i'm curious to see if this report will show up in the u.s. media.
so much for freedom of speech. well, maybe we have freedom of speech still, as long as we say what they want, the way they want us to say it.
bastards. it's shit like this that makes me less patriotic. maybe it makes me more patriotic because someone needs to stand up against these oppressors.
"...That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,..."
maybe it's time to rethink where we are, how we got here, and where we go next.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Freedom of speech? More like conduct unbecoming a middle school teacher.
I'm sorry, let me repeat that.
MIDDLE. SCHOOL. TEACHER.
College professor is one thing. But isn't there a better way to teach MIDDLE SCHOOL KIDS how to express themselves than such an incendiary (no pun intended) method?
I hate like hell to see the flag burned, but passing a set of laws "aimed at boosting US patriotism" is much like the church banning jewelry, makeup and beer in an effort to boost spirituality.
Still...middle school? I think I'm with Zeke. This teacher had either an agenda, or really poor judgement...or both.
hopefully this will be a debate and not an argument:
we can have freedom of speech as long as we dont have an agenda or poor judgement? why does it matter that it was a middle school teacher?
is there a good reason that american kids get to grow up so much later than those elsewhere in the world?
Agreed. Who cares that it was a middle school teacher? Do middle school teachers have less freedom of speech?
I don't dispute the teacher's freedom to burn the flag. But freedom and wisdom are different issues. I am unaware of any law that would prevent the teacher from suggesting to 12-15 year olds that it's ok to burn the flag, but that doesn't make it wise to do so.
I don't see this as a free speech issue as much as a school policy issue. Clearly, there are behaviors that the law permits but which your local school system prohibits. Would you get upset if a teacher were suspended for polishing off two or three margaritas in the teachers' lounge during lunch? Perfectly legal, and doesn't put his blood alcohol above the limit.
I would fault the school for apparently acting on the matter based on one parent's complaint without a written policy (or some other precedent) in place.
actually, the state of kentucky has a misdemeanor law that covers this. so, to me, the whole state of kentucky is at fault (along with almost every other state, as it turns out), not just the school.
i wouldn't have a problem with a teacher having a couple of drinks at lunch (i know i probably contributed to some teachers wishing they could) but i don't have kids in school, so i think i'm outside that topic.
i'm still not certain how wisdom has anything to do with this, though. the kids probably see people on tv doing it, so why not at school? tv has a certain "buffer" quality to it.
i don't think i finished my thought in that last comment.
why not do this at school so that it can be discussed?
Yeah, on the drinking thing, talk to me about it again after you've handed your 7 year-old into the care of a state employee you've never met. heh.
So there's a misdemeanor law in place. If it's a bad law, the way to challenge it is just the way this teacher did. The next step is for the teacher to challenge the law in court. The law will either be upheld or struck down. For as often as the system fails, it works, too.
You lost me on the last paragraph, though. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. Kids see crime on TV, too, so why not at school?
(Didn't see your addendum.)
Why must it be demonstrated? Isn't it enough to discuss it?
good points. i'm not sure there is a definite answer to "isn't it enough to discuss it?"
the closest i can come to is a quote from Confucius:
"I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand"
and i might add that i have found out that washington has a simillar law. i have just written to the state legislators for my district. here's the text:
It has recently come to my attention that this state has in its laws what appears to be a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, specifically to the portion protecting the freedom of speech. I have referenced the url which links to the state law in question.
I believe that in the attempt of protecting the symbol, we have chosen to ignore that which the symbol represents
I would like to move to have this section removed from state law.
Thank you for your time
Reference:
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/flag/desecration.aspx
I think that was a good move. If your legislator hears from enough people, he might be motivated to act. Even if he doesn't, it's important that he knows what you think. But if you want to git 'er done for real, you have to challenge the law in court (which means get your ass arrested). I'll help with your bail (seriously).
Confucius sounds good on paper, but I'm not sure he adds up in this case. I don't need to see nor perform an abortion to know how I feel about it.
This is a good discussion. Thanks.
Anti-flag-burning laws are stupid. Freedom of expression must allow the most offensive ideas to be expressed! If you can only express inoffensive ideas, that's not freedom. So, yeah, write your legislators and see if you can overturn as many stupid laws of this sort as possible.
Anti-flag-burning polcies at a workplace (such as a school) aren't stupid, though. When you're on the clock in an institution, you're representing that institution. If that institution doesn't want to be associated with flag burning, they can require that employees not do it on paid time or institution grounds. Even if they don't have an explicitly stated policy, employees should know better than to do things of that nature without checking with a supervisor first.
When I'm on the clock at my current job, I don't make political or religious statements. My job is to teach kids about airplanes, flying, space, etc. and controversial speech would compromise my ability to teach, as well as the museum's standing as a neutral educational institution. When I'm off the clock, it doesn't matter, but as long as I'm representing the museum I have to represent them appropriately.
If a teacher does something, on the clock, that gets students or parents significantly riled up, the district has every right to suspend them while they determine appropriate action.
Okay, so to wrap this up from my perspective: it's not a question of freedom of speech. I think the teacher should have every right to burn the flag in a public demonstration provided he clean up after himself and not damage public property. But when he's on the job, in the classroom, teaching kids, he isn't free to say and do everything that he would be free to say and do in a demonstration. Like say "F**K THE POLICE" and such.
Is this really that complicated?
Really?
Post a Comment