Betsy's Page
HOME
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
Betsy neither necessarily uses,
nor endorses,
the products advertised on this site.
The truth about Avesil
Cheap Hosting
Atlanta Bankruptcy Attorney
Dallas Bankruptcy Attorney
Wikio
Get exclusive travel deals and book discount cheap flights
Online Bachelors Degree
Comments from an AP history
and government teacher in Raleigh, NC.
e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com
Commissions earned from selling items through Amazon will go towards buying materials for my classes. Thank you.
Site Feed
Monday, June 25, 2007
Bong Hits 4 Jesus
The Court ruled in another 5:4 decision in favor of the principal in the case in which a high school kid had unfurled at a school event a 14 foot banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" and got suspended for his troubles. The Court said that the principal had an interest in protecting students from an arguably pro-drug message that trumped the freedom of speech that students may have for more political messages. Justice Thomas would have gone further and overthrown the Tinker decision that established that students could wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
This is so tricky because I believe so strongly in freedom of speech yet, as a teacher, I support a principal's authority to determine what would or would not be disruptive in his or her individual school environment. The last thing we need is for judges to be overseeing the discipline procedures in every school as students routinely whine about their "freedom of speech" rights every time they get disciplined for something at school. I have had students who think that freedom of speech means they can cuss out a teacher or disrupt a class with their particular brand of humor. There are time, place, and manner restrictions on their freedom of speech that are more rigorous than on adults because of the need to preserve a suitable educational environment.
We may not think that the kid's banner was all that objectionable, but that principal on that day at that event had to make a decision and thought that it was. There may be particularly egregious events for a judge to decide that a principal had abridged a student's freedom of speech rights but this didn't seem to rise to that level. Show me examples of students getting punished for their political statements when they have not been disrupting class and I would have a different reaction.
The decision of the Court is here.
Meanwhile, the student, Joseph Frederick, claims that he had to leave college due to financial reasons because his father lost his job as a result of his son's case. Hmmm, I wonder whether his leaving college had more to do with this.Joseph Frederick, who has been teaching and studying in China, pleaded guilty in 2004 to a misdemeanor charge of selling marijuana at Stephen F. Austin State University in Nacogdoches, Texas, according to court records.Labels: Education, Supreme Court
0 comments
Comments:
The Court ruled in another 5:4 decision in favor of the principal in the case in which a high school kid had unfurled at a school event a 14 foot banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" and got suspended for his troubles. The Court said that the principal had an interest in protecting students from an arguably pro-drug message that trumped the freedom of speech that students may have for more political messages. Justice Thomas would have gone further and overthrown the Tinker decision that established that students could wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
This is so tricky because I believe so strongly in freedom of speech yet, as a teacher, I support a principal's authority to determine what would or would not be disruptive in his or her individual school environment. The last thing we need is for judges to be overseeing the discipline procedures in every school as students routinely whine about their "freedom of speech" rights every time they get disciplined for something at school. I have had students who think that freedom of speech means they can cuss out a teacher or disrupt a class with their particular brand of humor. There are time, place, and manner restrictions on their freedom of speech that are more rigorous than on adults because of the need to preserve a suitable educational environment.
We may not think that the kid's banner was all that objectionable, but that principal on that day at that event had to make a decision and thought that it was. There may be particularly egregious events for a judge to decide that a principal had abridged a student's freedom of speech rights but this didn't seem to rise to that level. Show me examples of students getting punished for their political statements when they have not been disrupting class and I would have a different reaction.
The decision of the Court is here.
Meanwhile, the student, Joseph Frederick, claims that he had to leave college due to financial reasons because his father lost his job as a result of his son's case. Hmmm, I wonder whether his leaving college had more to do with this.
0 comments
The Court ruled in another 5:4 decision in favor of the principal in the case in which a high school kid had unfurled at a school event a 14 foot banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" and got suspended for his troubles. The Court said that the principal had an interest in protecting students from an arguably pro-drug message that trumped the freedom of speech that students may have for more political messages. Justice Thomas would have gone further and overthrown the Tinker decision that established that students could wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
This is so tricky because I believe so strongly in freedom of speech yet, as a teacher, I support a principal's authority to determine what would or would not be disruptive in his or her individual school environment. The last thing we need is for judges to be overseeing the discipline procedures in every school as students routinely whine about their "freedom of speech" rights every time they get disciplined for something at school. I have had students who think that freedom of speech means they can cuss out a teacher or disrupt a class with their particular brand of humor. There are time, place, and manner restrictions on their freedom of speech that are more rigorous than on adults because of the need to preserve a suitable educational environment.
We may not think that the kid's banner was all that objectionable, but that principal on that day at that event had to make a decision and thought that it was. There may be particularly egregious events for a judge to decide that a principal had abridged a student's freedom of speech rights but this didn't seem to rise to that level. Show me examples of students getting punished for their political statements when they have not been disrupting class and I would have a different reaction.
The decision of the Court is here.
Meanwhile, the student, Joseph Frederick, claims that he had to leave college due to financial reasons because his father lost his job as a result of his son's case. Hmmm, I wonder whether his leaving college had more to do with this.
Joseph Frederick, who has been teaching and studying in China, pleaded guilty in 2004 to a misdemeanor charge of selling marijuana at Stephen F. Austin State University in Nacogdoches, Texas, according to court records.
Labels: Education, Supreme Court
Comments:
Post a Comment
