student sent home for wearing distracting shirt to school

[thenammagazine]

What constitutes an abuse of free speech?

This incident isn't an example of freedom of speech being violated, but I'd love to hear which ideas qualify as exempt from protection under the First Amendment.

Easily answered, but I'm not gonna give a handout to the quoted. Let 'im squirm.

 

[CelticPredator]

Well, you can say whatever you want. But there will be a consequence if it demands for it.

 

[Eli26]

Sorry, I was joking. I should have made that more clear, and thought it would be when you look at my first post in this thread as well.
My point was that if this girl has the right of free speech to wear this shirt, then so does everyone else, which causes things to snowball out of control, and leads to racial slurs on shirts and maybe live sex demonstration in sexed class like in Monty Python's The meaning of Life. It's a very slippery slope.

Gotcha. Didn't read your other post. And my brain is frazzled... found out my dad who has terminal Cancer, also got into a car accident today. Lots on my plate... Heck, earlier today I confused 30 for 3D. D'em the breaks. When it rains. It pours.

 

[devilof76]

Watch the road Lori.

Easily answered, but I'm not gonna give a handout to the quoted. Let 'im squirm.

The obvious ones like inciting a riot or shouting fire in a crowded theater come to mind, but I don't think those are free speech issues either.

 

[thenammagazine]

Watch the road Lori.

The obvious ones like inciting a riot or shouting fire in a crowded theater come to mind, but I don't think those are free speech issues either.

Those, along with mentioning "bomb" on an airplane indirectly limit the freedoms of speech. But I don't see that as a bad thing in these cases. You're still given the freedom to say it, but are held accountable for the actions your words may cause.

 

[Eli26]

Watch the road Lori.



The obvious ones like inciting a riot or shouting fire in a crowded theater come to mind, but I don't think those are free speech issues either.

It is abuse of freedom of speech... and ESB is terrible... terrible. Battlefield Earth is glorious.

 

[thenammagazine]

It is abuse of freedom of speech... and ESB is terrible... terrible. Battlefield Earth is glorious.

Nova? Did you hack Eli's account?

 

[Eli26]

Nova? Did you hack Eli's account?

lol No, just teasing Michael.

 

[devilof76]

Calling Battlefield Earth better than ESB is an abuse of free speech.

Those, along with mentioning "bomb" on an airplane indirectly limit the freedoms of speech. But I don't see that as a bad thing in these cases. You're still given the freedom to say it, but are held accountable for the actions your words may cause.

Protection of speech is specifically a protection of the exchange of ideas. If your ideas make people angry and they engage in random acts of violence because you said it, you are not responsible for their actions, and you have the right to legal protection against them.

You are not free to say something if you will be legally punished after the fact, or if others will be exempt from prosecution if they opt to punish you outside of the law.

Conflating yelling "bomb" on a plane with expressing ideas leaves the door open to ideas being criminalized. The bomb cryer is not engaging in free speech. They are willfully enciting panic. Speech being the medium of expression doesn't qualify it for protection. It would be like saying I'm free to skin cats so long as it's on a ceremonial altar and I'm a card holding member of the Church of Satan.

This girl's actions fall under neither category. I assume she's just violating school rules.

 

[Blackthornone]

Gotcha. Didn't read your other post. And my brain is frazzled... found out my dad who has terminal Cancer, also got into a car accident today. Lots on my plate... Heck, earlier today I confused 30 for 3D. D'em the breaks. When it rains. It pours.

I am aware your dad has cancer. My condolences. I understand how stressful it can be.

 

[thenammagazine]

Calling Battlefield Earth better than ESB is an abuse of free speech.

Protection of speech is specifically a protection of the exchange of ideas. If your ideas make people angry and they engage in random acts of violence because you said it, you are not responsible for their actions, and you have the right to legal protection against them.

You are not free to say something if you will be legally punished after the fact, or if others will be exempt from prosecution if they opt to punish you outside of the law.

Conflating yelling "bomb" on a plane with expressing ideas leaves the door open to ideas being criminalized. The bomb cryer is not engaging in free speech. They are willfully enciting panic. Speech being the medium of expression doesn't qualify it for protection. It would be like saying I'm free to skin cats so long as it's on a ceremonial altar and I'm a card holding member of the Church of Satan.

This girl's actions fall under neither category. I assume she's just violating school rules.

Given it's uttered orally, it would qualify as speech. And again, you're free to say whatever you like. Nobody's stapling your mouth shut or severing your vocal chords. But the actions brought on by speech are another matter and have consequences.

And the Church of Satan doesn't sacrifice or skin cats.

 

[Project_A]

In before the lock.

 

[devilof76]

Given it's uttered orally, it would qualify as speech. And again, you're free to say whatever you like. Nobody's stapling your mouth shut or severing your vocal chords. But the actions brought on by speech are another matter and have consequences.

You're free to blaspheme in a theocracy. Of course, the consequences are entirely another matter.

See how that works?

 

[ShadowX81]

What constitutes an abuse of free speech?

This incident isn't an example of freedom of speech being violated, but I'd love to hear which ideas qualify as exempt from protection under the First Amendment.

Like I said in my last post, there is a huge difference between speech that is legally protected, and that which is appropriate.

She was asked to leave in the same way any other institution would ask someone to leave if they felt the person was being disruptive.

Also, according to Miller v. California, obscenity isn't necessarily protected speech in public. This could easily qualify as such.

 

[devilof76]

And like I asked in the post you quoted, what constitutes that difference?

 

[ShadowX81]

You won't get arrested, but that doesn't mean those in charge of the places where you choose to exercise that speech don't have the right to kick you out or others to criticise you for it.

 

[devilof76]

I agree. The First Amendment gives you protection against the government infringing on your freedom of speech; it doesn't empower you to speak as you choose in those places where you are not in control (i.e. private businesses or residences). Dave can tell us what things we can or can't say here. The government cannot.

What makes the t-shirt interesting is that a public school is public, and any authority curtailing speech in such a place derives their authority from the state. Problematic, but it makes more sense to treat it like a private institution (for the sake of avoiding arguments over how a government mandated curriculm constitutes endorsement of a particular set of ideas, and is, by its nature, inimical to freedom of speech).

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

Did you perhaps miss his point. I think thats what he was saying essentially.

eli has reading comprehension problems

 

[Eli26]

eli has reading comprehension problems

Nah, I just don't read all the posts in the thread... and 30 and 3D do look an awful a lot alike.

Poor eye sight and lots on my mind can make things quite difficult. Leave me alone!!! heh

Anyway, I'll just end with... IT WAS QUIGGLE'S FAULT!!! There...

 

[crows]

Would have been better if she got a tattoo of Krang in her stomach and wore a midriff showing t-shirt.