Page 1 of 3
Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:50 pm
by _asbestosman
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26316235/"I think a shirt that says 'I support gays' is very different from a shirt that says 'Gays are going to hell,'" said Benjamin Stevenson, an ACLU attorney. "One can be very disruptive for a child's self-esteem; the other supports other people and their ideas."
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:06 pm
by _Mad Viking
asbestosman wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26316235/
"I think a shirt that says 'I support gays' is very different from a shirt that says 'Gays are going to hell,'" said Benjamin Stevenson, an ACLU attorney. "One can be very disruptive for a child's self-esteem; the other supports other people and their ideas."
Seems like a double standard to me. Both statements could be disruptive to kids from different points of view.
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:17 pm
by _EAllusion
While I think both are and should be protected by the first amendment, I also think they are different kinds of expressions. One is an attack on a group of people, the other is affirming support of a group of people. Of course, through affirmation of support one might be implicitly disagreeing with other views, but it's not quite the same as just out and out attacking on a shirt. The equivalent of "I support gays" would be something like, "I support Southern Baptists." For a Mormon relevant analogy, look no further than comparing a shirt that says, "I support Mormons" with one that says, "Mormons are going to hell."
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:24 pm
by _Angus McAwesome
Chan ge the language and you can clearly see that one shirt is declaring supoort for something while the other is hate speach.
Ex. 1:
"I support Civil Rights."
"Niggers are going to hell."
Ex. 2:
"I support Israel."
"Jews are Christ Killing Kikes and are going to hell."
Pretty obvious which is hate speech. Under our current laws, hate speech is protected, but just because something is legal doesn't at all mean it is "right" or "good".
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:38 pm
by _The Nehor
Somewhere along the line someone decided that constitutional freedoms don't apply in compulsory attendance government-funded daycare institutions.
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:40 pm
by _EAllusion
This particular case brings up a difficult nuance in the law. First off, let me say what the principle did was not only illegal, but also extremely unethical. His behavior was even worse than what this article reports. In the judge's words, his behavior was deplorable. It was about as open and shut of a case there is.
With that out of the way, when it comes to school dress, students ought to retain the right to express themselves as they see fit as it isn't disruptive to the school's misson. The case law on this is complex, but the most important argument against a particular expression is that it is disruptive. This has led to principals eager to ban all manner of expressions calling anything they dislike disruptive. For instance, if you want to ban a students showing support of gays on their clothing, simply call it disruptive. That's one of the things this principal did. Unfortunately, simply calling something disruptive doesn't make it so and when you go to court you can't get away with just waving your disruptive wand. But there are mere expressions that will cause disruptions. Imagine a student wearing "Die Niggers" on a shirt to school. That's a massive fight waiting to happen and if it doesn't, it rachets up an atmosphere of hostility that will make it tougher for some students to learn. But those kind of disruptions are highly dependent on the cultural attitudes towards the expressions. In the right kind of environment a shirt saying, "I support gays" could incite people to act in a disruptive manner. Banning it just gives those offended and willing to threaten the educational mission of the school the power to censor with their threats. There's a very difficult to manage line here.
The ACLU's argument is standard interpretation of the law. What they are arguing isn't hypocritical; you just have to appreciate the argument. The idea is that a shirt that says, "Gays are going to hell" creates a hostile atmosophere for gays that might interfere with their ability to learn (for instance because it causes low self-esteem) at school whereas as a shirt that says, "I support gays" does not do the same for anyone. As I said above, I personally think both ought to be allowed, so I'm not buying the argument, but I also don't think there is a double standard here.
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:41 pm
by _asbestosman
How about a shirt that says, "I support pedobear"?
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:45 pm
by _The Nehor
EAllusion wrote:This particular case brings up a difficult nuance in the law. First off, let me say what the principle did was not only illegal, but also extremely unethical. His behavior was even worse than what this article reports. In the judge's words, his behavior was deplorable. It was about as open and shut of a case there is.
With that out of the way, when it comes to school dress, students ought to retain the right to express themselves as they see fit as it isn't disruptive to the school's misson. The case law on this is complex, but the most important argument against a particular expression is that it is disruptive. This has led to principals eager to ban all manner of expressions calling anything they dislike disruptive. For instance, if you want to ban a students showing support of gays on their clothing, simply call it disruptive. That's one of the things this principal did. Unfortunately, simply calling something disruptive doesn't make it so and when you go to court you can't get away with just waving your disruptive wand. But there are mere expressions that will cause disruptions. Imagine a student wearing "Die Niggers" on a shirt to school. That's a massive fight waiting to happen and if it doesn't, it rachets up an atmosphere of hostility that will make it tougher for some students to learn. But those kind of disruptions are highly dependent on the cultural attitudes towards the expressions. In the right kind of environment a shirt saying, "I support gays" could incite people to act in a disruptive manner. Banning it just gives those offended and willing to threaten the educational mission of the school the power to censor with their threats. There's a very difficult to manage line here.
The ACLU's argument is standard interpretation of the law. What they are arguing isn't hypocritical; you just have to appreciate the argument. The idea is that a shirt that says, "Gays are going to hell" creates a hostile atmosophere for gays that might interfere with their ability to learn (for instance because it causes low self-esteem) at school whereas as a shirt that says, "I support gays" does not do the same for anyone. As I said above, I personally think both ought to be allowed, so I'm not buying the argument, but I also don't think there is a double standard here.
Suppose you were in a school filled with violent homophobes though. Would that justify banning a shirt that says, "I support gays" if it would result in the wearer being attacked? It's the same concept as a "Die Niggers" shirt as it might incite violence.
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:49 pm
by _asbestosman
EAllusion wrote:The idea is that a shirt that says, "Gays are going to hell" creates a hostile atmosophere for gays that might interfere with their ability to learn (for instance because it causes low self-esteem) at school whereas as a shirt that says, "I support gays" does not do the same for anyone. As I said above, I personally think both ought to be allowed, so I'm not buying the argument, but I also don't think there is a double standard here.
I personally think both shirts are disruptive and neither should be at school. I think school should be more about the 3 r's than some kind of political battlefield (except, I'm all for politics on college campuses). In fact, I might consider school uniforms if it'd help cut down on the nonsense I see with dress.
Re: Homosexuality and freedom of speech--double standard?
Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:56 pm
by _asbestosman
asbestosman wrote:How about a shirt that says, "I support pedobear"?
Or a shirt that says, "murderers are going to hell"
Or one that says, "I support N. Korea's right to nukes"
Or one that says, "Nazis are going to hell"
Or one that says, "I support cyber-bullying."