1st Amendment again assaulted in San Diego

[el Gusano]

Sometimes even the ACLU gets one right, though. If the homos have a right to freedom of speech, so do those who stand up for righteousness.

POWAY – Tyler Chase Harper is a good student and athlete who likes to surf and has never been in trouble at school. He is also a Christian who believes homosexuality is wrong, and he's suing the Poway Unified School District over a T-shirt proclaiming his beliefs.

"I was appalled that my school would take such a controversial issue and only allow one side to be heard," said Chase, who prefers to go by his middle name, "I presented a message that was scriptural, biblical. I feel like my rights were violated and I had no freedom of speech."

Chase's T-shirt condemning homosexuality was not hate speech, and he should not have been punished by Poway High School, said attorney Robert Tyler of the Alliance Defense Fund.

Tyler, who filed the suit on the Harper family's behalf, said Chase was given a one-day, in-school suspension for refusing to take off a T-shirt that stated "Homosexuality is Shameful" and referenced Romans 1:27 from the Bible.

Freedom of Speech at Poway High (Unless it's Christian speech)

[gridbug]

Don't most schools ban inflammatory T-Shirts? The First Amendment didn't allow them back when I was in school, and I got sent home for that once myself.

[nic]

You know what is odd...

I've never seen anybody protesting outside Rib and Loin, or the Choo Choo BBQ (Although it may be the reason why Bucks closed down).

What is it with us Christians, picking and choosing our battles?

[el Gusano]

I wasn't aware that Rib and Loin or Choo Choo BBQ were government entities to be protested?

And the whole homo day of silence is inflammatory. The ACLU, while probably hating the kid, got it right in saying if one is permitted, both must be permitted.

[gridbug]

I wasn't aware that Rib and Loin or Choo Choo BBQ were government entities to be protested?

You mean it isn't an abomination for a restaurant to serve pork?

[el Gusano]

They're not a government entity, so it really doesn't matter what you think, other than to choose to eat there or not.

At school, however, if one side is permitted to wear a shirt calling pork an abomination, the other side must be permitted to declare that pork is primo. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to just one side.

But, in the arena of political speech, it's more important, which is one of the primary reasons for the 1st Amendment. The homos can make a political statement, so can a Christian.

[wheels]

Jun 1, 2009 13:36:48 GMT -5 @gridbug said:

I wasn't aware that Rib and Loin or Choo Choo BBQ were government entities to be protested?

You mean it isn't an abomination for a restaurant to serve pork?

abomination for who? i don't know very many Christians who think eating pork is an abomination.

those who do could certainly protest bbq joints if they so desire, but in the end, the owner can do what he wants. in this situation, the school (a government entity) was allowing one group to display its beliefs while refusing to allow another to do the same.

personally, i don't believe the school should allow either display.

[Justin Thyme]

After reading this part of the story:

On April 21, Chase wore a T-shirt with an anti-gay message during the school's annual Day of Silence. The national event is held on high school and college campuses to recognize and protest discrimination and harassment against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender students.

Chase wore the T-shirt in response to the event, which he believed endorsed, promoted and encouraged homosexual activity, according to the lawsuit. Chase was not confronted or disciplined April 21, his father said.

The following day, however, was a different story. Chase wore a similar shirt April 22 with the additional message "Be Ashamed" and "Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned." Chase said his teacher, David LeMaster, told him he was in violation of the school's dress code and had to remove the T-shirt or be sent to the office. Chase said he refused to take off the shirt and compromise his beliefs that homosexuality is wrong.

I have to disagree with the idea that by recognizing the National Day of Silence the school was embracing homosexuality. The school was embracing the idea that harassment of homosexuals is wrong, much along the teachings of Leviticus 19:18.

[wheels]

after examining the article, i see that the student was not asked to remove the shirt on the day of silence. it was the day after. therefore, he was allowed (whether purposefully or accidentally) to display his beliefs during the same period that others were allowed to display theirs. i was incorrect in my previous post.

[el Gusano]

So, you think they can only express their embracement of homosexuality on one day?

[wheels]

Jun 1, 2009 14:32:23 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

So, you think they can only express their embracement of homosexuality on one day?

that's not what i said. if the school allows people to wear clothing w/ pro-gay messages, then they should allow others to wear clothing w/ the opposite view. however, i haven't read anything that would suggest that pro-gay students wore clothing stating their beliefs on that or any other day.

my opinion is allow it all or forbid it all.

[gridbug]

personally, i don't believe the school should allow either display.

I could not agree more. <- this statement is certified to be sarcasm-free

[sargonkiadi]

Jun 1, 2009 13:50:04 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

They're not a government entity, so it really doesn't matter what you think, other than to choose to eat there or not.

At school, however, if one side is permitted to wear a shirt calling pork an abomination, the other side must be permitted to declare that pork is primo. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to just one side.

But, in the arena of political speech, it's more important, which is one of the primary reasons for the 1st Amendment. The homos can make a political statement, so can a Christian.

The point here is that they choose when and where they make this "political statement" as you call it.

T-shirts with any kind of words, symbols, or negative connotations (for the most part) are banned from schools now for good reason.

[LimitedRecourse]

"The point here is that they choose when and where they make this "political statement" as you call it."


Aaaaaaaannnnnd.....ACTION!

[el Gusano]

Jun 1, 2009 15:34:25 GMT -5 @sargonkiadi said:

T-shirts with any kind of words, symbols, or negative connotations (for the most part) are banned from schools now for good reason.

Last I checked, it was still OK to wear Malcolm X shirts in many schools where a Confederate flag is prohibited. That could have changed. It's been a while since I lived anywhere that it mattered. But when I lived there, one was racist, the other was "diversity".

[sargonkiadi]

Jun 1, 2009 17:32:38 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

Jun 1, 2009 15:34:25 GMT -5 @sargonkiadi said:

T-shirts with any kind of words, symbols, or negative connotations (for the most part) are banned from schools now for good reason.

Last I checked, it was still OK to wear Malcolm X shirts in many schools where a Confederate flag is prohibited. That could have changed. It's been a while since I lived anywhere that it mattered. But when I lived there, one was racist, the other was "diversity".

I understand the situation you are describing. I lived in Dade county for six years where any anti-gay messages would probably be welcomed, especially with active KKK members who live on Sand Mountain. Regardless of what the majority believes, it is still wrong to allow such messages on t-shirts.

"Aaaanddd action" - Is this common behavior on all the forums you post?

[Tookie]

personally, i don't believe the school should allow either display.

Thank you.

[Conservator]

I agree... Shirts that display political, or social, or offensive material, etc... should not be allowed. The problem is, school officials let these rules slide alot and when it doesn't offend them, but when it does... all of a sudden the rule is implemented again. Sounds like the is exactly the case here.
On a side note - doesn't it seem as though most in education are liberal... I'd say 100% of public school teachers and principals are liberal.

[el Gusano]

You can't say 100% because I know 3 who are not.

But, if you look at polls and how they describe themselves, then it's about 90%.

[wheels]

Jun 2, 2009 23:29:54 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

You can't say 100% because I know 3 who are not.

But, if you look at polls and how they describe themselves, then it's about 90%.

i think there more than 10% of educators who are conservative.

[el Gusano]

Only if you count McCain's type as conservative.

[Conservator]

The 100% was a reference to Blackfox's assertion that 100% of Government officials are Christian in the "Home Bible studies soon to be banned" thread. Exaggerating...

But it is amazing how large a percentage it is...

[BlackFox]

The only 2 public school teachers I know are conservative. In fact, most of the people I know period are conservative.

By the way Conservator, I believe I actually wrote "almost 100%".

[Conservator]

My bad bf..didn't mean to mis-quote.

I went thru UTC's art department and they WERE 100% liberal. It's amazing I survived my time there! I was a fish out of water. So, it all depends where/what you've experienced...

[Justin Thyme]

I've always enjoyed it when I was the contrarian of the group.

[BlackFox]

Well, the art department, that's a different story. They don't call it Liberal Arts for nothing.

[Conservator]

Well said...

[LimitedRecourse]

"Well, the art department, that's a different story. They don't call it Liberal Arts for nothing."


And, they call a lot of "nothing" art. Go figure.

[el Gusano]

Steve and I are the two token conservatives out of 38 artists at our gallery. We constitute about 5%.

[wheels]

Jun 3, 2009 12:53:24 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

Only if you count McCain's type as conservative.

i know a lot of teachers, almost all of whom are conservatives.

now if you're talking about college professors, i'd be inclined to agree w/ you.