|
|---|
|
|---|
Newshawk: chip Votes: 0 Pubdate: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 Source: Shelby Star, The (NC) Copyright: 2007 The Shelby Star Contact: Website: http://www.shelbystar.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1722 Bookmark: <http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Bong+Hits+4+Jesus>http://www.mapinc.org/topics/Bong+Hits+4+Jesus (Bong Hits 4 Jesus)
STUDENTS NOT GUARANTEED FREE SPEECH
THE ISSUE Does a student have freedom of speech? POINTS OF DEBATE The court upheld a principal's decision tosuspend a student because of a banner that seemed to promote drug use; The ruling strikes fear in those who've seen slippery slopes in action THE STAR'S VIEW Children have minds of their own; Parents mustteach them, not just tell them, something is bad and forbid them to talk about it All speech is free ... except when a school principal says it's not. That was part of what some free speech advocates took away from a U.S. Supreme Court ruling this week. Briefly, a high school student, Joseph Frederick, put up a banner one winter morning as the Olympic torch made its way through his home of Juneau, Alaska, en route to the Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. The banner's message: Bong Hits 4 Jesus. Frederick said his banner was a nonsensical message that he first saw on a snowboard. He intended it to proclaim his right to say anything at all. But the school principal, Deborah Morse, said to her mind the phrase promoted use of illegal drugs. Bad message. Frederick was suspended. Frederick denied that he was advocating for drug use and brought a federal civil rights lawsuit. The court agreed the young man's message was "cryptic" and split 5-4 in upholding the principal's actions. So now we have, in student settings at least, an exception to the First Amendment. A drug exception. Students, you can't talk about drugs. Think about them, but don't talk about them. Free speech is tricky. If you have it, it's great. If you don't it's totalitarianism. Free people can say wise things out loud. They can say dumb things out loud. A man can open his mouth and remove all doubt as to his sanity or reason. Or, he can open it and thrill the world with a speech about his dreams. That the court would rule on such a cryptic message, only to explain it as pro-drug, strikes fear in those of us who have seen slippery slopes in action. That the message also used the word "Jesus" is also a little unsettling. Did the use of Jesus make the message any different? No, the drug words, of course, were bong hit, slang for smoking drugs. So, the delivery system is the issue, no? If the sign was Tequila Shooters 4 Strippers, would the message ( if there is a message at all ) be more palatable? Can we shield our kids from drugs by removing words or thoughts from the language? Do we think that if we make them sit down and shut up now, we won't have to worry about them when they get older? Words are certainly interpretive. We understand them as we understand them. At least one justice, John Paul Stevens, understands the ruling "does serious violence to the First Amendment." The judge said the First Amendment protects student speech if the message itself neither violates a permissible rule nor expressly advocates conduct that is illegal and harmful to students. "This nonsense banner does neither," Stevens said. We agree. That's the way it is with freedom. It's not lost all at once, but a chip at a time, a slow erosion, a 5-4 split vote. We should protect our children, we should instruct them on the right ways to live and treat their neighbors. We should also teach them they have minds of their own and should query the universe, question the actions of government, learn as much as they can about the world. That the case sprang from a government school is all the more disturbing. We, parents and mentors, have to guide them in this journey, teaching them right from wrong -- not just telling them something is bad and not to talk or think about it. MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman | ||||||||||||||
|
|---|
|
|---|