5th Grader Suspended For Anti-Obama Shirt

[romantico]

Posted: 9/23/08 at 11:50pm

Wait til you see the shirt in question. DISGUSTING!

AURORA (MyFOXColorado.com) - An 11-year-old in Aurora says his first amendment rights are being trampled after he was suspended for wearing a homemade shirt that reads "Obama is a terrorist's best friend."

The fifth grader at Aurora Frontier K-8 School wore it on a day when students were asked to wear red, white and blue to show their patriotism.

The boy's father Dann Dalton describes himself as a "proud conservative" who has taken part in some controversial anti-abortion protests. Dalton says the school made a major mistake by suspending his son for wearing the shirt.

"It's the public school system," Dalton says. "Let's be honest, it's full of liberal loons."

According the the boy's father, the school district told the student, Daxx Dalton, that he had the choice of changing his shirt, turning his shirt inside out or being suspended.

Daxx chose suspension.

(more)

http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=7490636&version=6&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

[TheHumanTorch]

Posted: 9/23/08 at 11:53pm

as much as i may disagree with the shirt... i really do struggle with punishment on the grounds of "inappropriate" messages

[romantico]

Posted: 9/23/08 at 11:57pm

A few years ago a kid was suspended for wearing a Bush shirt with Bush's face as a markman's target. Can't stand Bush, but even I found that offensive. Where do you draw the line? No, this was a homemade shirt meant to stir the pot. My guess is the father wanted the kid to get in trouble. There are plenty of anti Obama shirts out there he could have worn that would not have been as offensive. Just my opinion, but I think you have to draw a line. People can and will abuse this to the max.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:02am

"People can and will abuse this to the max."

Abuse what? The First Amendment?

What irks you the most was that the shirt was homemade and not a commercially sold one? Who cares?

The ACLU has to get on this and get the suspension revoked.

[romantico]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:14am

If I wore a shirt saying death to all jews or a shirt advocating hate speech would that be considered acceptable? Is crying fire in a crowded theatre violating one's free speech? Looking at the father and his history and extreme views do you really honestly think he did plan on his kid being suspended?

I think the ACLU will look into it,but I feel in this case the school did the right thing.

Whats to stop kids from wearing shirts that say "Kill All Fags?" Its their 1st amendment right and its not abuse or so you say.This is what I mean when I say abusing our rights and people taking it to the max.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:19am

How is a know-nothing shirt that says "Obama is a terrorist's best friend" at all equivalent? I am just having a hard time following your logic. That is not a death threat.

[romantico]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:22am

I am asking you where do you draw the line? I mean if this homemade shirt of Obama is OK whats wrong with the others? Calling an African American a terrorist in my opinion is a little racist and offensive.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:27am

Political speech is defended by the First Amendment. It's one of the guarantees of the US Constitution. It doesn't matter if the context is a father trying to stir up trouble. It doesn't matter.

I am also not interested in where "I would draw the line." It doesn't matter. It is illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater for a reason: people can die in a the rush of the ensuing panic. So that is where, legally, the line is drawn.

That shirt is stupid but not DISGUSTING in all caps. Suspension is not only uncalled for, it's most likely illegal.

[romantico]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:35am

I found the shirt DISGUSTING. In my opinion the school did the right thing. I find it racist to call him a friend of a terrorist. Are they implying Obama sounds like Osama? You have stated your opinion on the matter and I have done the same. I certainly hope the ACLU brings up the father's past and his motives. For all we know this could have been a scheme for the father to make some money. Who knows?

If people can die in a theatre if someone calls out the word fire then why can't I wear a t shirt with bomb making instructions or advocating death to someone? Can't someone die from that? I am playing devil's advocate but I am also not 100% certain, so I am asking.

I stand by what I said and feel the shirt is RACIST and DISGUSTING.

Updated On: 9/24/08 at 12:35 AM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:41am

You obviously have no grasp on what the ACLU does.

Nor do you seem to understand First Amendment Law.

No one can tell you you can't wear a t-shirt with bomb making instructions. No one can stop you from wearing a "Death to ..." t-shirt. And I hate to break it to you, but racist speech, abhorrent though it is, is also protected speech.

Saying you can't yell Fire in a crowded theater is not equivalent to those things. Charging up to someone and yelling "I am going to kill you" is. You can't do either of those things.

The First Amendment protects all of our rights to say what's on our minds, however stupid those minds might be. It doesn't exist to make sure people's feelings don't get hurt.

[romantico]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:48am

Um, I do 'have a grasp' on what the ACLU does.

Um, I do understand the first Amendment law.

I stand by what I said in my initial post. I do find the shirt RACIST and DISGUSTING.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:52am

Neither of those things is a punishable offense.

The ACLU will defend the kid's right to wear the shirt. Period.

What I think is disgusting is that the school would have a red, white and blue day so students can show "their patriotism." That would have been a pink and lavender day for me if they tried to tell me I had to show "my patriotism," but then, I was an edgy fifth grader.

[KrissySim]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:54am

FindingNamo, are you suggesting that slander, libel and defamation are protected by the First Amendment ?

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 12:59am

No but political opinion definitely is.

[KrissySim]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 1:11am

There may be those who would view the shirt as being malicious, because the bearer of the statement cannot show evidence of the statement being true. It could be argued that the statement is slanderous and not a political opinion. I will not try to second-guess what a court or the ACLU would say about it. Both organizations have their own process by which they arrive at their judgments and decisions.

[thetinymagic2]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 1:12am

Re: Hate speech.

A brief notation from WIKI (below). SKOKIE (1981, starring Danny Kaye), is an excellent film on this highly controversial subject. Being Jewish myself, I find the discussion a neverending "battle". However, I agree with Namo re legal issues. A touchy subject for sure, but that's how we live in the United States of America. Stupidity, yes, racism, yes, homophobia, yes...however sometimes you have to either slough it off, or fight to change it...

NSPA Controversy

In 1977 and 1978, Illinois Nazis of the National Socialist Party of America (derived from the American Nazi Party) attempted to demonstrate their political existence with a march in Skokie — at the City's north western border — far from their south side headquarters. Originally, the NSPA had planned a political rally in Marquette Park, in the south side of Chicago, to which the City reacted against, first, by requiring the NSPA post an onerous public-safety-insurance bond, then, by banning all political demonstrations in Marquette Park.

Seeking another free-speech political venue, the NSPA chose to march on Skokie. Given the many Holocaust survivors living in Skokie, the Village's Government thought the Nazi march would be politically provocative and socially disruptive, and refused the NSPA its permission. In the event, the American Civil Liberties Union interceded in behalf of the NSPA, in the case of the National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie, wherein an Illinois appeals court raised the injunction issued by a Cook County Circuit Court judge, ruling that the presence of the swastika, the Nazi emblem, would constitute deliberate provocation of the people of Skokie, however, the Court also ruled that Skokie's attorneys had failed to prove that either the Nazi uniform or their printed materials, alleged the Nazis intended to distribute, would incite violence. [5]

Moreover, because Chicago subsequently lifted its Marquette Park political demonstration ban, the NSPA ultimately held its rally in Chicago. In 1981, the attempted Illinois Nazi march on Skokie was dramatised in the television movie, Skokie.
Updated On: 9/24/08 at 01:12 AM

[KrissySim]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 1:23am

There is no question of inciting violence with the T-shirt. The question is whether the sentiment in the shirt is true or can it be regarded as being slanderous, libelous or malicious. Slander, libel and malice are not protected by the First Amendment.

But I will bow out of this discussion and defer to any attorneys who may be in this forum.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 2:58am

The school district said he was suspended for willful disobedience and defiance, not the shirt itself. He was asked to change or turn it inside out and refused. When I was in middle school, boys had to turn their Billabong t-shirts inside out because the shaky implication of marijuana use could be "distracting in a learning environment." The ACLU wasn't called in; they just turned their shirts inside out for the day and then stopped wearing them to school. They use same excuse of "distraction" when enforcing dress code and forbidding girls from wearing sleeveless shirts or skirts too far above the knee. The schools are within their rights to enforce the dress code as they see fit.

Why defend this one boy for his disobedience when the same conflict goes on in thousands of principal's offices every day? Were this not politically "edgy" (and his father wasn't a psycho-conservative relishing in the spotlight), no one would be up in arms about the civil rights of fifth graders in public schools and the only discussion this would warrant would be related to school uniforms.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 3:32am

Honestly, if he's not allowed to vote I don't really care about his political opinions. And I have to assume his being so young that he did not come to such a conclusion on his own. You've got to be carefully taught.

[Craww]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 3:47am

Maybe I'm too much of an aesthete, but my biggest problem with the shirt is how awful the design looks.

The father wants to make it a Loony Liberals issue, but I'm sure the school would have taken the same measures with a comparably offensive McCain shirt.

I mean, especially if it was as ugly as this one is.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 7:24am

Students have limited First Amendment rights ala the Tinker Standard, the Fraser Standard and the Hazelwood Standard.

The school was well within their right to request the student change clothing.

[JbaraFan1]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 7:36am

Note that according to the press release put out by the school, the boy's "sister wore a shirt with an anti-Obama message, which did not disrupt learning and no discipline was imposed in that case."


The school's press release on the matter

[Patronus]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 7:55am

Thank you for being the voice of reason Colleen.

Speaking about First Amendment rights in conjunction with a 5th grader who was obviously wearing a shirt that was designed to elicit a reaction - thus prohibiting the teacher's ability to do her job and educate the children is just silly.

I'm all for the First Amendment - but public school and pawning a shirt off your child to make your political argument isn't the place to exercise that right.

If it's a distraction in the class room, then it's a problem. The "message" is irrelevant.

[JbaraFan1]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 8:38am

The school was well within their right to request the student change clothing. - Colleen

If it's a distraction in the class room, then it's a problem. The "message" is irrelevant. - Patronus

Exactly, agreed on both counts. As the school press release states, that's exactly why the student was disciplined. This boy's shirt was designed to agitate and disrupt, period.

[best12bars]

Posted: 9/24/08 at 9:32am

There is nothing for the ALCU to get involved with here, because his civil rights weren't violated. It's a dress code thing. If you don't play by the school's rules you get disciplined.

He chose his own punishment.