Tux of Borg Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/n...cs/16952999.htm Student sues school over anti-gay T-shirt Associated Press CHICAGO - Two suburban Chicago students filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court claiming their high school violated one of the students' civil rights by not letting her wear an anti-gay T-shirt. Heidi Zamecnik, 17, of Naperville, and Alexander Nuxoll, 14, of Bolingbrook, are students at Neuqua Valley High School in Naperville. In response to a National Day of Silence event in April 2006, Zamecnik wore a shirt to school that read "MY DAY OF SILENCE, STRAIGHT ALLIANCE" on the front and "BE HAPPY, NOT GAY" on the back, according to the suit filed Wednesday. On the Day of Silence, students can refrain from speaking as an effort to highlight discrimination against homosexuals. According to the suit, one school administrator ordered Zamecnik to remove the T-shirt and another official ordered her to cross out "NOT GAY" with a marker. The suit alleges Zamecnik suffered unlawful discrimination and humiliation because school officials didn't agree with her viewpoint. Calls to the Indian Prairie School District and Neuqua Valley High School were not immediately returned Thursday morning. The Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative Christian litigation group, is representing Zamecnik. Gary McCaleb, senior counsel for the group, said the organization has filed at least eight similar lawsuits nationwide. McCaleb said the Alliance Defense Fund is trying to "enable Christian students to express a contrasting viewpoint on homosexuality." McCaleb said Zamecnik and her parents discussed the incident with school officials to work out an agreement allowing the teen to wear a similar T-shirt during next month's Day of Silence event. The suit said school officials declined the request. I remember when Bart Simpson t-shirts were banned from my school. It caused a bigger uproar than if they would have just let the kids wear the shirts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 how did they turn that word gay as in happy into gay as in sex (fag ) ???? who started it ???? when did it first happen ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 There are way too many bigots running around. They should take these two self-righteous brats and stick 'em in a cage with that guy from the other thread, the horse fugger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 how did they turn that word gay as in happy into gay as in sex (fag ) ???? who started it ???? when did it first happen ??? I don't know. But you can no longer have a gay old time, talk about the Gay '90's, or give a girl a nosegay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 There are way too many bigots running around. They should take these two self-righteous brats and stick 'em in a cage with that guy from the other thread, the horse fugger. This looks like a post for the "Annoy" thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 I don't know. But you can no longer have a gay old time, talk about the Gay '90's, or give a girl a nosegay. Or forget about naming your son 'Gaylord' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Or forget about naming your son 'Gaylord' So true... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 There are way too many bigots running around. They should take these two self-righteous brats and stick 'em in a cage with that guy from the other thread, the horse fugger. not that I agree with their message, but isn't it their right as an american citizen to Free Speech? If someone can wear something, or do something to show their proud to be gay, why can't they also have people express how they don't agree with gays? If Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson can do what they do for the Black community, why can't the whites have someone do the same without that person considered a racist/bigot? These days Free Speech is only given to minorities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 So true... seriously what could POSSIBLY be the motivation. on a related note, how do Brits still get away with calling cigarretes fags? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navy Chief Navy Pride Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 not that I agree with their message, but isn't it their right as an american citizen to Free Speech? If someone can wear something, or do something to show their proud to be gay, why can't they also have people express how they don't agree with gays? If Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson can do what they do for the Black community, why can't the whites have someone do the same without that person considered a racist/bigot? These days Free Speech is only given to minorities Unfortunatly you are 1000% correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 not that I agree with their message, but isn't it their right as an american citizen to Free Speech? If someone can wear something, or do something to show their proud to be gay, why can't they also have people express how they don't agree with gays? If Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson can do what they do for the Black community, why can't the whites have someone do the same without that person considered a racist/bigot? These days Free Speech is only given to minorities I believe sexual orientation is a federally protected category. So, no, you can't wear your anti-gay t-shirt to school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dib Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 If only stupid like this were all we had to worry about in society. BTW cant use fag (slang term for cigarette) or faggot ( a bundle of stick s for burning) anymore either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 I believe sexual orientation is a federally protected category. So, no, you can't wear your anti-gay t-shirt to school. what is sexual orientation and is that like going to school for orientation before classes begin ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketch Soland Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 They should be allowed to wear the t-shirts because it is freedom of expression, imo. It's also a good way to show the other kids that amazingly narrow minded brainwashing does exist, can be expressed, and can be debated intelligently by free-thinking people. It does not good to "ban" the shirts because that is only promoting those who wear them to become more incensed and staunch in their advocacy and they will focus all their energies on "fighting" and not discussion. Wearing the shirts promotes open discussion between all sides, which is the only way for people to learn about each other, no matter what positions they aspouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 They should be allowed to wear the t-shirts because it is freedom of expression, imo. It's also a good way to show the other kids that amazingly narrow minded brainwashing does exist, can be expressed, and can be debated intelligently by free-thinking people. It does not good to "ban" the shirts because that is only promoting those who wear them to become more incensed and staunch in their advocacy and they will focus all their energies on "fighting" and not discussion. Wearing the shirts promotes open discussion between all sides, which is the only way for people to learn about each other, no matter what positions they aspouse. if they let them wear that shirt , why not a fuc*k the fish shirt . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 They should be allowed to wear the t-shirts because it is freedom of expression, imo. It's also a good way to show the other kids that amazingly narrow minded brainwashing does exist, can be expressed, and can be debated intelligently by free-thinking people. It does not good to "ban" the shirts because that is only promoting those who wear them to become more incensed and staunch in their advocacy and they will focus all their energies on "fighting" and not discussion. Wearing the shirts promotes open discussion between all sides, which is the only way for people to learn about each other, no matter what positions they aspouse. agreed on principle but where do you draw the line? at the promotion or moment of violence? people who might fervently disagree with you would suggest that public expression of intolerence (lack of a better word) creates a hostile environment unlike your free thinking one...your response? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 agreed on principle but where do you draw the line? at the promotion or moment of violence? people who might fervently disagree with you would suggest that public expression of intolerence (lack of a better word) creates a hostile environment unlike your free thinking one...your response? Apparently we have a judicial system to weed out people who can't control themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 Apparently we have a judicial system to weed out people who can't control themselves. AFTER they've committed a crime. why not take steps to prevent the situation all together? too big brothery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjeff215 Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 not that I agree with their message, but isn't it their right as an american citizen to Free Speech? If someone can wear something, or do something to show their proud to be gay, why can't they also have people express how they don't agree with gays? If Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson can do what they do for the Black community, why can't the whites have someone do the same without that person considered a racist/bigot? These days Free Speech is only given to minorities http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free...ech/tinker.html http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...udentspeech.htm I agree 100% with those links. The gov't can't keep you from speaking out against {insert cause}, but your employer sure as hell can. Same situation in my opinion. "But it's a government school' you'll say.... try getting away with an anti-gay t-shirt as public defender, senate staffer, or even a snow-plow-driver-guy. It's not a question of keeping down dissent, it's striking a balance between allowing school children to express themselves and keeping the school itself driving forward with it's core mission of education (please leave out the indocterination replies). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 22, 2007 Share Posted March 22, 2007 http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free...ech/tinker.htmlhttp://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...udentspeech.htm I agree 100% with those links. The gov't can't keep you from speaking out against {insert cause}, but your employer sure as hell can. Same situation in my opinion. "But it's a government school' you'll say.... try getting away with an anti-gay t-shirt as public defender, senate staffer, or even a snow-plow-driver-guy. It's not a question of keeping down dissent, it's striking a balance between allowing school children to express themselves and keeping the school itself driving forward with it's core mission of education (please leave out the indocterination replies). who then is the student's employer? in this case it's the principal or other school officials, but they obviously don't't have the same liberal authority over a student's well being as the man signing his pay check. what then is the legal relationship between student and public school administrator? (I apolgize if that's explained in the link) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts