More students suspended for wearing anti-gay tee shirts

This entry in the Sacramento Bee rather points out how the students' action was set up by their parents AND CHURCHES -who encouraged them to wear the shirts and refuse to take them off or change them. They were suspended, which of course set off nasty tantrums from the churches and parents who accused the PUBLIC school of violating their right of religious speech on campus. But frankly, what I DO like about this story is that one enterprising student wore an ANTI-CHRISTIAN tee shirt in response to them - of course he was suspended as well. I have thought for a long time that these religious "right" set-ups (and watch - in about a week, one of the christo-fascist law organizations will file suit against the school district - part of their effort to evangelize American law for Masters Falwell and Dobson) were just orchestrated events - maybe the school district should consider filing a countersuit against the churches and the parents for intentional harassment and attempting to force religious indoctrination in the public school...
Meanwhile, I have a lovely tee shirt that says: "So many christians. . .so few lions" that I'd be happy to wear if they want to start a little tee shirt "culture" war.

Now let me make one thing clear here - I have nothing against anyone's PERSONAL religious beliefs - but when you DEMAND that I have to be condemned by them AND governed by them, you are gonna have a big-ass problem with me. I take my right to religious freedom very seriously, and as a legal adult I am more than capable of making up my own damned mind about how and what I wish to worship. If a pseudo-christian doesn't like it - too bad. But if they are going to continue to issue these utter demands to persecute others, then it's time to let them get it right back. . .I'm sick and tired of these arrogant Americans who believe they can't honor their religious beliefs unless they are free to follow me around all day and proclaim that I'm "going to hell."

Anyway, here is the story. . .


Thirteen students were suspended from Oakmont High School Tuesday after refusing to take off T-shirts that condemned homosexuality as "sin" in anticipation of today's National Day of Silence.
The day is part of a nationwide effort to spread awareness of the discrimination that gay and lesbian youths say they often face in schools and in society.


Another student was suspended today after he declined to take off a t-shirt that Oakmont High School principal Kathleen Sirovy described as "anti-Christian" and "inappropriate." She said the student wore the shirt to protest the message students attempted to spread Tuesday.

Sirovy said all 14 students were given the option of taking off their t-shirts, which she said violated dress code because they were disrespectful of a particular group. When they refused, they were suspended for defying authority and for creating a disruption on campus, she said.

Sirovy added that the students suspended Tuesday said they had been directed by their parents and churches to wear and not remove the shirts. She was not sure what churches were involved.


http://www.sacbee.com/content/news/story/14248169p-15065566c.html


Honestly - I wonder if some parents of OTHER students could countersuit these nutcases, their parents, and churches for attempting to coerce their children into a certain religious belief without the permission of the parents or the school and attempting to use their religious belief to intimidate other students.

they have a choice....

Get the hell out of the public schools and send their kids to a religious private school where they can hate all they want....(these schools have a high suicide rate among teens that may be gay)

In the mean time the kids in the public schools can attend school without the fear of being picked on, bullied and hated.

FauxChristians are what they are....they should just get it over with and put on their jackboots...

Good for the teenager that wore the Anti-Christian shirt....it's time to stand up to the damn bullies....

constructing "private" schools was to ensure they could teach their own dogma without the state interfering. And you are right - why the hell don't they just DO it and shut up?

trying to interfere in the states business.....this is crossing the line...this is what the * cabal has done to America and these people feel empowered....

The good thing is that the school suspended all of the students on both sides which is showing no favoritism.

legal groups will file suit to defend the student with the anti-christian tee shirt along with the set-up "christian" ones.

Unless the shirts called for violent attacks on gays in words, or through imagery, I would say that their speech is protected under the First Amendment. I would say that Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) applies. Just because speech is unpopular that should not give a school district the right to restrict it under the guise of being "disruptive" to the learning environment. What if a student wore an anti-war T-shirt in a high school located in a Bushbot town in Utah? I'm sure that would make a lot of people mad and as such, it could be said to be disruptive. But if we used that standard then any unpopular speech could be squelched by school administrators.

How about a shirt that reads "I hate N*ggers" or "Jews Go Home."

Just a "guise of being 'disruptive'"?

The idea that freedom of speech should only apply to certain views is a very, very tempting one, and clearly very dangerous.

I'm inclined to think that school students probably shouldn't be allowed to wear T-shirts making political statements for precisely this reason: if some political statements are allowed then they all have to be.

Incidentally, here in the UK virtually all schools have a uniform, which all pupils are required to wear - am I right in thinking that that's virtually unheard of in the US?

directed at anyone but reflects a political opinion, and a shirt which directly declares that a specific group also attending the school is condemned. And schools have won court cases against speech (and press) by high school newspapers that merely printed a story about gay students at a school - the administration was allowed to BAN the story because it would disrupt christo-fascists who hated the gays.

There is also a difference in terms of bullying. If those tee shirts are used as a prelude to verbally attack a gay student, where is his protection? In case after case after case in the past few years, gay students have sued school districts for refusing to protect them when they are verbally and physically attacked using epithets and anti-gay slurs - and they usually start with some attempt at proclaiming biblical arrogance. Now if the school was willing to. . .say, go back through history books and let students wear tee shirts which quoted religious leaders as proclaiming God saying blacks were inferior, is that nothing but free religious speech? Or how about a quote that proclaims these people should be slaves, according to the interpretation of the gospel?

Exactly what is the point here. For one thing, why should anyone give a damn whether someone else's church hates gays or not? If that is your church and you believe it, it only applies to YOU - not everyone else. When you venture into demanding the right to "express" your "religious belief" that EVERYONE else is doomed for being gay because your minister says so, then that is no longer a "deeply-held personal belief" but a belief which insists that all others be interested in that belief. It seems to me to be a rather simple issue, actually - if the student isn't gay because his church hates gays, that's the limit of his proclamation. That's HIS speech. Condemning some other students based on that is disruptive.

Maybe that means I'd have no problem if the tee shirts said "I am not a homosexual because God says they are going to hell". You wanna wear that tee shirt, then fine - it's YOUR speech about yourself. It isn't about ME or anyone else. It's a personal statement. When the tee shirt is worded so the target is someone else, then it isn't a personal statement, it's an attack on a specific group of people who have suffered violence based on those statements. What is wrong with the students wearing such shirts to actually be RESPONSIBLE about their speech?

:thumbsup:

In the Tinker vs Des MOines case the plain arm bands in question were not disruptive. Hate speech targeting a small, specific group of people in the school IS certainly disruptive.

schools in order to evangelize them. They do have private as well as public listed. I'm a teacher. The last thing I need on my campus is a religious crusade. When researching this, I found that the people they prop-up as the leaders of this group and all the groups they directly link to don't come across as a robertson/falwell fascist. However, knowing that these huge mega-churches are funding this and the people inside those mega-churches terrorizes me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1030694&mesg_id=1030694

the future of what their crusades result in....

Considering that there are a huge number of people with different religious beliefs....this could lead to religious fights on the school campus, even possible deaths....of students....we have to rid ourselves of this administration and try to get the states back on track..

others from evangelizing to their children. Since the fundie's argument is that the rights of the parent are always attacked, why dont' they protect the rights of other parents to choose their child's exposure to religious belief as they wish, instead of at the direction of some pseudo-christian group making these decisions for them?

Don't you keep up with the poor travails of the Christians who just want religious freedom in America. :shrug:








:sarcasm:

Parents quickly shut them down. (large population of Catholics and Jews)around here

Me breaking their motherfucking homophobic skulls open with a bat and playing with the gooey insides is a sin. See the difference?

:rofl: