Technically, the Supreme Court was probably right that the high school principal's action did not violate the First Amendment. A school, after all, is not Congress, which is prohibited under the First Amendment from abridging freedom of press and speech - as when Congress passes laws which fine broadcasters for "indecent" language. A school is not even a state or local government, which, under the Fourteenth Amendment, is not allowed to violate any amendments to the U. S. Constitution.
No, a school is not the government.
A school is a place where students are supposed to learn about the government - and about what it means to be an American - what it means to live and work in a society that tolerates differences of opinion and expression.
And this high school principal failed miserably in that job. By suspending Joseph Frederick from school for unfurling that banner, this guardian of education proclaimed to the world the devotion of that school to totalitarian values. To the traditions of Hitler and Stalin, not Jefferson and Madison.
So congratulations, Supreme Court, you've struck another blow not for but against fundamental American values.
Fortunately, we have an upcoming Presidential election. Of all the candidates, however, only one, Republican-Libertarian Ron Paul, has taken a no-compromise position throughout his political career of opposing government trampling of the First Amendment, such as Congress attempting to regulate media.
The Democrats, of course, have been critical of the current Supreme Court on many issues. But the Democratic candidates need to go further, and start speaking out every time the First Amendment is violated by government, and every time the principle of freedom is stifled by a small-minded principal.
I hope, in the next round of Presidential debates, all the candidates are asked how they feel about this Supreme Court decision. I'd like to see them unfurl a banner that says, BONG HITS FOR FREEDOM...
========================================
Digg
7 comments:
A consistent commitment to free speech means allowing students to unfurl whatever banners they want, opposing falg burning amendments, and all other kinds of unpopular activities. You're right, Ron Paul is the only conservative who consistently votes to maintain free speech.
Joel
http://ronpaul.typepad.com
Yes but ROn Paul can't win the election. I understand both sides on this issue. Let me ask you if the banner Had profanitys would that be under the same umbrella? Oh Paul started the Silk Code I have so many questions for you (hey like a very old student) but I want to get alittle futher in to it first
Thanks for the comments, Joel and Dawn.
Dawn, as a general guideline, I think schools should on focus on reducing violence (actions not words) and regulating behavior that interferes with learning in the classroom.
Suspending a student for unfurling a banner at an outdoor event is never a good idea.
Let's say the banner had profanity, or, even worse, hate speech (in this case, the words of course were neither). But a far better response to banners with hate speech would be to publicly denounce the students who unfurled the banner, start a discussion in the school community about why such speech is wrong, etc. Suspending the student gives the wrong lesson. Free speech is about allowing people, including students, to express unpopular, bizarre, and stupid opinions, as Joel says - and this includes insulting and outrageous opinions.
Glad you're into The Silk Code! Ask away....:)
You know I never felt suspending was really a punishment for a child. The parent suffers more. I do agree that a positive should have come out of it, what a waste for the children of the school. I have met some over the top excellent principal in my day and really sad (how did they ever get the job)ones. I was an active member of our schools. PA President for years, headed President Council in the district. I soured when the restructure of the BOE came and I was cheated out of a parent coordinator position after going thru interview processes and chosen as there #1 choice. The principal wanted his own crony and that is why the NYC school system is still in the state it is. My youngest 13 goes to private school and it is much easier on me and it stretches his mind. Sorry to go on just thought I'd let you know where I'm coming from.
The local school boards were lucky to have someone with your intelligence and sensitivity as a member (and the students, too).
I think the controversy at Wilton High in Connecticut over the play Voices in Conflict is an additional piece of evidence that administrators are taking their role as "guardians" of a certain set of arbitrary boundaries too far.
That's a great example, Matt - thanks for mentioning it. Here's a link with details ... Voices in Conflict
I'll be talking about that, and other prime examples of schools inculcating totalitarian values, on August 5 in Westport, CT - I'll be on a panel after a performance of Sedition, a play by David Wiltse, at the Westport County Playhouse. I'll post more details about this closer to the date.
Post a Comment