- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New respect for Livingston Parish Schools
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:42 am to Catman88
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:42 am to Catman88
Ah well, I didn't realize they had uniforms. That doesn't really change anything. The rule still allows for one type of football jersey or even football colors, while prohibits others.
Again, this is content based and would be unconstitutional anywhere but a public school.
It is a public school, so I think they might be able to get away with that kind of rule. That doesn't make it right. Once again, it goes directly against First Amendment principles.
Again, this is content based and would be unconstitutional anywhere but a public school.
It is a public school, so I think they might be able to get away with that kind of rule. That doesn't make it right. Once again, it goes directly against First Amendment principles.
This post was edited on 2/6/10 at 11:43 am
2
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:45 am to TxTiger82
BTW with your argument its interesting because where I work we had a black and gold day and one of my coworkers who doesnt follow football wore a colts blue and white shirt with an actual colt on it. We gave him shite all day about it but he really has no idea who the Colts are.
This post was edited on 2/6/10 at 11:46 am
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:48 am to Catman88
Work is probably a different scenario, so long as it is a private business.
First Amendment rights only apply to public forums. Your boss could have reprimanded your coworker with no consequences.
Now, if you worked in a government job, different story completely.
Public schools, btw, are "semi public forums." In some circumstances, students have free speech rights, but in other circumstances, they do not. That is why I call this case a gray area.
It doesn't surprise me in the least the ACLU is taking this up. In fact, they have probably been waiting for a case like this to raise the issue.
First Amendment rights only apply to public forums. Your boss could have reprimanded your coworker with no consequences.
Now, if you worked in a government job, different story completely.
Public schools, btw, are "semi public forums." In some circumstances, students have free speech rights, but in other circumstances, they do not. That is why I call this case a gray area.
It doesn't surprise me in the least the ACLU is taking this up. In fact, they have probably been waiting for a case like this to raise the issue.
This post was edited on 2/6/10 at 11:51 am
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:49 am to TxTiger82
It was more fun to rag his arse all day.. 
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:50 am to TxTiger82
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District defines free speech rights of students in public schools.
quote:
The court's 7 to 2 decision held that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and that administrators would have to demonstrate constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom. Justice Abe Fortas wrote the majority opinion, holding that the speech regulation at issue in Tinker was "based upon an urgent wish to avoid the controversy which might result from the expression, even by the silent symbol of armbands, of opposition to this Nation's part in the conflagration in Vietnam," and, finding that the actions of the Tinkers in wearing armbands did not cause disruption, held that their activity represented constitutionally protected symbolic speech.
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:53 am to WikiTiger
I would think that it would be pretty easy to prove that a kid wearing that Colts jersey causes disruption in the classroom.
quote:
finding that the actions of the Tinkers in wearing armbands did not cause disruption
This post was edited on 2/6/10 at 11:54 am
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:53 am to Catman88
quote:
I would think that it would be pretty easy to prove that a kid wearing that Colts jersey causes disruption in the classroom.
if so, that speaks very poorly of the students in that school.
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:55 am to TxTiger82
quote:
I swear to God you people seem to be ignoring the most important point in this debate, which I have made three or four times now.
I think you miss the central part of the debate, the school administration's ability to set a dress code. If they have that ability, and they do, they have the ability to relax it for certain occasions and under certain restrictions.
If they can have a "dress down friday" but still require skirts of a certain length and shirts with collars and they can, than they can allow B&G Saints jerseys but not Colts jerseys.
This kid violated dress code. He attempted to cresate his own dress code and was (appropriately) sent home.
To me his options were to 1) wera uniform, 2) wear Saints jersey, 3) stay home.
Posted on 2/6/10 at 11:56 am to WikiTiger
I dont know a school in this country where it wouldnt be a disruption..
If a kid wore an Auburn jersey to a school in BR during Auburn week you think that the treatment will be any different in any school? There will be a disruption.
There is also the fact that the administration has the right to determine ahead of time if an action will cause a disruption.
If a kid wore an Auburn jersey to a school in BR during Auburn week you think that the treatment will be any different in any school? There will be a disruption.
There is also the fact that the administration has the right to determine ahead of time if an action will cause a disruption.
This post was edited on 2/6/10 at 11:57 am
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:01 pm to Catman88
quote:
There is also the fact that the administration has the right to determine ahead of time if an action will cause a disruption.
What about the disruption a Colts fan feels on "black and gold" day. Or does the majority outweigh the minority in your opinion?
I imagine a Colts fan would feel excluded, ostracized, perhaps marginalized, but I guess he doesn't count according to you.
Plain and simple, man, if the school is going to amend the dress code to allow for clothing that makes a statement then they HAVE TO open it up to allow all statements. Otherwise just don't even do it. In fact, this is one of the main reasons public school have adopted uniforms.
This post was edited on 2/6/10 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:04 pm to WikiTiger
Why does the Colts fan decide?
The SCOTUS pretty clearly says that School officials can censor because of concerns that the expression would disrupte the educational process
The SCOTUS pretty clearly says that School officials can censor because of concerns that the expression would disrupte the educational process
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:07 pm to Catman88
quote:
The SCOTUS pretty clearly says that School officials can censor because of concerns that the expression would disrupte the educational process
yes, and I'm arguing that the "black and gold" day policy is disruptive to the Colts fan. Why do you not care about his learning environment?
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:09 pm to WikiTiger
And if the SCHOOL administration felt that way then its within their rights to not have it.
Its pretty clear that the court leave that decision up to the SCHOOL. If they felt that the colt jersey would cause a disturbance then they had the right to censor his wearing of it.
Of course this still leaves us with the girl wearing the Pink.
Its pretty clear that the court leave that decision up to the SCHOOL. If they felt that the colt jersey would cause a disturbance then they had the right to censor his wearing of it.
Of course this still leaves us with the girl wearing the Pink.
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:18 pm to Lsut81
quote:
Lord knows if the situation was reversed they'd all be whining like little bitches.
Anyone who supports this is either:
A. Incredibly unintelligent
B. Incredibly immature
c. Trash
I'm guessing that the majority of this board falls into category A.
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:20 pm to TulaneTigerFan
quote:
I'm guessing that the majority of this board falls into category A.
And so would the US Supreme Court I guess
This post was edited on 2/6/10 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:45 pm to Catman88
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:46 pm to Catman88
what people are forgetting is that the kid asked the day before if he could weat the colts jersey and was told no. He broke the rules even after he was told no. This kid is a trashy punk that does not listen to what he is told so I have no probelm with sending his arse home. Kids these days have ZERO respect for authority and this is what is wrong with the world today.
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:49 pm to fightingtiger2335
quote:
not sure why politics/race is being brought into this...it was a local excitement allowing kids to flaunt black and gold...was the school board short sighted in not thinking of the Colts...maybe...but the rule was in enforced properly.
the reason politics were brought in, is that people like rules that support their view, but not when they do not support their view.
Posted on 2/6/10 at 12:52 pm to tigeraddict
I hope the kid sues the school and wins
Page 6 of 8
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News