More rights being violated.

[calpoon]

let's talk about what no one is adressing:

if kids are our first line of defense against terrorism, we are fucked.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Sadly? I think it's a good thing, violating someone's rights is a bad thing.

If the parents are paying taxes for the school district then they should be the ones that dictate the dress code. Unless, they can stop paying taxes.

How about people without children,should they be able to not pay taxes for schools? Or if I disagree with the way tax dollars are spent on something else like the military should I be allowed to not pay taxes? That would be a crazy situation wouldn't it,individuals thinking they can pick and choose what the govt can or cannot do.If people really think dress codes are wrong they need to change laws, lobby for such and get it changed democratically,if they can.If they can't I guess they have to comply.
And on the shirt in school issue and free speech,would you allow any shirt that says anything? I see nothing that this was being singled out while other controversial shirts were allowed.
Sure they can bring a suit I guess,they can loose too lol.Courts have repeatedly found schools have the right to set such codes.

If you look at this link that Max put up,they settled the case and they had no dress code in effect which is probably why they settled it without a trial.But if you have a code in place every court has found those codes are legal.

 

[calpoon]

How about people without children,should they be able to not pay taxes for schools? Or if I disagree with the way tax dollars are spent on something else like the military should I be allowed to not pay taxes? That would be a crazy situation wouldn't it,individuals thinking they can pick and choose what the govt can or cannot do.

Or how about people getting rid of representitive government, cutting out the middle man, and going directly to the source. If I want to educate my children, I can pay a teacher to do it, or buy my own books and do it myself. Military budget and civil defense? I can buy my own arms and guard what i will myself. is that a crazy situation?

or is it brilliant?

 

[USNinc]

So, when did school become like a church?

The shirt was fine, the teacher just wanted to single out the student.
Next time maybe they will think twice.

Obviously the shirt was not fine.

I guess you don't get analogy which pointed out the use of "Tact".

 

[anomaly]

Uninformed voters will continue to elect people that will allow the U.S. to become a police state. Discreet slavery will soon become the order of the day.

 

[dave_rhino]

The shirt was fine, the teacher just wanted to single out the student.

No, he singled himself out by wearing it.

 

[max0rz]

the article clearly states that the school was just being sensitive in this post columbine era.

Hopefully the court will throw the lawsuit out on it's a55.

just suck it up kid and take your measly freakin detention. :1orglaugh

 

[Will E Worm]

How about people without children,should they be able to not pay taxes for schools?

No one should have to pay taxes to any school they don't have children attending.

Obviously the shirt was not fine.

I guess you don't get analogy which pointed out the use of "Tact".

The case was settled out of court. So, um.........

I don't see any problem with the shirt. Nitpicking is going to turn this country into a police state, even faster.

Uninformed voters will continue to elect people that will allow the U.S. to become a police state. Discreet slavery will soon become the order of the day.

Seems many on this board wouldn't mind seeing that happen. I'm not one of them.

 

[USNinc]

I don't see any problem with the shirt. Nitpicking is going to turn this country into a police state, even faster.

Nitpicking?
How many times have you ever gone to a gas station or grocery store?
I'm going to guess you need gas and food so you have been at least once.

Usually they have a sign on the door that says "No shirt, no shoes, no service".
Is that a violation of your freedom of speech, too?

If you enter my house wearing purple spandex and I don't like it...do I have the right to ask you to change or leave my house?
Would that be a violation against your civil liberties, too?

Last time I checked a school, public or private, has the right to enforce whatever rules they want to in order to protect everyone inside.

They have put innocent people behind bars for up to life in prison.
I'm also willing to bet there have been some guilty people who have won a court case or two....

And where are you getting that they settled out of court?

The lawsuit was filed in January. A federal judge will hold a conference on the case March 31.

That was at the bottom of the link you provided to this story.

 

[senob44]

I'm with the school on this one. Dress codes are there for a reason. To keep a certain decorum that encourages a safe learning environment.

This kid and his family may have the right to sue, but just because you have a right to do something doesn't always mean it is a good idea.

 

[marquis2]

Next thing we'll have the Army suing because the poor soldiers have to wear uniform.

If you wish to belong to any organisation you accept the conditions attached.You can't turn up and expect to ignore them.

 

[rmagedon]

I'm with the school on this one. Dress codes are there for a reason. To keep a certain decorum that encourages a safe learning environment.

This kid and his family may have the right to sue, but just because you have a right to do something doesn't always mean it is a good idea.

I agree.

When I went to school they used to tell me to take off my bandana cause I "looked like a gangster". Girls were told mini-skirts were not allowed in school. Some girls still wore them. School called their parents, they went home to change and got brought back to school. But no one sued. I bet some kids/teachers/parents might be upset had I gone to school with a tee that stated, "Your little Princess is my Little Whore" on it. I think the suing part is what made this article ridiculous.

 

[Will E Worm]

Nitpicking?
How many times have you ever gone to a gas station or grocery store?
I'm going to guess you need gas and food so you have been at least once.

Usually they have a sign on the door that says "No shirt, no shoes, no service".
Is that a violation of your freedom of speech, too?

Actually, yes. I'm not one to run around without a shirt or shoes.
I was in a restaurant in Florida and they had a sign saying they could refuse service for "offensive" shirts and so on. I refuse to eat there or any restaurant like it.

And where are you getting that they settled out of court?

That was at the bottom of the link you provided to this story.

seems there may be a precedent for a lawsuit sadly.

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/03/025302.php

They will settle or the student will win. Look at max0rz's link.

 

[Friday on my mind]

seems there may be a precedent for a lawsuit sadly.

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/04/03/025302.php

From the link above.

"Natalie, who was booted for a day from Middle School 210 on April 10, 2002, even though the school had no official dress code, said the settlement should make life easier on other openly gay students."


The school had no official dress code which made the legal footing a little less strong for the school.Plus a settlement does not mean they concede the point but that it may be too expensive to litigate it or as the link also mentioned they may not want the publicity.

The author of the story also says.


"Unfortunately, the lawyers representing the school shirked their duty. Giving in to this kind of blackmail may lead to students wearing extremely offensive clothing to school. I have regularly blogged the activities of Kirk Lyons, a neo-Nazi and neo-Confederate leader. His favorite way to raise money is to send groups of students to public schools attired in tee shirts depicting black people picking cotton and a Confederate flag. He then tries to blackmail the schools to settle lawsuits he has filed when the students are disciplined. This kind of behavior is something we don't want to open the door wider to."




Should those types of shirts above mentioned be allowed in school?The Neo-nazi ones.Or ones that say Bush is Hitler or America deserved 9/11 from the other side of the political spectrum.I think not.




Lastly from the link is this.




"Under the caselaw, it is settled that any clothing that is potentially disruptive or disruptive can be excluded. I believe Natalie's shirt was potentially disruptive."




And that is true case law is heavily on the side of the school being able to enforce such codes.

 

[calpoon]

Actually, yes. I'm not one to run around without a shirt or shoes.
I was in a restaurant in Florida and they had a sign saying they could refuse service for "offensive" shirts and so on. I refuse to eat there or any restaurant like it.

technically, no. People don't have a right to private propety use if it isn't theirs. it's a concession of the owner, so they do have the right to disbar anyone they want to from thier property for whatever reason they want to (so long as it doesn't go against the law of discrimination, whcih only applies to race, gender, religion and in some cases (gray area) sexual orientation). It's the reason why you can't do whatever you want to at an airport. those security searches are unconstitutional, but they aren't forced on anyone, you have the right to refuse to accept thier services and conditions and not go to the airport. If you want to go there, then you have to do what they say.

now schools fall under public property, they are subject to the rules of the government and as such, according to the constitution, they can't ban free speech and other things. they often still do (such as the fact that I think every public school bans guns on campus), and they are often sued in court and found in violation for it. as all things, it depends on the whim of the judge.

 

[Friday on my mind]

technically, no. People don't have a right to private propety use if it isn't theirs. it's a concession of the owner, so they do have the right to disbar anyone they want to from thier property for whatever reason they want to. It's the reason why you can't do whatever you want to at an airport. those security searches are unconstitutional, but they aren't forced on anyone, you have the right to refuse to accept thier services and conditions and not go to the airport. If you want to go there, then you have to do what they say.

now schools fall under public property, they are subject to the rules of the government and as such, according to the constitution, they can't ban free speech and other things. they often still do (such as the fact that I think every public school bans guns on campus), and they are often sued in court and found in violation for it. as all things, it depends on the whim of the judge.

Again children do not have rights like Adults do.Schools can totally ban speech they determine is disruptive to the function of the school that the govt would have absolutely no right to ban an adult from saying.Again you may think that is wrong but that is the law.
And let me point out that even adults don't have a total free speech right in all circumstances.The workplace is one place you don't.

 

[calpoon]

well, Fri, let me take a moment to review your case study... the actual details of the case are fuzzy. I don't think the case was settled by the supreme court, and in anycase, it was merely setting precident, not actually passing a law banning offensive clothing or overturning any existing law that allowed it.

I said that according to the constitution they can't ban free speach in the class room, which they haven't done. Yes, the court has many times set similiar precident even with adults shutting down cases where they deemed the particular speech in question was not protected. They haven't set any particular laws outlining what is and what isn't free speach, because it would be impossible to list every single contingent, so it's best decided on a case by case basis.

 

[calpoon]

edit: actually, I am wrong, they have passed laws that define speech as being unprotected, and even subject to prosecution, such as falsifying a police report. But they by no means have made an exhaustive list, certainly not in regards to clothing.

 

[Fresno]

Dress codes in schools are as old as time. Like all rules though dress codes have thin lines. You shouldn't let one thing (gun pic) go by just because it represents a soldier serving. A gun is a gun and in my book a rule is a rule. Rules should NOT BE SPLIT with exceptions made. It leaves a bitter pill in the mouth of those left out for the doing same thing and sometimes even much less.

As for the scent thing. It should not be allowed in schools, work places, especially restaurants or any other places not open air. Did you know a waitress heavy in perfume opening your beer bottle will change the taste of your beer? Its a fact.

Many people suffer asthma as well as other respiratory illnesses. I am allergic to many perfumes, cologne as well as all incense type stuff myself. A walk past Spencer's in the mall thats full of incense can give me a headache. Musky scents are the worst for me. Its a matter of being considerate, don't douse yourself. Children in school think body sprays are a 'the more the better' thing. Many children suffer asthma and it should be a rule as far as I'm concerned.

Rules/laws after all are for those that can't do the right thing on there own. Right? Without them the world would be in chaos all the time.

LL

Lady love I agree 100%

 

[Friday on my mind]

Now you make me get links LOL.
From "WikiAnswers"


What are a minors rights under the Constitution?
In: US Constitution



Answer
A minor has no rights until they are emancipated or turn 18 in most states.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_a_minors_rights_under_the_Constitution