| 
|
Page: Profile: Wren's Nest News Local
| Total Views: 4,941,704
|
Article: 18082
[Legal]
Date Posted:
6/29/2007
4:58:40 pm EDT
Wvox Stats
Views: 4,896
RSS: 21,153
Comments: 8
|
U.S. Supreme Court Allows Vt. Student's Anti-Bush T-Shirt
Author: WPTZ Source: WPTZ
Title: U.S. SUPREME COURT ALLOWS VT. STUDENT'S ANTI-BUSH T-SHIRT
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday rejected a Williamstown school district's appeal of a ruling that it violated a student's rights by censoring his anti-Bush T-shirt.
In 2004, then seventh-grader Zachary Guiles, who was 13 at the time, was suspended from the middle school for wearing a shirt that bore images of cocaine and a martini glass, but also had messages calling President George W. Bush a lying drunken driver who abused cocaine and marijuana.
| Options: [Read Full Story] [Comments Locked]
[Email to a Friend]
|
|
Community Thoughts: There are 8 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| There Is A Distinction | Jun 30th. at 3:28:50 am EDT
|
Shadowbear (Hillsboro, Oregon) - Email Me
Lawyers love fine distinctions - if it is a little bit this way, it is one thing, just a hair that way and it is the other.
The bong hits court was persuaded that the boy was at a "school sanctioned event" in that they were outside as a school observing the olympic torch runner AND the sign appeared to be advocating mj use (and jesus for that matter) .
The t-shirt was held to be political because it was accusing bush of using alcohol and cocaine, not advocating their use - so it was political speech.
Very complex, as you can see, lawyers have an attention to split hairs that is almost unrivaled - except for tax accountants.
Personally, I think t-shirts with writing don't belong in school at all but, I am old and we had to wear dresses and skirts to school when I was a kid and would have been expelled for wearing that kind of t-shirt, no matter what it said.
|
| Artificial Distinctions | Jun 29th. at 9:16:39 pm EDT
|
Terry (Irvington, Virginia) - Email Me
This isn't the first time a court drew an artificial distinction not supported by the 1st Amendment, protecting certain classes of overtly political speech, but failed to give equivalent weight to other speech with Constitutionally equivalent criteria the courts often respect less.
In the South Florida Free Beaches nudity case, the court recognized public nudity only if it was part of a clear political message, somewhat like Cohen's "Fvck the Draft" jacket around allegedly harmed little wimmins and children in a courthouse, but failed to defend against laws based on favoring select groups of religions while discriminating against others, for which skyclad or nude lifestyles and rituals exist with reasons not obvious to anyone but the individual entitled to equal legal protections.
In the Bong Hits case, to the extent the message may have promoted drug use, and assuming it was primarily a speech case though the court erred in using that excuse for its actions, such a message inherently and unavoidably has a political element. Few people advocating such positions do so without strong awareness of militant and fascist drug policies and oppressive police state practices, and so the alleged promotion of select drugs cannot be done without an implied, US drug policy is wrong. The "Jesus" mention, whether by the original phrase authors or the banner painters, suggests a connection to religious or spiritual practices and drug rituals as part of Free Exercise, even if not expressed in a concise way of clear meaning to most observers (but would concise meaning to others be a reasonable standard for any religious concept?) . The court in its actions has again engaged in hypocrisy, in effect classifying select forms of political speech as recognized by corrupt lawyers, but other classes not elite enough for their social tastes as qualifying for censorship.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that only religions and forms of political speech socially approved by wealthy, highly educated bigots with lynchmen's robes, are entitled to those rights.
As 2 Live Crew sings, "pop that pussy and let me see what you got". To people who choose the culture and religious perspectives which make that very blunt and straightforward sexual rhythm a core part of their social lives, such speech deserves the same protections as part of religion and culture as any other of the most highly protected classes. It meets the same content criteria under "Miller" to not be found subject to community judgements about obscenity, as any other controversial expression of culture or art.
Maybe someday we'll have Justices who get it. Even if we're dead first.
What part of "ideological content based speech censorship is fundamentally illegal" do supposedly learned legal scholars not get? Perhaps we could require a training program for judges, and see if they better understand a simpler word like "no", after a 3 year stint in some prison chosen for patterns of anal rapes and coerced blow jobs?
That experience might help teach that legally, the speech content of Ivy League grad and composer Steven Sondheim, whether "I Never Do Anything Twice" is performed by Millicent Martin or the group Betty, cannot be treated differently than 2 Live Crew compositions, and meet Constitutional standards. When many pagans and even educated UU's don't "get that", the political and potential jury challenges to have effective protections of civil rights are a major ongoing challenge.
Some of Betty's original music is more like "Bong Hits", when they lyricise in Yuppy riddles, such that it's not clear if they're talking about hetero foreplay, lesbian main courses, or just silly banter. Does that change the Constitution, when compared to covering Sondheim, or 2 Live Crew concerts or CD's at outdoor parties (at which Southern Sheriffs have made discriminatory "obscenity" arrests) ?
The fact that the court upheld Constitutional standards in this case, doesn't undo the damage, or impression that bigotry and politics trumps justice as national policy, when viewed in the larger picture.
|
| To Teach... | Jun 29th. at 8:43:38 pm EDT
|
Elwin Shadowstrider (Bartlett, Tennessee) - Email Me
children one idea of free speech, and then to censure a shirt because so many of the "Bushies" take offense to irrefutable facts of their politician's past and then take the kid to court. I really like to see the underdog win like this. He questioned authority, he challenged the system, and won. There have been far too many people whose lives, jobs, and careers have been destroyed for speaking out against what the mainstream political ideology, I am glad to see someone win for a change.....
Brightest Blessings to all!!
Elwin Shadowstrider ) O (
|
| ... | Jun 29th. at 7:45:59 pm EDT
|
Draken (Bronx, New York) - Email Me - Web
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
|
Disclaimer: The Witches' Voice inc does not verify the accuracy of the details stated in this listing, nor do we vouch for the value of the goods or services presented here... As with all contacts and financial dealings in cyberspace, we encourage you to use caution and wisdom in your dealings with strangers.
Political Statements: Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren's Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches' Voice, Inc. TWV is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization.
|
State/Country flags created by 3dflags.com and are used with permission
Web Site Content (including: text - graphics - html - look & feel)
Copyright 1997-2009 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.
| |
