?

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by PogoPedant
In Norway there has as far as I know, never been a ban like the one described. Still Norwegian students listen to their teachers, do their homework, and pass their exams. Hi Pogo,

Good to see a fellow Norwegian teaching the Americans something about the freedom of speech! :p

De tror de vet alt best!

[LeFevre]

Originally posted by Bjorn
Hi Pogo,

Good to see a fellow Norwegian teaching the Americans something about the freedom of speech! :p

De tror de vet alt best!

What? :) (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14129) :p

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by LeFevre


What? :) (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14129) :p Hehe - good one.

As you have seen, Norwegians are soooo polite that even if it is part of freedom of speech to burn a Norwegian flag, we don't allow anyone to insult another country by burning theirs. :p Small countries like Norway must take care .... :(

[subgenius]

Its not hopeless, just hard.
I take it you agree with restrictions on nudity, for example, or yelling?
The hard question is where do YOU draw the line.
I've stated where I'd draw mine, and it was for the reason that you state.

[PogoPedant]

Originally posted by Bjorn
Hehe - good one.

As you have seen, Norwegians are soooo polite that even if it is part of freedom of speech to burn a Norwegian flag, we don't allow anyone to insult another country by burning theirs. :p

Hi Bjorn!

Some say that laws are passed to make people do what they don't want to do, and don't do what they do want to do, so perhaps it's not such a great law after all... *holds up a mirror*

In the end, I guess there's just two different ideas about what's acceptable and what's not. I've always considered burning flags a great insult, but then again I was a royal guard.
What confounds me is the will to defend a relatively rare action like flagburning, calling it freedom of speach, and at the same time demand utter conformity when it comes to a choice of clothing.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by subgenius
Its not hopeless, just hard.
I take it you agree with restrictions on nudity, for example, or yelling?
The hard question is where do YOU draw the line.
I've stated where I'd draw mine, and it was for the reason that you state. The question we are discussing is do we draw a line anywhere when it comes to slogans on T-shirts.

For fredom of speech in general, in the US, the line is drawn when/if you ask/encourage someone to do something that is illegal - if you do, you can be prosecuted and 'free speech' will not be an accepted defense.

I draw MY line exactly there, I see no reason why the line should be drawn anywhere else just because it's a T-shirt.

My confusion, that you might clear up, is why what is printed on a T-shirt should be restricted in different ways from what is printed on any other material? :confused:

We can, by the way, talk about nudity any day - but it has nothing to do with what we are discussing here. :(

[Bjorn]

PogoPedant
I was a royal guard Congratulations, not that many qualify!

What confounds me is the will to defend a relatively rare action like flagburning, calling it freedom of speach, and at the same time demand utter conformity when it comes to a choice of clothing. Agreed, but I don't remember if Subgenius defended the right to burn flags. Sub, did you? :confused:

[PogoPedant]

Originally posted by subgenius
Its not hopeless, just hard.
I take it you agree with restrictions on nudity, for example, or yelling?
The hard question is where do YOU draw the line.
I've stated where I'd draw mine, and it was for the reason that you state.

I take it this was intended for me? Well, I'm going to answer anyway, cause I've posted more today than on any other day of my years of lurking...

I agree with restrictions on nudity. Nudity in a public space is restricted by law. However, I would not crach down on every case of nudity. For example, after a gymclass in junior high, us boys decided to spend some time in the sauna (only after leaving junior high did I realize what a luxury that was...), and after that we came running out into the snow, butt naked. Punishing us for cooling down in that way, I would consider petty. On the other hand, appearing in class nekkid could really not be construed as anything but misguided attentiongrabbing. That should be prohibited.

Yelling in class should be as prohibited as talking or whispering. It all detracts from the formal reason for being in class, as the added noise makes it hard for the teacher to be heard, and for other students to concentrate on the work at hand. Noise is not something that can be turned off by averting one's ears.
Yelling outside of class is a different issue. I suppose it should be the call of the individual teacher to ask any students loitering in hallways to be quiet, iff their noise disturbs a class. This request should be granted as a matter of course. In principle however, it should be allowed to yell.

The reason why I would not ban t-shirts, is that the visual noise they may generate can be turned off simply by looking away, perhaps at the blackboard?

[Beleth]

I agree with corplinx.

If I were the principal, my school would have implemented mandatory uniforms 8 years ago.

[PogoPedant]

Originally posted by Bjorn
PogoPedant
Congratulations, not that many qualify!


Why thank you. :D It was a strange experience....


Agreed, but I don't remember if Subgenius defended the right to burn flags. Sub, did you? :confused:

My bad. I got confused by LeFevre's astute linking.

[shanek]

If I'm the principal:

Don't ban the shirt, and use it as an opportunity to open dialogs in the classrooms about current events and the different opinions surrounding them.

Of course, if anything resembling critical thinking were to be introduced into our government schools, the whole system would probably collapse...

[corplinx]

Impose uniforms. If you want to drive on a government road you need a drivers license. If you want to go to a government school I do not think its outlandish to think that you might have to conform to some standards.

The misconception people have is that schools are "public".

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by kittynh
the head at the school where I work imposed a "No belly button" rule! and for some reason, no hats indoors (then one child under went chemo, so everyone got to wear hats so she wouldn't feel out of place).

I understand the "no hats in class" style rules. Students have been known to actually try to paste/write notes on the undersides of their hats to cheat on exams.

... and this was in college, fer cryin' out loud!

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by corplinx
Impose uniforms. If you want to drive on a government road you need a drivers license. If you want to go to a government school I do not think its outlandish to think that you might have to conform to some standards.

The misconception people have is that schools are "public". Hal's question was: "So, you are the principal, do you ban the shirt?"

If you ban the shirt, do you also ban pictures/letters on back-packs, or the black armbands Sub mentioned?

During WWII, Norwegians started to wear paperclips as a symbol of 'we stay together', and the Germans prohibited them. Now what if the next day, someone is wearing a cloth-peg?

I think this is a very very difficult way to go - and I cannot really see why the freedom of speech shouldn't also be granted in a government school?

Edited to add: And I'm all for the belly-button freedom! :p

[kittynh]

I think the problem with belly buttons was that my school only goes up to age 12 or 13. The head said she came to school one day and saw about 15 Brittney Spears wannabes, starting with several three year olds! Just go to a Limited II store (no please don't...) to find belly shirts for the preteen crowd, no make that kindergarten crowd.

[J3K]

Come on, give the youth of this country more credit than this. High school students are not going to fail a class because of a slogan on a shirt. This will take up about 5 minutes TOPS(this is really stretching it. I would give this situation really about a minute of time.) of the day, for that day. That is a very small fraction of time in a day. For all of this commotion over such a small thing is ridiculous. A student can't be distracted for a minute and not catch up with what he missed during that time? These are almost adults for crying outload. I think they are a little more responsible than that. Not to mention, the students could just be mature and not pay attention to things like this. This is just as ridiculous as all of the rules being applied over public displays of affections. You get bitched at for holding hands now.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by J3K
High school students are not going to fail a class because of a slogan on a shirt.

Right, there was a kid who wore a confederate army hat to my high school. Luckily the principal made him remove it. If a minority student under the delusion that confederate symbols equal racism had beaten the boy senseless, I would say that is a big distraction.

Clothes can be divisive.

[J3K]

So the boy had the excuse of "the hat showed rascism, so I beat him up." ??? This is pure ignorance on the kid that would have done the beating. With today's society, he probably would get cut some slack too. Not to mention how highly unlikely this is. Someone will not care too much at all about the hat, maybe exchange a word or two. Fighting is not going to happen until the boy wearing the hat starts showing rascism.

Or is this how bad things have really gotten wear kids are stupid enough to fight over a damn piece of clothing. I believe when it comes to banning clothes with slogans, the extreme where the line is drawn starts with clothes that say things like "are you black? GO PICK MY COTTON!" Even though I would find that as a pretty funny joke(I heard it from a black person.)

[corplinx]

You obviously don't near a big city in the south.

[J3K]

I live in North Augusta, SC. Right beside Augusta, GA. I see this crap over confederate stuff all the time. I go to high school. I see it. The black person goes "blah blah" talks some crap, the person wearing the confederate clothing goes "blah blah" talking crap as well. Then it ends(and this happens so damn rarely, it's not even funny. Maybe a few times a year.) Fights rarely happen. And the ones that do, its pathetic. What you are implying would be not allowing clothes that have a confederate flag so an ignorant kid doesn't blow up because they are emotionally tramatized and are being treated like the slaves brought from africa hundreds of years ago(this is the kind of crap some will say.) How about raising children not to be so immature in such a situation and stop pampering them. It's a freaking flag. MOST of the black students I know(which make up half of my schools population) don't care about the confederate crap, because it's just a flag. People don't start getting pissed until and fighting until somebody starts some name calling and tells the other to bring it on and they will beat their ass. So we should not allow some clothes because they MAY start a fight? Come on, this stuff is overexaggerated because the school systems are so damn scared of lawsuits. Start teaching kids how to be mature, and how to grow up.
It's not the clothes starting these fights, it's what the kids are saying.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by J3K
Start teaching kids how to be mature, and how to grow up.


I would rather teach them reading, writing, arithmetic, science, and history.

Uniforms are just another way to reduce friction and the martyrdom of the occasional troll who wears something pornographic or profane to school.

You go to a government school, you are required to bring paper, pencils, pens. You are required to behave in certain ways. Your movement is dictated by government hired workers during the school day. I don't see why uniforms are considered to be such an infringement of liberty.

Uniforms are not a magic cure-all but they remove one less tension from an already chaotic mess we have in these government schools.

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by corplinx


I would rather teach them reading, writing, arithmetic, science, and history.

Uniforms are just another way to reduce friction and the martyrdom of the occasional troll who wears something pornographic or profane to school.

You go to a government school, you are required to bring paper, pencils, pens. You are required to behave in certain ways. Your movement is dictated by government hired workers during the school day. I don't see why uniforms are considered to be such an infringement of liberty.

Uniforms are not a magic cure-all but they remove one less tension from an already chaotic mess we have in these government schools. I guess you would also like to teach them about freedom of speech, and that you acknowledge that this is a freedom in government schools as well as everywhere else.

What is the difference between printing it on a T-shirt or printing it somewhere else? On a back-pack? On a pen? On a balloon? As a tatoo? In the school newspaper? Written with lip-stick on your belly?

Sure, the printed words can be provocating, and every single individual displaying them must face the risk that others might be angry, but restricting the freedom of speech is not the answer. :(

[corplinx]

Originally posted by Bjorn
but restricting the freedom of speech is not the answer. :(

Wearing a uniform does not infringe a student's right to free speech.

[Roadtoad]

While my wife worked at a local school district, we had kids who actually killed other kids over shoes. I'm serious! SHOES, FOR GOD'S SAKE! And parents wonder why the schools can't keep control, yet they fail to teach their kids the value of moderation, the need for civility, the need for integrity...

Yeah, uniforms might work for now. It's a temporary fix, but it's been known to work for a time. But the real problem has nothing to do with a t-shirt. It has to do with moron parents who refuse to think. They claim they're being open minded. Near as I can tell, they're simply being stupid.

(And don't get me started about Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, with Mom saying, "I just finished laundry, honey. I'll put your clean '666' t-shirts next to you pipe bombs on the dresser.")

[J3K]

Roadtoad, exactly what I was at least trying to say. I believe what you said can be summed up as the kids just need to grow up. It is much more a similiarity though.
and corplinx, You believe we shouldn't teach kids how to grow up and face the real world? Once school is over, that big thing called life out there doesn't put a uniform and pathetic rules on you so you will do better. That's why kids have got to learn what it means to act like adults. Which really sounds better, makeing rules that will keep the immature acts out of school or teach kids how those immature acts will give them a life that goes down the toilet before it starts. Uniforms will not help because it's what kids are verbally saying that is starting fights.

[Ed]

Remember that we are talking about children, not adults. I would be curious to know the rationale that the t-shirt kid would come up with for wearing that shirt. I suspect it would be rather banal (probably a parroting of what he heard in the house). If so, the wearing was meant to be provocative. I think that it is perfectly reasonable for a HS to establish dress codes.

Around here designer clothes start pretty early. kids can be "in" or "out" depending on whether or not they wear $75 jeans. uniforms would be a breath of fresh air.

[Victor Danilchenko]

corplinx

Right, there was a kid who wore a confederate army hat to my high school. Luckily the principal made him remove it. If a minority student under the delusion that confederate symbols equal racism had beaten the boy senseless, I would say that is a big distraction.

Clothes can be divisive.This is in the worst tradition of liberal strawmen so favored by the likes of Rush Limbaugh.

Clothes can be divisive? yes. Anything can be divisive and offensive. What if I use the infamous word "niggardly", and get beaten for then? The solution is not to remove the potentially offensive items, but to teach kids how to deal with offensive items appropriately.

And no fscking way would I ban a t-shirt.

[Bluegill]

I attended an all-male Catholic high school. All students were required to wear a tie, as well as a sweater or sports coat during all but the hottest months. We had to be clean-shaven, and we had to keep our hair above the collar line.

I’m not sure of all the reasons behind this, but I think a lot of it had to do with the idea that looking professional promotes professional behavior, and the idea of looking respectful and respectable to the community.

At the least, I think this was a good way to teach good dress habits and demonstrate that keeping a good, professional appearance can be an effective tool. It’s another form of teaching discipline.

I never felt like I had lost my freedom of speech, and I still don’t. I was free to bring up and discuss any subject or opinion I felt was important. One big difference, though, is that it was MY choice to be there at that school. If I had wanted to wear a Quiet Riot or Beastie Boys T-shirt, I could have gone to a public school.

In college, I finally had my first experience sitting in classrooms with people dressing however the heck they felt like dressing. Political slogans, ballcaps, dredlocks, whatever. I don’t feel like it distracted me from learning or caused disturbances.

My initial sympathies were for uniforms, but I have to say that I can’t justify it. Disruptions or distractions should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, and should not be the basis for blanket bans on such things as slogan T-shirts. If someone is offended, the reasons for people’s opinions can be discussed. If it leads to a fight or some other abuse, then whoever threw the first punch is the one who gets in trouble. Using respectful, moderated debate and critical discussion is a good way to handle things before they reach this level.

I can think of some unlikely, but possible, problematic situations, though. What if you were the only Jew at a school, and half the students were wearing “Jews Suck” T-Shirts? Or the only white student in a class full of students who wear “Send the White People Back to Europe” T-shirts? What if the teacher was wearing this sort of thing? How do you deal with this sort of passive intimidation? A little debate won’t resolve a some issues, and it would detract from some classes. Subgenious’s questions about the location of the cut-off line is a good one.

Like so many issues discussed on these forums, I find myself with a leg stuck over the fence.

[Nasarius]

Originally posted by Bluegill
What if you were the only Jew at a school, and half the students were wearing “Jews Suck” T-Shirts? Or the only white student in a class full of students who wear “Send the White People Back to Europe” T-shirts? What if the teacher was wearing this sort of thing?

Then you have much bigger problems than what they're wearing.

[shanek]

Originally posted by corplinx
You obviously don't near a big city in the south.

I do, and I agree with J3K.

[shanek]

Originally posted by corplinx
I would rather teach them reading, writing, arithmetic, science, and history.

If you really wanted them to learn history, you would teach them why the Confederate flag isn't a racist symbol.

[Bluegill]

Originally posted by Nasarius


Then you have much bigger problems than what they're wearing.

Too true :(

[shanek]

Originally posted by Ed
I would be curious to know the rationale that the t-shirt kid would come up with for wearing that shirt.

If you'd read the article, you'll see that it was to complement an assignment he was given to deliver an essay comparing and contrasting Bush and Saddam Hussein. That's what really makes all of this stupid.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by Bluegill

I never felt like I had lost my freedom of speech, and I still don’t. I was free to bring up and discuss any subject or opinion I felt was important. One big difference, though, is that it was MY choice to be there at that school.


Technically, it was your parents' choice - though they may have listened to your opinion. :)


In college, I finally had my first experience sitting in classrooms with people dressing however the heck they felt like dressing. Political slogans, ballcaps, dredlocks, whatever. I don’t feel like it distracted me from learning or caused disturbances.


Of course, by that time you had likely grown up quite a bit over your average high school / junior high student. And it'd be a safe bet that at most schools, most people dress "normally".


My initial sympathies were for uniforms, but I have to say that I can’t justify it.


You had it right before. A dress code doesn't take away anyone's freedom of speech.

Banning one specific shirt is wrong (because it is seen as banning one particular idea_, but there's nothing wrong with sidestepping the whole mess and just having a dress code or uniforms. What "speech" is being suppressed by a dress code?

A somewhat unrelated observation - why do the private schools always seem to be the ones with strict dress codes?

[Nasarius]

Originally posted by Occasional Chemist
What "speech" is being suppressed by a dress code?

All forms of political expression are protected by the first amendment, regardless of the medium. I asked subgenius and he didn't respond, so I'll ask anyone to whom it applies - if you support limiting freedom of speech in public schools, what about public universities? It's only a year of age difference in some cases. If not, why not? What's the critical difference?

A somewhat unrelated observation - why do the private schools always seem to be the ones with strict dress codes?

Because they can? Private schools don't have to worry about that nasty Constitution thing. Plus, most private schools are religious schools.

[Tmy]

Somebody smack this kid (oh wait, we cant do that anymore). You're in school to read, write, and learn. If you want to practice free speech, religion, whatever, then do it after school. Why must everyone cause so much unneeded trouble. I feel for these schools. They're damned if they do or if they dont.

The whole thing is regoddamndiculous. It shouldve gone like this: Teacher "Jonny could you not bring that shirt to school again. It's a little too contraversal" Jonny: "Ok teacher".

But noooo, there is always some litigious jerk waiting in the wings with a constitutional chip on their shoulder.

[Aoidoi]

Originally posted by Nasarius
All forms of political expression are protected by the first amendment, regardless of the medium. I prefer to express my freedom of speech by creative use of high explosives. Nothing punctuates a good argument like high order detonations. :D

I asked subgenius and he didn't respond, so I'll ask anyone to whom it applies - if you support limiting freedom of speech in public schools, what about public universities? It's only a year of age difference in some cases. If not, why not? What's the critical difference?[/B]Why can you only drive at 16? Vote after you turn 18? Drink at 21? Be president at 35?

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by Nasarius
if you support limiting freedom of speech in public schools, what about public universities? It's only a year of age difference in some cases. If not, why not? What's the critical difference?

The critical difference - at least as the courts see it - is that in one case you're dealing with minors and in the other case you're not.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by subgenius
I am a civil libertarian. The shirt can and should be banned for the distraction factor alone. The fact that worse shirts are allowed elsewhere doesn't make that right. Kids are there to learn, not for a fashion show or to make provocative statements. This school is in Dearborn a few miles away and where one of my brothers lives. It has, I believe, the largest Arabic population outside of the Middle East. The shirt can easily be misconstrued a number of ways and especially in these times could easily lead to violence, let alone just being disruptive.
Everything is a matter of degree.
Just as the schools have a right and duty to prohibit immodest clothing, they have a right and duty to maintain some semblance of order with respect to any other public displays.
I think they should ban all clothing with writing or pictures, because it becomes too hard to make a judgement on every piece of clothing.
I wore a small black armband to my all white high school the day after Martin Luther King was murdered, and that got me several comments and confrontations, even though that kind of discreet display I believe should be protected.

SG,

Damn man...I knew there was a reason I liked you! Just couldn't put my finger on it. Great post...makes alot of good common sense. My thought was to let the kids wear whatever message they wished (non-obscene that is)..and perhaps try and use disputes in a constructive way...object lessons...etc. However, it IS a school...with a curriculum. The curriculum must come first. There's enough disruptions around here with snow days etc.... You are right. Clothing cannot be allowed to disrupt an already busy day. Schools have bigger issues anyway...like class sizes, etc.

Great post,
-zilla :)

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally posted by Tmy
You're in school to read, write, and learn. If you want to practice free speech, religion, whatever, then do it after school. Why must everyone cause so much unneeded trouble. I feel for these schools. They're damned if they do or if they dont.


You are absolutely right. Schools are not there to actually raise the children; that is the parents' job.

Schools have enough to teach without endless distractions by students trying to get attention. Principles and other school administrators have a responsibility to keep the students and staff in order, to promote the education of the children, and to ensure that each student has a fair education. It infringes on the rights of the other students to have a decent education if distractions prevent them from doing so.

People need to get it into their heads that schools are funded publicly, but they are not public facilities once you enter the premises. Public schools are entitled to rules that maintain the order without discrimination. All government institutions have specific sets of rules.

[Bluegill]

Originally posted by rikzilla


My thought was to let the kids wear whatever message they wished (non-obscene that is)..

[Edited to add: sorry Rik, I see didn't actually express anything in opposition to Subgenious--I guess I'm just furthering the point YOU were making.]>>

But then you have to decide on how to define obscene. Does that include a shirt that has a picture of a naked woman? What about a shirt that says, "I like naked women." What's the difference between a shirt that says "F#CK" is huge letters, and one that says "Sexual Intercourse?" What if there are more people who are more offended by the Bush=Terrorist shirt than there are by the "F#CK YOU" shirt?

[Bluegill]

As an aside...

My brother told me he used to work in an office where they had casual-dress Fridays. There was one guy who always wore a T-shirt that depicted a huge, bare-chested WWF wrestler. That prompted my brother to wonder...what's the difference between wearing a shirt depicting a bare-chested man, and not wearing a shirt at all?:)

[Roadtoad]

Originally posted by Bluegill
As an aside...

My brother told me he used to work in an office where they had casual-dress Fridays. There was one guy who always wore a T-shirt that depicted a huge, bare-chested WWF wrestler. That prompted my brother to wonder...what's the difference between wearing a shirt depicting a bare-chested man, and not wearing a shirt at all?:)

That's a little too casual, Dude.:eek:

[svero]

I think a school should be allowed to enforce a dress code if they want. However... I wonder in this case whether the dress code is being enforced arbitrarily or in a particular way?

Would a "vote for bush", or "Hunt Bin Laden" t-shirt be allowed? If so then I'd say he has the right to wear his shirt as well. I'll side with the principal so long as it's not a question of not allowing one shirt because that particular shirt doesnt agree with his political views.

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by Bluegill


[Edited to add: sorry Rik, I see didn't actually express anything in opposition to Subgenious--I guess I'm just furthering the point YOU were making.]>>

But then you have to decide on how to define obscene. Does that include a shirt that has a picture of a naked woman? What about a shirt that says, "I like naked women." What's the difference between a shirt that says "F#CK" is huge letters, and one that says "Sexual Intercourse?" What if there are more people who are more offended by the Bush=Terrorist shirt than there are by the "F#CK YOU" shirt?

All true...I guess that's why I changed my mind and agreed with SG. However, out in the real world....freedom should reign until the point your freedom begins to trample someone elses. ;)

-z

[Torlack]

U.S. Constitution:

Article IX.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

So, yes. There is no problem with banning the t-shirt IF children have a right to education and the right is being denied due to having the classroom disrupted. However, it isn't something that should be taken lightly since the possibility of abuse is significant.

[Samus]

Originally posted by Nasarius
All forms of political expression are protected by the first amendment, regardless of the medium. Almost all forms of expression are protected, except those that pose the threat of imminent, unlawful action. That stipulation has been confirmed in the Supreme Court on more than one occasion.

Originally posted by Nasarius
I asked subgenius and he didn't respond, so I'll ask anyone to whom it applies - if you support limiting freedom of speech in public schools, what about public universities? It's only a year of age difference in some cases. If not, why not? What's the critical difference? You said it yourself, it's only a year's difference in some cases. I don't think it fair to impose different dress rules on the seniors than the freshmen.

It is not the job of a public school to allow all the students to express themselves in any way they wish. These are minors we're talking about (the vast majority of them are minors). Minors do not have every constitutional right extended to them, this has also been upheld by the Supreme Court.

If I was that principal, I would have done exactly what he did, and I commend him for it. I am an advocate of free speech; I'm also an advocate of a constructive learning environment.

[Nasarius]

Originally posted by dwb Almost all forms of expression are protected, except those that pose the threat of imminent, unlawful action. That stipulation has been confirmed in the Supreme Court on more than one occasion.
Well naturally. But obviously that's not the case here.

You said it yourself, it's only a year's difference in some cases. I don't think it fair to impose different dress rules on the seniors than the freshmen.

I don't think it's fair to restrict the rights of minors just because they're in a school, but what do I know.

Minors do not have every constitutional right extended to them, this has also been upheld by the Supreme Court.
No. Most of your constitutional rights are thrown out the door in public schools. It has nothing to do with being a minor or not. Outside of schools, there's absolutely no difference.

I really don't see how wearing a T-shirt is disrupting a class.

[J3K]

Nasarius, you don't see how it distracts because it doesn't distract. Every adult in a high school says "you are adults, now you have to learn how to act like adults and will be treated like adults." and then they go and make rules to keep a possible highly unlikely fight from happening. If you are going to treat us like adults, do what happens to adults when they get in fights in public places, TAKE THEM TO JAIL(which they do.) If anybody has half a brain, they aren't going to be ignorant enough to start another fight over a t-shirt.
But I can't stop thinking about how highly undistracted t-shirts with slogans are, except people read them when they see them. But you look at all the posters around schools and in classrooms(most of which don't show things that would teach a kid much of anything, so don't give that agruement against this) Should all forms of writing a kid may read that will "distract" them for 30 seconds be banned? Stop pampering kids for christ sakes. Schools have plenty of rules right now(in the last years just throwing in new useless ones) and no more new ones are needed. Adults need to start doing what they say they are going to do with high school students AND start treating them like soon to be adults. Not like they are a class of 3rd graders that are going to laugh and giggle for 10minutes because somebody's shirt has a funny picture on it.

[American]

Originally posted by hal bidlack
So, you are the principal, do you ban the shirt?

No, but as it says in the Air Force Tongue and Quill, "treat a bastard as a bastard deserves to be treated." True you have to be professional, but a well-considered personal grudge can be stealth and effective.

Keep in mind, it's good to know who your enemies are. If you're out to get me and my friends, by all means- open your big mouth and say something. I will quietly note your kind thoughts and save them for future reference.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by J3K
Every adult in a high school says "you are adults, now you have to learn how to act like adults and will be treated like adults." and then they go and make rules to keep a possible highly unlikely fight from happening.


Who says that adults don't have rules they have to follow? Most businesses, for example, expect their employees to dress in a certain way. Some of them (and I'm not actually talking about McDonalds or Burger King here - I'm talking about places where you can make some real money) even require their employees to wear ... uniforms!

Why? Perhaps because all those funky clothes do distract from the work at hand. That thirty seconds you spent laughing at Bobby's cool slogan T-shirt could have been the thirty seconds of explanation in which you might have finally gotten what the concept of chemical equilibrium actually meant.


If anybody has half a brain, they aren't going to be ignorant enough to start another fight over a t-shirt.


Come now. I was in high school once. Fights broke out over less...


But you look at all the posters around schools and in classrooms(most of which don't show things that would teach a kid much of anything, so don't give that agruement against this)


Most of the time, these have to be approved too.

[J3K]

Uniforms are required in work places to give the work place a perfessional working look. Come on now, do you remember school dude? There is probably an HOUR+ wasted everyday with teachers that talk about stuff that doesn't relate to school. Do we ban all the teachers now?(thats a joke) That 30 seconds DOESNT make a difference. You know how I know? Because I am a top student and see something everyday that takes my attention away from school work, and it's usually just something in the classroom that draws my attention. Yes, fights do start out over less, you know why? Because the kids that start them are that damn immature. I bumped into a guy once and he was like "wtf is your problem." and got up in my face. You know what I did, I ignored him because I knew it was stupid, I even apologized for bumping into him even though his friends had a line blocking the bathroom entrance and there was no way in the bathroom without one of them moving. Banning slogans on shirts is not going to stop this kind of thing, it's how people raise their kids that will do that.

[Occasional Chemist]

Originally posted by J3K
Uniforms are required in work places to give the work place a perfessional working look.

True for retail. Industry may have other reasons. After all, you aren't allowed to just walk into a chemical plant and see all these folks in uniform.


That 30 seconds DOESNT make a difference.


It just might. In industry, that 30 seconds could be the 30 seconds you might have to notice that the pressure or temperature in a reactor is getting dangerously high. Believe it or not, there aren't always computers that do these things for you. This is often the case in facilities whose main function is to test out new processes - most things are done by hand. The old-fashioned way.


You know how I know? Because I am a top student and see something everyday that takes my attention away from school work, and it's usually just something in the classroom that draws my attention.


[Puts on professor hat]
Congratulations on being a top student. Keep it up when you hit college. I don't like people repeating my classes; it's bad for their GPA. :)
[Takes off professor hat]

Back to the question at hand - You can't get rid of every distraction. You can work to minimize the number of distractions, though. If outlandish clothing becomes a problem, expect the powers that be at the school to want to do something about it.


Yes, fights do start out over less, you know why? Because the kids that start them are that damn immature.


I believe you've now made the case for high school students not always being treated like full-fledged adults. :)


Banning slogans on shirts is not going to stop this kind of thing, it's how people raise their kids that will do that.

I agree that banning slogans on shirts will not stop stupid people from acting stupidly.

[American]

Just to be redundant... I want to know who the trouble makers are. Wear your Eminem shirt. That's what makes me better than you and why I earn more.

Or from their perspective, what makes them better than me and why they get more girls and are allowed to use drugs without getting fired.

Uniforms mask all that. My opponents become mysterious. I don't like that. I like information about others, and I like to forge my own identity.

I like George Bush. If you don't, then I want to know that too.

[Roadtoad]

Originally posted by American
Just to be redundant... I want to know who the trouble makers are. Wear your Eminem shirt. That's what makes me better than you and why I earn more.

Or from their perspective, what makes them better than me and why they get more girls and are allowed to use drugs without getting fired.

Uniforms mask all that. My opponents become mysterious. I don't like that. I like information about others, and I like to forge my own identity.

I like George Bush. If you don't, then I want to know that too.

I don't like George Bush. I don't trust him. Period.

About uniforms: Ever heard of John Molloy's Dress for Success ? I thought so.

[J3K]

Occasional Chemist,
On the industry and uniform things. I believe one working in a lab and such would be required to wear just that because it gives the look of that job(doctor=white jacket, chemist=other kinda white jacket.) And it also might be the type of clothing that would protect them on that job.
In your response to my thing over 30 seconds, we are talking about school, not the work place.
Of course you can't get rid of every distraction, but part of being a mature growing teen is learning how to not get distracted, and being responsible about your school work. And I've never seen anybody make a bad grade because they looked at a shirt slogan and read it.
About the full fledge adults comment, I said high school students are soon to be adults. So there are plent that are immature, but this is also true in the adult world.
You talked about "outlandish clothing." I have already stated where I would draw the line and something becomes outlandish. But a funny slogan or picture, isn't outlandish. This thought of dress code is good, they have just made it too strict.

[ArmchairPhysicist]

On T-shirts in general: Students go to the bus stop/walk to school. They see the other students, they walk the halls to class, they sit in class for two to five minuntes after the bell rings while the teacher takes attendance and collects homework and deals with late arrivals, they hang out at lockers and in the bathrooms in between classes, and so on. A handful of T-shirts are not distracting from an education; by the time the actual education portion of the class has begun, everyone has already seen the shirts and reacted.

Further, the list of controversial T-shirts doesn't grow by the dozen with each passing day. The whole student body doesn't refurbish its wardrobe every week with five new T-shirts. Students might see five to ten new T-shirts in any given week, depending on the season. This amounts to about five minutes a week, spread out among five days, occurring in the time when the students aren't being educated in the first place. The arguement of distracting from an education is pretty ridiculous.

On the specific T-shirt: We should discourage students from expressing opinions on the society that they are being prepared to join? School is the place where children are (supposed to be) being prepared to become functional members of society. Discouraging them from forming personal views about their government and expressing those views is not the way to keep society evolving.

On uniforms: Who will be paying for these uniforms when parents are legally required to send their students to school, but can't afford the cost of uniforms? Public schools are there for everyone, private schools are there for people who can afford such things as uniforms. Look at the condition of most inner-city schools and try finding enough surplus cash in their budget to fix the water fountain. Now, shave enough from that budget to clothe the student population.

Beyond that minor detail, what part of educating the students will be enhanced by making everyone dress alike? This is the age when children are struggling to grasp their own individuality. Taking this away from them is not going to either further their education or assist in the evolution of society as a whole.

On people fighting: Probably the worst way to open the minds of the ignorant is to make everyone else conform to the way the ignorant act. If a student is assaulted because of a political statement, and we blame the student who had the statement, what message are we giving the youth? We're telling him that it's okay to beat people up for being different, and if you don't want to be beat up you should conform to the whims of the ignorant.

Just some considerations.

[DialecticMaterialist]

This is bull. People should be allowed to wear whatever the hell they want. Is the shirt really hurting anybody? I'm offended by a lot of crap that I don't see banned. It's called freedom of speech and it's only supposed to be circumscribed under the most extreme of circumstances....being "offended" by another's shirt does not count as such a circumstance. As for school uniforms, they again circumscribe freedom of speech for a less then compelling reason and also have little to no benefits:

http://www.geocities.com/school_uniforms/finalreport.html
http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/hearings/106th/ecyf/schdisc3999/wl3999.htm
http://www.members.tripod.com/rockqu/uniform.htm

Basically they are patch-up solutions to complex problems made to give people the illusion of safety and imporvement. They are also simply ways of imposing certain aesthetic tastes in an extreme manner on an entire population. To prove this point ask yourself: will we ever see "goth" uniforms? Why not? Goths are not really violent people, dressing in that manner does not make others violent....but you won't see "goth" uniforms I bet, EVEN IF it was proven they lowered rates of school violence because the issue for school uniform advocates is more about taste then an effective solution.

Likewise, despite what certain conservatives may think, violating the first amemdment in a given area is not a trivial thing. You need compelling reason for this. A dubious wonder solution is not that compelling.

[Samus]

I've been doing some reading on the topic that started this thread, viz. wearing an offensive article of clothing to school and calling it free speech.

In the Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines School District [393 U.S. 503 (1969)], there were a handful of students that wore a black armband to school to protest the Vietnam war. They were told that they could not wear the armbands, and were suspended for doing so.

The Court ruled that the armbands were protected under the first amendment. Justice Fortas delivered the opinion of the court, which has some interesting quotes that apply to this situation:

"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."
--- and ---
"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."

In short, they ruled the armbands were A-OK. Now, back to the offending T-shirt. Was this also a "silent, passive expression of opinion"?

In another case, Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire [315 U.S. 568 (1942)], the Court ruled that certain speech can be proscribed if it falls under the category of "fighting words" -- speech meant to incite unlawful action. Justice Murphy had this to say:

"...it is well understood that the right of free speech is not absolute at all times and under all circumstances. There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which has never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or 'fighting' words-those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace."

So, the question becomes: was the said T-shirt meant to incite a breach of peace in the school? Was the principal merely trying to prevent any backlash that could potentially be taken out on the student or others?

My personal opinion is that it did not. So, from a constitutional perspective, the student was probably okay to wear that T-shirt. That being said, I stand by my earlier statement that as a principal, I would probably be inclined to ask the student to change clothes anyway, so as to not cause any unnecessary conflict.

Torn I am on this issue, because I see the constitutional side of it, but I also have my personal feeling about it.

[DialecticMaterialist]

I interpret the court as saying basically, Freedom of speech is to be protected except under the most extraordinary of circumstances, whicha re narrowly defined. Circumastances I imagine like "beat the **** out of that guy" or "kill all *******" and such.

Notice the court puts stress on the statements "narrowly defined" and such. I think it means that if a case is questionable, we are to err on the side of liberty.

As for me being principle, I would admit having a student wear such a shirt would make my job more difficult....but it would be my responsibility to deal with this as a principle. I could not let my personal feelings detract from my moral and legal obligations. Note also that I dsiagree with the statement that Bush is a terrorist very strongly.

[kittynh]

Does Marshall Mathers have issues, yes, like all "poets" and many great artists he comes from a background that gives him those issues and the credibility required of his work.

Would I wear his tshirt to work, no....

[Bjorn]

Originally posted by DialecticMaterialist
I would admit having a student wear such a shirt would make my job more difficult....but it would be my responsibility to deal with this as a principle. I could not let my personal feelings detract from my moral and legal obligations. Note also that I disagree with the statement that Bush is a terrorist very strongly. And it is when we disagree the freedom of speech becomes important.

It protects me from those who hate what I'm saying, and them from me if I hate what they're saying. We need no protection of the free speech in cosy discussions.