School ‘Correct’ to Ban U.S. Flag T-Shirts for Campus Safety

[Outis]

Uh, according to Snopes, yes it was a "special event" recognized by the school:

This case arose out of the events of May 5, 2010, Cinco de Mayo, at Live Oak High School ("Live Oak" or "the School"), part of the Morgan Hill Unified School District in Northern California. The Cinco de Mayo celebration was presented in the "spirit of cultural appreciation." It was described as honoring "the pride and community strength of the Mexican people who settled this valley and who continue to work here." The school likened it to St. Patrick's Day or Oktoberfest. The material facts are not in dispute.
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/immig...kYtM4wveVzb.99

The way I read it, there was an event in 2009, not in 2010. I either need more coffee, or less.

Probably more.

[Bill the Cat]

I've got the American flag AND the Texas flag on the front of my house, along with the "We Don't Call 911" sign.

I served for 21 years under the US flag, so I give it the honor that I was taught that it was due. And in this case, the 9th Circus basically told these kids that they could not wear the shirts because someone ELSE could beat them up...

[Bill the Cat]

The way I read it, there was an event in 2009, not in 2010. I either need more coffee, or less.

Probably more.

My wife says she resembles that!!

[Jedidiah]

Ah ... so a claim that one group is inferior is _not_ a claim that another group is superior. Got it!

You apparently failed to read the post. He pointed out that ". . . not only is "Mexican" not a race (in any sense of the word) but Mexico isn't even monoracial, . . ." Then went on to point out that it was Mexico that was screwed up not any race - except perhaps the white Mexicans.

[Jedidiah]

A bit more to the story: http://www.snopes.com/politics/immig...flagshirts.asp (Warning: language alert)

It seems the Mexican students are NOT allowed to wear Mexican flags, nor was there any special recognition of Cinco de Mayo by the school.

Funny at the time there were pictures of "Mexican" students carrying (not wearing) Mexican flags. And yes the school did recognize the event.

[Carrikature]

Yeah, it's just that "other end" of this is "Blame America first".

Do you think that's my approach? I can't honestly tell. I rarely go for either extreme. Nothing exists in isolation.

[Cow Poke]

Do you think that's my approach? I can't honestly tell. I rarely go for either extreme. Nothing exists in isolation.

Absolutely not.

[Carrikature]

Absolutely not.

Cool.

[Outis]

Funny at the time there were pictures of "Mexican" students carrying (not wearing) Mexican flags. And yes the school did recognize the event.

Yes, Bill already pointed that out, at which time I discovered that there was too much blood in my caffeine stream.

[Outis]

You apparently failed to read the post.

I don't read DE's posts. If I want to read posts that glorify white separatism, white superiority, or white supremacy, I know the address to Stormfront.

[CMD]

ALLAHPUNDIT from Hotair explains nicely why this is so ridiculous:

In other words, a bully can get the principal’s office to silence you by promising to beat your ___ if they don’t.

This is, as Eugene Volokh notes, a classic “heckler’s veto” in that it rewards a violent actor by suppressing the speech that’s irritated him instead of punishing him for being violent. What sort of incentives does that create? If the answer’s not obvious, here’s a snippet from the equal-protection section of the opinion that made my eyes pop. The students who had to take off their stars-and-stripes shirts wanted to know why students wearing shirts with Mexican-flag colors weren’t also asked to take off their shirts. Simple, says the court: No one was threatening to beat them up.

As the district court noted, the students offered no
evidence “demonstrating that students wearing the colors of
the Mexican flag were targeted for violence.” The students
offered no evidence that students at a similar risk of danger
were treated differently, and therefore no evidence of
impermissible viewpoint discrimination.

Because the record demonstrates that the students’ shirts
“might reasonably have led school authorities to forecast
substantial disruption of or material interference with school
activities,” Tinker, 393 U.S. at 514, the authorities’ actions
were permissible under Tinker. We reject the students’ equal
protection claim.

If you want to make your classmate shut up, you need to credibly threaten violence. That’s how “free speech” works in the nation’s schools. Take a lesson, America.

[Jedidiah]

I don't read DE's posts. If I want to read posts that glorify white separatism, white superiority, or white supremacy, I know the address to Stormfront.

Then it might behoove you to avoid responding to them.

[Outis]

Then it might behoove you to avoid responding to them.

I don't respond to DE's posts. I was responding to your post.

[Paprika]

The court ruled that the safety of the school outweighed the freedom of the students to exercise their First Amendment rights of free speech...
What say ye?

It means the school administrators are inept.

[Cow Poke]

It means the school administrators are inept.

Exactly. And all this "zero tolerance" stuff in our schools is a result of our administrators being too cowardly to make good judgement calls.