And in this case they are the same, no matter what you think.
And yes, I tend to read an entire thread before tossing in my worthless opinion about something I know absolutely nothing about. You should do the same.
Setting aside the bizarre passive-aggressive comment about my use of big words (if you need, I’ll limit myself to monosyllables, but I hope that won’t be necessary), you also left off:
Why? Why should the USA flag never be banned for any reason? I can think of several circumstances under which it might not be allowed.
ok, well thanks for telling me how you do things. i’m going to change my whole life around now so that i can live up to your fine standards.
you really think saying “you truncated my list” is NOT passive aggressive? really? really really honestly?
i’m curious as to what examples you have for banning the US flag. i can’t think of any. but you could very well surprise me. i doubt it, but it would be interesting to see what examples you make.
No, it was plain old aggressive, since you did after all truncate the list. You’ve still not responded to the part you truncated. Why not?
- A kid tells another kid, “Next time I wear an American Flag t-shirt, I don’t care what punishment I get, I’m gonna beat you up.” In addition to punishing the kid for the threat, it’d be reasonable to ban that kid from wearing an American flag t-shirt.
- A marine shows up for her first day of boot camp dressed in an American flag t-shirt instead of in her uniform. She claims that, as you said, “USA flag t shirt is silent protest and should NEVER be banned for ANY reason.”
- Variations on those two themes (flag intended to communicate a threat, and uniform).
The more I read about this situation the more I agree with the administration and the court ruling, although that admittedly relies on some assumptions. The principal of that school must be constantly doing face-palms.
ah i see, you think i was ducking you. i wasn’t. i was just lazy. a flag is not fighting words. even if it is intended to be. a flag is a flag. i disagree with your first example though i do think you made a good job of presenting an example. if he said i’ll beat you up if you wear tennis shoes (instead of leather loafers) you still can’t ban tennis shoes.
the second example only works here if you already have a uniform code,ie, shirts with collars only. the military already has a dress code. i mean, in absence of a dress code you shouldn’t start restricting certain items.
Can you please read post 162 carefully? You’re still not addressing the relevant bit of what I said.
I sure can ban that kid from tennis shoes.
So you agree that there is a circumstance under which you can ban the flag, given a particular context?
Can’t figure out if this is more Orwellian-type speech or that of The Onion. Either way, it is complete bullshit.
I dunno. I think whether it’s anti-American is really beside the point. If we’re gonna allow speech in this context, we ought to allow it whether it’s American or anti-American.
is this the part of 162 you mean?:
There’s also a limitation on speech in government facilities: speech that substantially disrupts government proceedings (for example, screaming at the judge during a trial, shouting at a teacher during a lesson) can be limited.
ok, i disagree. are we talking about what so and so principal or board of education did, or we talking about what they - ought - to do or not do? it’s the second half, what they ought to do or not do, that i find an interesting discussion.
your point would stand, maybe, IF the t shirts lead to a fight. but i think it is wrong to censor that, or tennis shoes, or anything else, until a last resort. of course, as stated, a dress code, ties and shirts with collars, would eliminate all of the controversy. i think it is unfair to regulate selectively with an overall dress code however.
and yes, i guess there are a FEW examples where a flag should be banned but thus far they are examples where earning rings or pink hair or swearing would not be allowed. you have yet to give me a case where a flag, in its own right, should be banned. for that i can not think of any examples.
Really? Why not wait to the violence happens and then punish him. Or simply punish him for the threat itself? Otherwise the smart-ass kid could say something like: My shirt is plain white. But I kicked his ass because I have the flag on the label on the inside. You get the idea.
Come on, that’s just being out of uniform. The point there is not what one IS wearing, but what one IS NOT wearing. Which is some of the beauty of uniforms.
Not seeing any variations that that the first two don’t cover.
I’m not sure about that. As I mentioned earlier, I think there’s a distinction to be made between the concepts of Issue Speech and Everyday Speech. I view having the flag of the country you’re in on your shirt as rather benign, more Everyday Speech. True, that in the context of the flap, it does become more of the Issue Speech variety. But I do agree with Robert163 that I can’t imagine an scenario where displaying the flag of the country one is in should not be allowed.
I see. Yes, I’m responding to your initial idea that freedom of speech means that speech cannot be restricted. I’m thinking about another free speech case, in which a kid involved in racist violence at his school was banned from doodling the Confederate flag, and ended up getting in trouble for violating the ban (it was a major case, if someone wants to look it up). Certainly free speech in the US isn’t absolute, nor should it be; there are plenty of cases in which it should be restricted, including but not limited to the list I offered earlier.
Do you think it’d be fair to regulate selectively if the t-shirt wearer clearly intended to intimidate? Imagine a shirt worn on Yom Kippur that said, “If we’d listened to Hitler, every day would be like this” (because most Jewish students would be at home on that day). Should that be allowed? What if it were worn on another day and said something like, “Firing up the ovens since 1940”? Are you such an absolutist that you’d allow any t-shirt no matter what? Or do you agree that in certain circumstances, a school needs to limit free speech in order to protect the educational environment?
I’m deliberately using extreme examples because I only think such regulation is all right under extreme circumstances. But I do think it sometimes is appropriate.
Okay, I can see that. But that pretty dramatically changes what you were saying: instead of saying that the flag receives unique speech protection, now you’re saying it can’t ever be uniquely targeted. I think that’s true of virtually all speech.
Fair enough, but if that will be the rule the school certainly shouldn’t be having things like Cinco de Mayo or Traditional Marriage Day or anything remotely political. Even though I agree that they are generally mouthy little bastards that are just parroting what they have been told, they shouldn’t be forced to sit quietly while a political viewpoint is foisted upon them they disagree with. They shouldn’t be allowed to picket the school but a minor form of protest like wearing a non-offensive T shirt (and the US flag at that!) should be allowed in all cases where the school has endorsed a viewpoint.
Because if I’m the kid who’s threatened with violence, I know that the flag is an implicit continuation of the threat. The teacher can protect me from the dread of the threat, in addition to protecting me from actual violence, by banning what I’ve been told is a continuation of the threat.
Note what I’m responding to: I was told that it can never be banned. Someone who’s supposed to be in uniform is banned from wearing anything significant in addition to that uniform. I was simply objecting to the absolutism of the claim.
ok, can i switch up the example just a bit? lets suppose people start wearing a bronze 4 as a lapel pin. it means they are 4 (for) traditional marriage. it means they are against gay marriage. it becomes co opted by the worst, bigoted people from that opinion. it becomes, in a l practical purpose, a message of hate and bigotry. but. how can you outlaw or censure the letter 4? how do you prove intent? i mean everyone knows what it means but they can all ways say, oh, 4 is my lucky number…
1- am i wrong then to say the confederate flag should be banned in school but not the american flag. (whatever you want to display on your own property is 100% your own business.)
2- i agree freedom of speech in school can/should be limited but only under valid circumstance. it seems schools most often rule on expediency and avoiding problems than on the merits alone.
3- a t shirt with a printed message is different than a t shirt with the flag. the flag does not come CLOSE to the extreme examples you listed.
4- yes, we are in agreement, the flag can’t/shouldn’t be selectively targeted.
agree with the whole quote but most particularly this
I think you’re shedding light on the problem here and show that the problem lies in being too quick to ban anything. The more obscure the symbol the more it needs to be left alone. You start to get into the realm of thought-crimes.
Now, it IS possible that symbols can be so tightly associated with violence that it becomes a legitimate target of banning. I think the perfect example of this is gang motifs, even gang colors. But i=even here, where does one draw the line. It’s one thing to ban, say, red bandanas. But how about if you add a red shoes? Hat? Scarf? Shirt. And what percent of the shirt must be red for it to fall under the band.
I’m for banning as little as possible, while protecting people from violence as much as possible, If some skinhead idiots want to wear “88” on their shirts, let them advertise their assholeness. But if they become violent, or threaten violence, I’d come down on them with as hard as possible.