A Culture of Intolerance

[Luissa]

TKs biggest problem is he doesn't understand that the school has the right to censor booths etc.. If they are providing the venue for her to express her views. Tinker ruled on harm bands, not a booth during lunch.
You can't use the precedent Tinker established, because it has no bearing on the Principals decision.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

[MENTION=47594]PaintMyHouse[/MENTION]
Thankfully, we don't need to guess about your stance towards us. You said "White people are an easy group to hate."

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ffs-nullify-federal-gun-laws.html#post8708254

I have all your shit on bookmark.
[MENTION=43268]TemplarKormac[/MENTION] [MENTION=23420]Quantum Windbag[/MENTION] [MENTION=19484]The T[/MENTION]

Fitting, since the title of this thread is about Progressive Intolerance.

I didn't know you cared? I'm honestly not sure why you would? To each his own.

I know what you are, and so do you, you be should be ashamed. You're an Authoritarian Contortion Artist who hides behind the mask of Progressivism, spreading propaganda everywhere you can.

It's people like that convinced entire nations to embrace fasicsm and communism, which led to democide of tens of millions in 20th Century and the miseries of hundreds of millions to this very day.

Lincoln said the banks are more dangerous than standing armies. He was correct.

But people like you are even more dangerous than banks.

Huh. And I thought I just enjoyed a good argument...

 

[JakeStarkey]

TK, if you wanted an abortion thread don't begin in a way that is going to get your OP shot down before you get to your premise.

Study the principles of composition.

 

[TemplarKormac]

TK, if you wanted an abortion thread don't begin in a way that is going to get your OP shot down before you get to your premise.

Study the principles of composition.

Nobody shot down my premise Jake. I can tell you that much. I was the one citing case law, citing established legal precedent and thinking on the subject of free speech, not on abortion. It was people such as yourself who chose to make this thread about abortion, not me.

I know composition, it's a matter of reading comprehension on your part.

 

[Luissa]

TK, if you wanted an abortion thread don't begin in a way that is going to get your OP shot down before you get to your premise.



Study the principles of composition.

Nobody shot down my premise Jake. I can tell you that much. I was the one citing case law, citing established legal precedent and thinking on the subject of free speech, not on abortion. It was people such as yourself who chose to make this thread about abortion, not me.



I know composition, it's a matter of reading comprehension on your part.

Yes they did. A few times actually.
And you did try to make it on beliefs. You assumed me and others don't think she has the right to have a booth based on our beliefs.
Yes you cited case laws and precedent but they didn't prove your point, because you have no understanding of what free speech protects. You also cited Tinker, which has no bearing on this topic. If you actually understood legal precedents you would realize this.
She wanted to use school resources to present her side to the abortion debate, the Principal wouldn't allow it, which he has every right to do.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[J.E.D]

And given the slew of trolling right now, the insult to intelligence lies in the fact that people can't argue my points. Lack of intelligence exists when you have nothing for which to base a cogent argument upon.

Typical TK response. "Nobody agrees with me; therefore, I win". People have given you pages of intelligent responses that you just refuse to entertain, because you always think that you are right about everything. We have all seen it over and over again with you. Remember the thread where you challenged liberals to find you a job? You got plenty of helpful responses from people, but you you talked right over them.

Seriously, you seem like an intelligent enough person, you just need to learn that you're not right about everything. Instead of spending hours on USMB composing theses on the eroding of society due to liberal boogeymen, focus on honing your talent for writing and do something constructive with it.

You are way too kind. Really.

I know. I just thought I'd try.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Typical TK response. "Nobody agrees with me; therefore, I win". People have given you pages of intelligent responses that you just refuse to entertain, because you always think that you are right about everything. We have all seen it over and over again with you. Remember the thread where you challenged liberals to find you a job? You got plenty of helpful responses from people, but you you talked right over them.

Seriously, you seem like an intelligent enough person, you just need to learn that you're not right about everything. Instead of spending hours on USMB composing theses on the eroding of society due to liberal boogeymen, focus on honing your talent for writing and do something constructive with it.

You are way too kind. Really.

I know. I just thought I'd try.

I'm guessing his big concern is that when a school paddles a teenage girl, they will have told her that she is not allowed to say "Ouch"? That's very un-Tinker-like. I promise TK, according to the Supreme Court of the United States and God Himself, she will be allowed to say ouch. We wouldn't want to negatively impact her rights, just her cute little bottom.

No problem there right? Right...

 

[BDBoop]

And given the slew of trolling right now, the insult to intelligence lies in the fact that people can't argue my points. Lack of intelligence exists when you have nothing for which to base a cogent argument upon.

Typical TK response. "Nobody agrees with me; therefore, I win". People have given you pages of intelligent responses that you just refuse to entertain, because you always think that you are right about everything. We have all seen it over and over again with you. Remember the thread where you challenged liberals to find you a job? You got plenty of helpful responses from people, but you you talked right over them.

Seriously, you seem like an intelligent enough person, you just need to learn that you're not right about everything. Instead of spending hours on USMB composing theses on the eroding of society due to liberal boogeymen, focus on honing your talent for writing and do something constructive with it.

I skim threads like this for entertainment value, but on point: How come liberals get accused of public school indoctrination, and conservatives get a pass under the 'free speech' <insert laughter here> argument.

 

[BDBoop]

Now, do any of you have anything else? For nearly three hours I've taken down each of your arguments.

I have established that

1) Regardless of the view, restriction of speech cannot take place unless it serves a legitimate educational concern

2) If the only premise of such action is based on the undesirability of said view, it is unconstitutional

3) When the principal referred to the display as "controversial" he basically used his disagreement as a premise to restrict speech, which if using the Tinker Test, would be unconstitutional.

4) The concept of In Loco Parentis does not give a school the right to limit speech. Students are obligated to follow school rules, yes, but as Tinker points out, a student does not surrender his constitutional rights as soon as he steps into the schoolhouse. The only time administrators can limit speech is if it presents a legitimate disruption of school operations or activities. Since when does having a display out during lunch hour disrupt the operations of a school?

Now if you will excuse me, I have dinner to prepare.

You haven't taken down shit. You've chased your tail for quite some time. You've declared victory when you clearly lost, and people who treated you like an equal, I know not why, were denigrated and insulted. In short, you behaved like a dick and called it a win.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It has become quite obvious to me that in the years after I left school, that there is little tolerance of certain political views that students hold in school. Especially on hot button issues like abortion. As this 17 year old high school student found out, it's not okay to freely express your worldviews in school. If you don't believe government and politics have any influence in the classroom, you're in for a rude awakening. There is a culture of intolerance that is nurtured in the minds of our children that cannot be allowed to continue. The school should be a place where ideas and views are accepted no matter what they are. The First Amendment applies to everyone, not just to those who hold like views.

BRANFORD, Conn. (WTNH)– Life-sized replicas of fetuses are too much for lunchtime at Branford High School. A student leader of the school’s pro-life club says the principal banned her from using the models and she is fighting that.

Seventeen-year-old Samantha is a senior at Branford High School and she is learning a harsh lesson in education policy after trying to set up a pro-life table during lunch at Branford High.

“When we asked our principal at our school if we can have this set up during lunch and have an opportunity for kids to come over and take a look at our display, he said no,” said Samantha Bailey-Loomis.

Samantha is the founder of the students for life club. Their table is complete with blown-up images of fetuses and real- life sized fetus models that look just like the real thing and she says that doesn’t sit well with her principal.

“He tells us that this topic in particular is too controversial to be talked about in public school,” said Bailey-Loomis.

Life-sized fetus causes cafeteria controversy at Connecticut school | WWLP

While I am a staunch supporter of First Amendment rights, I believe that the public school is an inappropriate forum for this display.
The student should do this outside in public. Not in school. It's just too controversial and of course the school administration can legally quash it based on the "disruptive" nature of the issue.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

While I am a staunch supporter of First Amendment rights, I believe that the public school is an inappropriate forum for this display.
The student should do this outside in public. Not in school. It's just too controversial and of course the school administration can legally quash it based on the "disruptive" nature of the issue.

Then they should stop teaching about the wonders of abortion to our children in school as well.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It has become quite obvious to me that in the years after I left school, that there is little tolerance of certain political views that students hold in school. Especially on hot button issues like abortion. As this 17 year old high school student found out, it's not okay to freely express your worldviews in school. If you don't believe government and politics have any influence in the classroom, you're in for a rude awakening. There is a culture of intolerance that is nurtured in the minds of our children that cannot be allowed to continue. The school should be a place where ideas and views are accepted no matter what they are. The First Amendment applies to everyone, not just to those who hold like views.



Life-sized fetus causes cafeteria controversy at Connecticut school | WWLP

In Loco Parentis. They are in charge of keeping order. In school, it's their call. On the sidewalk outside, knock yourself out.

Non Sequitur.

In Loco Parentis does not apply here. Even if the school has a legal responsibility to act in the place of a parent while the child is on the premises, that doesn't give them the right to hinder the constitutional rights of that student. Your argument is thus flawed and baseless.

In 1969 the Supreme Court ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines that students do NOT shed their constitutional rights when they enter the schoolhouse. "Students in the public schools do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." They cannot be punished merely for expressing their personal views on the school premises -- whether "in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours," -- unless school authorities have reason to believe that such expression will "substantially interfere with the work of the school or impinge upon the rights of other students." This ruling was in favor of students who wore black armbands protesting the Vietnam War. The only way you can restrict a student's speech is if such speech presents a significant disruption to the school's educational mission.

The only time school administrators can restrict a student's speech is if it presents a genuinely controversial messages, such as was the case in 1982, when a student gave a campaign speech at a school assembly which was laced with sexual innuendo. In 1988 the Supreme Court ruled in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, that administrators did have a right to discipline students for speech that violates school rules, or incites behavior which interferes with the stated disciplinary objectives of the school.

Nonetheless, the Constitution still applies in the school as well as outside.

we must be careful here. Is the student being punished for her viewpoint? Or is she being instructed to cease because she is in the opinion of the school administration, "disruptive to the educational process"?
BTW, that term in and of itself is most likely going to face a challenge in the courts because it is so frequently used to squash conservative viewpoints of students.
The rights of students and their belongings/lockers have limits that do not apply ourtside of the school.
Here are some pertinent cases.
http://www.patc.com/weeklyarticles/print/2011_tx_smc.pdf
It appears that State of New Jersey v T.L.O. is the case law in which the legal precedent to search as long as reasonable suspicion is present, is based
New Jersey v. T.L.O. | LII / Legal Information Institute

BTW, I have found the Cornell Law website to be very useful. It's my go to site on legal stuff.

 

[TemplarKormac]

[MENTION=23165]thereisnospoon[/MENTION]

I realize that. But the principal arbitrarily ruled she couldn't set up the display. As far as I could tell, it served a legitimate educational purpose, but the principal's decision did not. It was based off of an inane fear of someone expressing an undesirable viewpoint, which in Tinker and Hazelwood did not serve as a legitimate reason to forbid the student from exercising their 1st Amendment Rights. Lockers on the other hand are school property, and an entirely different matter. Your constitutional rights do not give you the right to deface the locker or use it to make a political point.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It has become quite obvious to me that in the years after I left school, that there is little tolerance of certain political views that students hold in school. Especially on hot button issues like abortion. As this 17 year old high school student found out, it's not okay to freely express your worldviews in school. If you don't believe government and politics have any influence in the classroom, you're in for a rude awakening. There is a culture of intolerance that is nurtured in the minds of our children that cannot be allowed to continue. The school should be a place where ideas and views are accepted no matter what they are. The First Amendment applies to everyone, not just to those who hold like views.

BRANFORD, Conn. (WTNH)&#8211; Life-sized replicas of fetuses are too much for lunchtime at Branford High School. A student leader of the school&#8217;s pro-life club says the principal banned her from using the models and she is fighting that.

Seventeen-year-old Samantha is a senior at Branford High School and she is learning a harsh lesson in education policy after trying to set up a pro-life table during lunch at Branford High.

&#8220;When we asked our principal at our school if we can have this set up during lunch and have an opportunity for kids to come over and take a look at our display, he said no,&#8221; said Samantha Bailey-Loomis.

Samantha is the founder of the students for life club. Their table is complete with blown-up images of fetuses and real- life sized fetus models that look just like the real thing and she says that doesn&#8217;t sit well with her principal.

&#8220;He tells us that this topic in particular is too controversial to be talked about in public school,&#8221; said Bailey-Loomis.

Life-sized fetus causes cafeteria controversy at Connecticut school | WWLP

While I am a staunch supporter of First Amendment rights, I believe that the public school is an inappropriate forum for this display.
The student should do this outside in public. Not in school. It's just too controversial and of course the school administration can legally quash it based on the "disruptive" nature of the issue.

The Supreme Court in the past (such as in the case Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589 (1967), which was cited in Tinker) has ruled that classrooms, and schools themselves, are a "marketplace of ideas" and thusly should not treat the expression of one idea with hostility while promoting the other. This was the opinion of Justice Brennan in Keyishian:

The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools.' The classroom is peculiarly the 'marketplace of ideas.' The Nation's future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth 'out of a multitude of tongues, [rather] than through any kind of authoritative selection.'"

Also, I saw art displays by set up at the entrance of my school's cafeteria that were more disruptive than this display would have been.

 

[Luissa]

While I am a staunch supporter of First Amendment rights, I believe that the public school is an inappropriate forum for this display.

The student should do this outside in public. Not in school. It's just too controversial and of course the school administration can legally quash it based on the "disruptive" nature of the issue.

Then they should stop teaching about the wonders of abortion to our children in school as well.

They do? Do you have proof of that?
I am guessing no, because you are making shit up.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[Luissa]

It has become quite obvious to me that in the years after I left school, that there is little tolerance of certain political views that students hold in school. Especially on hot button issues like abortion. As this 17 year old high school student found out, it's not okay to freely express your worldviews in school. If you don't believe government and politics have any influence in the classroom, you're in for a rude awakening. There is a culture of intolerance that is nurtured in the minds of our children that cannot be allowed to continue. The school should be a place where ideas and views are accepted no matter what they are. The First Amendment applies to everyone, not just to those who hold like views.







Life-sized fetus causes cafeteria controversy at Connecticut school | WWLP

While I am a staunch supporter of First Amendment rights, I believe that the public school is an inappropriate forum for this display.

The student should do this outside in public. Not in school. It's just too controversial and of course the school administration can legally quash it based on the "disruptive" nature of the issue.

The supreme court in the past have ruled that classrooms, and schools themselves are a "marketplace of ideas" and thusly should not treat the expression of one idea with hostility while promoting the other.



Also, I saw Art displays by set up at the entrance of my school's cafeteria that were more disruptive than this display would have been.

So are you trying to make the argument the school is promoting abortion?
I am guessing neither side is given a voice. As for your assertion about what the Supreme Court has stated, I am guessing it is like you claiming the beyond a reasonable doubt bit, completely made up by you.
I should link your posts to my friend who is a PA, he would get a good laugh at you trying to interpret the law.
The Principal has every right to not allow her booth, she is using school resources to push her social agenda. You are referencing a court case regarding arm bands. Which is not the same situation one bit.
Please get a clue before you try to act like you know anything about case law.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[gnarlylove]

Why call it a "public" school if you aren't allowed to publicly express your views there? Hmm?

Certain views are not to be taken seriously. Anti-human rhetoric is not to be taken seriously. Anti-abortion is anti-human. The same people who consider a fetus a full moral person (how is that determined? by definition, thus begs the question) tends to also condone mistreatment of animals if not outrightly support it. Why are "ideals" about human nature so important as to wage protests against human needs. School girls are daughters, not mothers. Our society has not prepared them for this life yet culture demands it through highly sexualized culture. The burden should not be against this vulnerable population because you have some unscientific ideal that a full moral person is any thing that can become a human. That is highly controversial, certainly not factual. It is pure speculation and since harm of a serious nature can cascade from lack of abortion information or anti-abortion views that belittle 14 year old girls. To force anti-human propaganda to be displayed which takes a stand against girls who need support to make their decision is not moral, not right, and should not be lawful. Our laws should reflect and be based on human flourishing, not absurd speculation.

 

[candycorn]

It has become quite obvious to me that in the years after I left school, that there is little tolerance of certain political views that students hold in school. Especially on hot button issues like abortion. As this 17 year old high school student found out, it's not okay to freely express your worldviews in school. If you don't believe government and politics have any influence in the classroom, you're in for a rude awakening. There is a culture of intolerance that is nurtured in the minds of our children that cannot be allowed to continue. The school should be a place where ideas and views are accepted no matter what they are. The First Amendment applies to everyone, not just to those who hold like views.

BRANFORD, Conn. (WTNH)– Life-sized replicas of fetuses are too much for lunchtime at Branford High School. A student leader of the school’s pro-life club says the principal banned her from using the models and she is fighting that.

Seventeen-year-old Samantha is a senior at Branford High School and she is learning a harsh lesson in education policy after trying to set up a pro-life table during lunch at Branford High.

“When we asked our principal at our school if we can have this set up during lunch and have an opportunity for kids to come over and take a look at our display, he said no,” said Samantha Bailey-Loomis.

Samantha is the founder of the students for life club. Their table is complete with blown-up images of fetuses and real- life sized fetus models that look just like the real thing and she says that doesn’t sit well with her principal.

“He tells us that this topic in particular is too controversial to be talked about in public school,” said Bailey-Loomis.

Life-sized fetus causes cafeteria controversy at Connecticut school | WWLP

In Loco Parentis. They are in charge of keeping order. In school, it's their call. On the sidewalk outside, knock yourself out.

Today's "the world is about to end" message I suppose. We had dress codes in school, we couldn't dye our hair distractive colors, bring radios into class or yell. Who knew the Constitution hung in the balance.

 

[Luissa]

[MENTION=23165]thereisnospoon[/MENTION]

I realize that. But the principal arbitrarily ruled she couldn't set up the display. As far as I could tell, it served a legitimate educational purpose, but the principal's decision did not. It was based off of an inane fear of someone expressing an undesirable viewpoint, which in Tinker and Hazelwood did not serve as a legitimate reason to forbid the student from exercising their 1st Amendment Rights. Lockers on the other hand are school property, and an entirely different matter. Your constitutional rights do not give you the right to deface the locker or use it to make a political point.

Actually Hazelwood did. Like I said my friend would get a good laugh at your posts. She is using the school resources to push her social agenda which could become controversial. The Principal has every right to not allow her to use school time and resources to push her agenda.
The Principal made the right choice, school lunch time is not the right place for the abortion debate. And the law is behind him and his decision.
Also Tinker wouldn't apply here, she is using school resources to express her ideas. She is only protected by Tinker if it was her personal belonging or if she was speaking to others in a casual manner. Neither is true in this case. She expected the school to provide a platform for her to express her social beliefs. The school didn't provide her one. That didn't violate her Freedom of Speech.


Sent from my iPhone using the tears of Raider's fans.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why call it a "public" school if you aren't allowed to publicly express your views there? Hmm?

Certain views are not to be taken seriously. Anti-human rhetoric is not to be taken seriously. Anti-abortion is anti-human. The same people who consider a fetus a full moral person (how is that determined? by definition, thus begs the question) tends to also condone mistreatment of animals if not outrightly support it. Why are "ideals" about human nature so important as to wage protests against human needs. School girls are daughters, not mothers. Our society has not prepared them for this life yet culture demands it through highly sexualized culture. The burden should not be against this vulnerable population because you have some unscientific ideal that a full moral person is any thing that can become a human. That is highly controversial, certainly not factual. It is pure speculation and since harm of a serious nature can cascade from lack of abortion information or anti-abortion views that belittle 14 year old girls. To force anti-human propaganda to be displayed which takes a stand against girls who need support to make their decision.

So, you liberals resort to dehumanizing anyone who disagrees with you or your views? That's rather disturbing, and rather typical of you.

As for why we think a fetus is a human being, we resort to science to explain why:

There is ample biologic, physiologic, hormonal, and behavioral evidence for fetal and neonatal pain. As early as 8 weeks post-fertilization, face skin receptors appear. At 14 weeks, sensory fibers grow into the spinal cord and connect with the thalamus. At 13-16 weeks, monoamine fibers reach the cerebral cortex, so that by 17-20 weeks the thalamo-cortical relays penetrate the cortex. [&#8230;] In fact, by 20 weeks post-fertilization&#8230; the fetal brain has the full complement of neurons that are present in adulthood.

Colleen A. Malloy, MD Assistant Professor, Division of Neonatology/ Department of Pediatrics Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine

Which should be devastating to your view that human fetuses are nothing but a clump of cells. If even one toe remains in the womb, it is nothing but a clump of cells, whilst it is obvious to the rest of us what it is. A human being. They feel pain just as adults do. They react to pain in the same way adults do. You can't explain that away. Also, more science:

It can be clearly demonstrated that fetuses seek to evade certain stimuli in a manner in which an infant or an adult would be interpreted as a reaction to pain.

Richard T.F. Schmidt, MD, former President of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Trust me, we're far more scientific than you are on the subject. And thusly, have more informed opinions about abortion than you do. What do you have? Your emotions? Scare tactics? Smear campaigns?