But “removing liberties” is what the school is doing. This is not the same as ignoring the person spouting the hatred, or even protesting against that hatred.
This implies that racist speech is somehow different from other non-mainstream speech. That’s incorrect. Racist hate speech is protected in the same way that speech for or against gay rights is protected, along with many other unpopular (by local standards) viewpoints.
2 Likes
This is untrue at a public school which has a government mandate to provide a safe and equal learning environment for all the students.
23 Likes
15 Likes
Then we disagree on the definition of liberties.
You can say anything you want. Anything. But I am not obligated to let you into my house after you have said it.
Also, I am fine with hate speech being illegal, similar to Germany.
You and I can disagree on this. I often disagree strongly with those that are my closest friends, and we still get along 
8 Likes
That’s begging the question in assuming only racist speech disrupts the safe and equal learning environment.
Racist speech isn’t the only speech that is disruptive. Racist speech is disruptive. Two axioms, one post.
8 Likes
I suspect the user is sending these messages from a Federal computer at an occupied wildlife refuge.
19 Likes
Nope, that is a perfectly valid example of a religiously bigoted statement of the kind you asked for.
1 Like
I’m flagging your comment as hate speech for your own good.
2 Likes
You don’t seem to understand how an argument works.
2 Likes
One day or twenty, it doesn’t really matter. There was nothing specific about the message on the shirts so your straw-man about targeting is pretty weak.
As to Morse, he in fact lost his case in the US Supreme Court (Morse v. Frederick, 2007). That same case can be used to support a high school punishing students for speech that the school administrators feel is disruptive. It’s a very blunt tool, and can be used against any unpopular message. The principal at Chesnee High School thought the “I’m a Lesbian” mesage on Ms. Popour’s t-shirt was disruptive, and thus she was punished using that same ability to punish unpopular speech.
3 Likes
These students will recieve a consequence for their actions, and that consequence is none of your business or mine. I don’t mean that so much rhetorically as legally. Ideally, a school administrator who knows these students and their audience will try to sort out circumstances and intent and make some disciplinary decisions. That person should not ask or inform the rest of us.
I work in a public school. For those of you who say actions like this must be always be dealt with strongly - I can’t and won’t excuse languague that is powerfuly demeaning to another person or group. But as a culture, we have created a small number of words that generate massive visceral reaction from other people, and at the same time we have given immature people instant, global media publishing. How can this current drama be surprising to anyone?
5 Likes
I am serious here: can you potentially reframe or rephrase your argument? I am not saying you are right, wrong, or anything. But what is the core message you are trying to say?
Only in the sense that ANY disruptive or unpopular speech can be punished in a high school environment.
Should I attempt to explain it to them?
- Yes
- No, obviously attempting to bait you into a conversation in order to pretend they have an excuse to continue being racist.
- Moar flags!
0 voters
3 Likes
Come on. This isnt ‘unpopular’ speech. It’s denigration of a sector of humans that have had a boot to their head for our nation’s history. We all know this.
This is hate speech–and I suspect they didn’t really mean it. But fucking hell, noone has to put up with someone who is accidentally hateful.
15 Likes
I admit I know nothing of what degrees of freedom people have in the public school system, so forgive me if this is an ignorant question. What sort of remediation exercise could be assigned to students in this type of situation? Could they be required to write a 5-page reflection paper on this episode?
4 Likes
There’s a difference between the State and an individual. Individuals are free to do what they want, and are not bound by the constitution. You can refuse to let anyone enter your house that you disagree with. On the other hand, the State is bound by the constitution.
I am arguing for procedural fairness (which most people seem to throw out the window the moment the hammer comes down on the outgroup).
The girls pulled off an undoubtedly racist stunt and shame on them (and on the broader culture they grew up in that made them think this is ok). But they most likely did not intend to bully anyone (the snapchat circumstance) or cause any specific harm. So I don’t think they should be institutionally punished for showing the world what a bunch of bigoted assholes they are. Anyone is free to judge them personally. But involving the school administration in this sets in my mind a bad precedent for its future involvement in other cases of acts deemed inflammatory, some of which would be vigorously defended by BB audience, because they would fall within the scope of their tribal allegiances.
5 Likes
