Bong Hits 4 Jesus

[Kuciwalker]

I don't think First Amendment law let's us discriminate based on the [perceived] sincerity of the speaker.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
So, this isn't some great moral crusade. It was a stunt calculated to tick the school off. There's nothing more meaningful here than a jack ass who got what was coming to him.

This was a calculated attempt to test the boundaries of his 1st amendment rights. And while the actual expression was retarded, it is important for all students since most students whose rights are violated for more substantive speech don't have the balls this guy does to challenge it all the way to the Supreme Court.

At the rally yesterday were two students from South Dakota who wore shirts that said "vote yes on prop 4" with a pot leaf design on the shirt. Prop 4 was a medical marijuana measure. That is absolutely protected political speech but they were made to take the shirts off and the school confiscated the shirts till the end of the day.

Those students complied with the unjust school officials and didn't fight it. So the bong hits guy is important for taking a stand. This stupid "bong hits 4 jesus" case will affect the rights of all students, especially those South Dakota students and others like them.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
If you don't feel they loose the right to discipline students who act up on field trips, why is it a gray area then?

I was collecting my thoughts. First I thought this was oustide of the school context. Then it was pointed out that it was a field trip (yay for skimming the OP!), but I'd already put it in a certain box in my head. I had to shift it over.

I basically agree with you now. The guy was being retarded. He picked a fight deliberately and whined when he got one.

That being said, he may be technically in the right. I do have to wonder what mummy and daddy think.

-Arrian

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Why are minors guaranteed full privledges of citizenship including 1st amendment rights? Its not as if their rights rights aren't already full of restrictions.

Compelled to school attendance
Restricted from purchasing fire arms, alcohol or tobacco
Deemed incapable of understanding the full gravity of the law and sentenced as minor for crimes
Compelled to foster custody by the state etc.

Screw the kid. He deserves a penalty kick to the nads from the principle. Especially the part where he goes after the principle personally liable for monetary damages. Talk about a chilling effect to school discipline and school administrators.

[Arrian]

He's 18, apparently, Ogie. Therefore, he's not a minor.

-Arrian

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Oh for the love of God. This isn't some crusade for civil rights. The guy was laying bait for the school admin and was suprised when they took it.

Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. The cause or rationale matters not.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Arrian
He's 18, apparently, Ogie. Therefore, he's not a minor.

-Arrian

Good expel him.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Arrian
That being said, he may be technically in the right. I do have to wonder what mummy and daddy think.

It's not a "technicality," it's the fundamental principle of the First Amendment.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Why are minors guaranteed full privledges of citizenship including 1st amendment rights? Its not as if their rights rights aren't already full of restrictions.

This is so ****ing stupid it's not worth answering. You're smarter than this, Ogie.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Hush. Other fishies.

[Kuciwalker]

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

It's not a "technicality," it's the fundamental principle of the First Amendment.

He was suspended from school, not arrested... doesn't that matter? Was he really denied free speech?

-Arrian

[Elok]

Originally posted by Odin
The student better win. According to the logic of the argument the school was using it would of been wrong back in the fifities for a student to support inter-racial dating because that was illegal back then.

Originally posted by MLK Jr in Bizarro World
I have a dream. I have a dream, brothers and sisters, that one day all of God's children, black and white alike, will get toasted in the name of their savior. I have a dream that those who endorse religion and those who endorse substance abuse will one day drink from the common cup of brotherhood. Let there be bong hits for Jesus on Stone Mountain of Georgia! Let there be bong hits for Jesus in Birmingham, Alabama! We shall overcome the uptightness of the Man and we shall rejoice, giving each other high-fives and tasting the sweet savor of victory. And oh, how sweet it will taste, like Mountain Dew. Wicked.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Arrian
He was suspended from school, not arrested... doesn't that matter?

No.

Was he really denied free speech?

Yes.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Nikolai
I see. Stupid of him. But the example of "fart" is a bit far off, if I had heard of a poor child being suspended for something so trivial as shouting "fart", I'd been in favour of suspending the teacher.

In my example it's not shouting "fart" that's important, it's continuing to do it despite knowing damn well that you are not supposed to. Schools have the power to regulate the conduct of students. The school wasn't keeping him from blathering about bong hits for Jesus to his stupid friends on his own time, just from holding up an obnoxious banner to embarrass the school during a public event. If it comes to that, he would also not be allowed to hold up such a banner during class while the teacher was lecturing, or to put a "bong hits for Jesus" editorial in the school paper.

I disagree that the sincerity of the speaker is irrelevant. A frivolous case is a frivolous case. If a man tried to sue the makers of Lays' potato chips after finding that he was, in fact, able to eat just one, he would not have a false advertising suit. If he tried to bring it before the judge, he would get his sorry butt thrown out of court, and hopefully fined for wasting its time. Same principle here.