Students at Calif. school allowed to display anti-gay stickers

[jpak]

Source: local8now.com

INDIO, Calif. -- Students who placed anti-gay stickers on their identification badges at a Southern California high school have the right to wear the symbols, just as others can sport insignia supporting gay rights, administrators said.

Both symbols are allowed as a matter of free speech, as long as they do not cause a disruption at Shadow Hills High School in Indio, a city outside Palm Springs, administrators said in a statement emailed to staff last week.

CBS Los Angeles reported that the stickers show a rainbow -- the symbol of the gay community -- with a line crossing through it. Officials said the stickers have increasingly shown up over the past two weeks on some students' school ID badges at Shadow Hills High School, as well as on social media websites.

But administrators warned that students cannot interrupt class to express their beliefs.

<more>

Read more: http://www.local8now.com/content/news/Students-at-Calif-school-allowed-to-display-anti-gay-stickers-370602061.html

[beachbum bob]

1. its free speech...and every one has a right....

doesn't mean we have to support their belief

[dchill]

51. The right to be stupid and cruel.

That's what education is for!

[William Seger]

53. ... and vote that way (n/t)

[Cavallo]

56. It's hate speech. Even the symbol. What next, symbols of nooses?

The ones who can wear a rainbow are not going after anyone. And, they are not harassment.

If people wore anti woman stickers would that be considered harassment at work or at school?

Why would it be any less for gays?

They are creating a hostile and I would venture unsafe and harassing environment.

[Roy Rolling]

2. And there we have it

The school will learn that they will eventually have to step in and regular what is "free speech" when something universally offensive shows up on the I.D. like an aborted fetus.

I.D.s identify a person's unchangeable hands, feet, and body. Not their political beliefs, which are subject to change.

Too much info on the ID I'm thinking...

[William Seger]

13. I dunno... maybe we could get ALL bigots to wear ID badges

... with little stickers showing what they're bigoted against. Why waste a lot of time getting to know them before you find out?

[RKP5637]

28. I think that is an excellent idea!!! n/t

[Cavallo]

57. I think as soon as they put the badge on they will overcompensate

and act the way they think they should since they wear the badge.

[bigworld]

3. The ID is school property. The kids shouldn't be defacing it with any stickers.

You're just opening up a can a worms with ruling what is and what isn't objectionable. IMHO.

[branford]

6. I surmise that the school has previously permitted stickers

and other marks on the identification, likely including pro-gay rights symbols like rainbow flags. If so, and they now chose to just prohibit anti-gay rights symbols, they would almost assuredly face legal liability.

The schools's statements about free speech in the learning environment so long as it isn't inherently disruptive appears to demonstrate the legal and practical necessities and understanding of free speech.

Unfortunately, some teachers need a refresher on the constitution, particularly Amy Oberman, an Advanced Placement U.S. History teacher, when she states, "Yes, there is freedom of speech established by Tinker, but at least in my view, it's a hate crime because a group was targeted." There are no "hate crimes" in the USA, unlike places such as much of Europe or Canada. America does not and cannot criminalize hatred itself. Some otherwise already illegal actions like assault can be further penalized at sentencing due to the targeting of certain groups, but hatred itself is perfectly legal, even if vile, offensive, and unsettling. Schools are allowed a certain degree of freedom in maintain order among minors in a learning environment, but it they permit advocacy on one side of an issue (e.g., gay rights), they usually either have to permit all sides to speak or none at all.

[NurseJackie]

4. TRANSLATION: "I don't want anyone to suspect my secret gay desires, so this will PROVE I'm not gay!"

The whole thing is so sad.

[WinkyDink]

12. Maybe the rainbow buttons could be changed to "Anti-Gay = Closet". hee.

[SCVDem]

5. This is just great, huh?

Until someone gets their ass kicked one way or another.

[branford]

7. Free speech has its costs,

and if the anti-gay rights students target and actually harass particular students, they could face discipline for their conduct.

I would surmise the anti-gay students have been guided or advised by an attorney who knows just how far the law allows without crossing any lines.

[Grins]

8. Flip it!

When I see stupid like this I just flip it back on the promoter.

If you change the "rainbow" to a "Star of David", is that still OK, Shadow Hills High administrators...?

This trick was used recently by one of the attorneys defending Apple against the FBI truing to get Apple to break their encryption codes: If you change "FBI" to "China"; are you still willing to back the FBI?

[GummyBearz]

17. This makes no sense at all and I encourage you to stop doing it

Flip anything to Adolf Hitler, Stalin, etc. and ask someone if they are willing to back Adolf Hitler. It is just a way to move the real question to a false narrative. 99% of people would would say no to Hitler, it doesn't even matter what the real question is.

[TipTok]

20. That would only partially make sense if it was mandatory...

I'm sure if the Jewish students wanted to wear a star of David sticker... They could..

[Politicalboi]

32. Yup

If the sticker had multi colored people on it with a line through it would that be okay.

[Cavallo]

58. Or just a black person with a line though it. Would they call it biggoted and hateful then.

They're doing the same thing to gays.

[Iggo]

9. What a fun idea! Here's my sticker.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

27. Beat me to it.

[HomerRamone]

10. Can schools have a dress code?

That they could say "no shorts" but not "no stickers attacking other people" seems ludicrous to me

[EllieBC]

14. Yes and many do which include "no slogans of any sort".

My cousin lives in Southern California and the dress code at public school where her kids attend has this.

[Yo_Mama]

18. I believe some schools do, but this one doesn't. Apparently rainbow stickers were allowed.

I guess maybe next year they'll consider such a code. It has the merit of simplicity. If someone sued they could probably defend it on the basis that it is viewpoint neutral and necessary for order.

The one thing I don't believe you can do is allow a slogan or sign on one side of an issue but disallow one on the other.

[TipTok]

22. No way to determine it...

It's all or nothing short of direct references to drugs, alcohol etc...

The anti-gay folks would say that the folks with rainbow stickers were attacking them.

[WinkyDink]

11. Because bigotry and prejudice have just as much right to be promioted in a school setting..NOT. Does

NO-ONE recall the 1960s and the fight for Civil Rights?

What's next, buttons with the "N" word big as life?

[HeartoftheMidwest]

15. Ridiculous ruling.

If you are "FOR" a POSITIVE cause ( something that affirms basic human rights ), wear a symbol affirming the cause.

If you are "AGAINST" a cause, don't wear anything. ( Absence of identifier = no comment, or = don't believe. )

But to actively be against something, and wear an ANTI-basic human rights symbol, IS hate speech.........
.....in a public school, which has a much more restricted version of acceptable student behavior than the real world.

Outside of school, students should be free to express whatever views, no matter how base, they wish to, as American citizens.
That does NOT apply to school-sponsored extracurricular activities ( i.e. students are representing their public school. )

Don't know why schools don't have the backbone to enforce basic values, like the Golden Rule.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

21. Who decides which causes are "positive" ones?

If I were to object to the invasion of Iraq some thirteen years ago, I would be limited to ... doing nothing?

"Cash for Clunkers" was the stupidest gummint program in recent history. Should I not have said or done anything to object?

[HeartoftheMidwest]

24. We're talking about school kids here, and what they can or cannot wear on their school uniforms....

....during school hours, or while attending school functions ( public school, not private school. )

I think it's pretty simple that if a student wants to positively affirm an aspect of humanity or human rights, they should.
And if a student DOESN'T agree with that affirmation, for whatever reason, they should have the right NOT TO WEAR something "positive" in that affirmation, kind of a "no comment."
But they do NOT have the right to affirm their HATE, or denigrate someone's humanity.
It's another form of bullying.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

31. Would a student be free to wear a t-shirt with this image on it to school?

How about this one?



Whatever you do, please don't tell me that wearing one is okay and wearing the other is not.

If you go to Google Images, you can find something similar for just about every public official, I suppose.

Alert expected in 5 ... 4 ... 3....

Edited, Thursday at noon: original title: "Would a student be permitted to wear a t-shirt with this image on it to school?"

[HeartoftheMidwest]

34. You're funny. Don't mean that in a mean, snarky way.

The "alert" phrase reminds me of how raw and sensitive everyone's nerves are around here lately.

Dunno what the schools' policies are regarding political commentary. That's another issue. Most schools allow political expression as long as it doesn't portray nudity, weapons, or obscene wording, as far as I know. That's certainly more subjective, and probably varies from region to region of the U.S. I know of some high schools that are pretty tolerant of political expression, as long as they get no complaints from anyone at the school.

Again, my concern is with the school condoning bullying under the guise of "freedom of speech."

[mahatmakanejeeves]

35. Thank you. Also, welcome to DU.

[HeartoftheMidwest]

37. Thank you very much!

Have to confess that I've been a lurker here since the depressing GWB years....I think this site was one of the first I saw that carried photos of the anti-Inaugural crowds in 2000-2001. None of the mainstream press did. ( Also known as " Our National Embarrassment." ) Have always used the site to check the news, especially the backstories the MSM won't divulge.
Have a little more time these days to sit and relax and occasionally contribute something!

[TipTok]

23. Which 'basic values'....

I'm sure you'll get different answers depending on who you talk to.

Folks who suggest this always seem to assume that their values are the baseline.

[HeartoftheMidwest]

25. The simplest basic value:

Do unto others what you would have them do unto you ( or yours! )

[TipTok]

29. I would have others respect my right to free speech...

... as I do for them with no expectation that I am shielded from something I might find offensive.

[HeartoftheMidwest]

36. True, but again we're talking about high school students.....

....not about you ( I presume you're an adult out of high school? ) and your rights as a citizen.

Though for all the Free Speech Absolutists out there, it's nice to remember that as adults and citizens, there are SOME restrictions on free speech when it comes to safety and the rights of others.

[TipTok]

39. Why do we expect children and young adults...

... To play by one set of rules and then act all surprised when they have trouble with a new set as adults?

The time to teach the tough lessons is when they are young and the price of failure is low and not when they hit 23 and wonder why no one is accommodating them at every turn.

[HeartoftheMidwest]

42. I guess I don't see the inconsistency if the schools teach...

....basic respect for all other people's basic human rights. If you're respectful of others as a child, hopefully you can respect others when you become an adult.

[TipTok]

44. That's the point...

Respect is subjective...

I'll bet the pro life folks wouldn't feel very respected if one side got to promote and they were arbitrarily told no.

Imagine what that could be turned into in some of the dark red parts of the country.

You must respect Jesus, the President and the country at all times otherwise home you go.

It's like writing a law that said 'Be nice'...

[snooper2]

54. So if I was a sick baby raping piece of shit, I would expect to be put down with the death penalty

Is that what you mean?

[HeartoftheMidwest]

55. So off the wall and off topic.

This isn't the Argument Clinic.

[snooper2]

59. no, it is online debating where you can wear shitty shorts and messed up hair like me

answer the question!

[HeartoftheMidwest]

61. Actually we were discussing high schools and ...

....codes of conduct that clash with freedom of expression, or so I thought.

What a belligerent, argumentative bunch!!

[Akicita]

38. The anti-abotion crowd portrays abortion as a basic human rights issue for the fetus.

So under your rules it would be fine to wear anti-abortion stickers in school but ridiculous to allow pro-choice stickers.

I think not. Who gets to decide which side of an issue is righteous? The Propaganda Ministry?

[HeartoftheMidwest]

40. Don't know what the schools' position is on this issue.....

...as it's probably considered "political" too.
Can't see that it's a bullying issue for the school, as no students are directly affected by it? ( No one's being bullied. )

As with other political issues, schools have different policies for those issues.

[Le Taz Hot]

16. It's nice when the bigots provide their own advertising.

Saves time.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

19. The only thing I object to is the use of the word "allowed" in the headline.

The students are not required to ask anyone if it is alright for them to speak their mind. This is a right that is guaranteed to them by the First Amendment and subsequent court decisions extending its reach.

I know that LBN rules do not permit a change in headline.

The only cure for free speech is more free speech. - Nat Hentoff, and doubtless many others.

[Zorra]

26. LGBT should wear anti-Nazi stickers in response. nt

[Liberty Sage]

30. School is right.

We either have free speech or we don't. Censorship is the danger here, not hurt feelings.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

33. Students at a nearby school (Palm Desert) chose to support the LGBT community

Putting any sticker (booster, political view, religious belief) over the face of an ID tag seems to defeat the purpose of the tag. Just as the administration can prohibit Christian students from flying a Christian flag on the school's flag pole, or LGBT supporters from flying a rainbow flag, or racists from flying a Confederate battle flag, it should have the ability to regulate the use of any school property.

[SpankMe]

41. Their parents must be proud.

I assume the school wouldn't mind if I wore a sticker on by badge depicting a crucifix with a slash through it.

[Throd]

43. We wore Bad Religion T-shirts back in the 80's. I don't remember a fuss.

[Egnever]

45. If it is a public school

Do they really have a choice?

[LiberalLovinLug]

46. Free speech or Hate speech?

Isn't there a difference between wearing stickers in support of a minority community (with a history of being attacked and ridiculed)....
and wearing stickers denouncing this same group?

So what's next racist raised kids can wear BLDM buttons? (Black Lives Don't Matter). Or anti-Jewish buttons. Anti Muslim buttons?

[branford]

47. There is little to no difference under the law.

Primary schools in the USA can normally ban ALL political speech and/or punish actual harassment or certain types of bullying, but they cannot just ban speech you (or I) dislike.

As we've discussed before, American free speech protections and jurisprudence are far more extensive that you might be used to in Canada, with no real recognition, no less prohibition, on "hate speech."

[LiberalLovinLug]

50. Ok thanks

Sometimes I am guilty of assuming that the USA has similar laws.

I think here, that would not be allowed as it targets an "identifiable" group. In our Constitution:

Section 319(2) makes it an offence to communicate, except in private conversation, statements that wilfully promote hatred against an identifiable group. Section 319(7) defines “communicating” to include communicating by telephone, broadcasting or other audible or visible means.20 “Public place” is defined to include any place to which the public has access as of right or by invitation, express or implied. “Statements” include words spoken or written or recorded electronically, electromagnetically or otherwise, and also include gestures, signs or other visible representations.

[TipTok]

49. Hate speech is a null concept regarding policy and law...

[FLPanhandle]

48. Either ban all stickers or allow any sticker.

Allowing the government to decide which stickers are "acceptable" is not a liberal position.

A Texas government might decide "anti-abortion" or "anti-christian" stickers are not allowed.

Either ban all stickers or allow any sticker.

[CBGLuthier]

52. As has been said before popular speech does not need protection. I applaud the decision

Even senseless assholes have certain rights and putting those stickers on their ID cards does not cause a disruption which is the only thing that can cause students to not enjoy the same rights as adults.

[jmowreader]

60. There are "Christians" in this country who'd call the rainbow stickers "hate speech"

In a case of "I am out of the Army but the Army will never be out of me," I really want to know why any kind of stickers at all are allowed to be put on security badges.