Illinois School RefusesTo Discipline Students Who Wear 'Straight Pride' T-Shirts

[terrya]

And this occurred during gay bullying prevention week. Anyone with contact information to this school, please post it. I'm ready to unload some serious fucking anger over this crap.


Three students at St. Charles North High School in suburban Chicago decided to wear "Straight Pride" T-shirts to school during the school's "ally week" on Monday. "Ally week" is meant to raise awareness about anti-gay bullying.

The St. Charles Republican reports:

Michael Fairbanks, president of the St. Charles East Gay-Straight Alliance, sent out an e-mail to the media last night saying a group of St. Charles North boys came to school yesterday with shirts that read “STRAIGHT PRIDE” on the front and “If a man lay with a male as those who lay with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination and shall surely be put to DEATH,” a Bible verse from Leviticus 20:13.

“Students were greatly offended,” Fairbanks said in the e-mail. “Fellow classmates are saying gay people should be put to death because they are gay. Who wouldn’t be offended?”

St. Charles Community Unit School District 303 spokesman Jim Blaney said once the building administrators became aware of the shirts, the three students wearing them were called into the deans’ office to discuss the matter. They were sent back to class and later were called back for a second discussion.

[AlabamaLibrul]

1. Tomorrow: "Illinois School Refuses To Discipline Studens Who Wear "White Power" T-Shirts" n/t

[David__77]

10. The proper analogy would be "white pride."

And, in fact, testing if this is the case would be an interesting provocation. There are strictly analogous.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

3. minus the Bible verse

the first year the GSA I advise dealt with the same issue the first year we had a Day of Silence. It was intimidating but I think, in the final analysis, it is a free speech issue. With the Bible verse it might well cross a line.

[howaboutme]

4. I'm for uniforms

Teenagers are usually shallow enough to believe that clothing makes the person. It is a major factor in bullying. The bullies pick on kids who are different and not as coolly dressed. I'd rather see schools go to uniforms, and save parents money and the perpetual court fights about freedom of speech and minimize the bullying that has clothing at its root.

[Ginto]

8. Uniforms would be a good idea.

Take away clothes as a way of establishing superiority.

[AlabamaLibrul]

12. Two points:

1) If they're uniforms as in, something specifically supplied by the school, it's usually at an exorbitant price that the poor kids can only buy one or two sets of. Ask me how I know.

2) If it's just a strict dress code, the rich kids always find a way to show that their white polo shirt was really $50 at the latest bullshit trend store, like the tiny alligator logo over the nipple. Ask me how I know.

Number one is how they do it in some schools in Mobile County, number two is county policy in Baldwin.

[Ginto]

14. Easy solution.

Use #1, but make them at a reasonable price. A couple of uniforms would replace all school clothes needed for the year.

[AlabamaLibrul]

16. I like that. The problem is getting the schools to agree to actually do that.

Mobile's not a rich town by any means.

The only reason I brought up the one or two sets thing, is that the poor kids around here (despite the RW belief that they're all welfare queens) are latchkey kids, and up to a certain age they can't really be expected to be able to wash and iron their stuff, so they wear a dirty uniform all week. Some of them wash it, but they still look like crap because who's going to let a six year old iron without any supervision?

[Ginto]

19. That's why I've always been a fan of federalizing the schools.

Would also make the curriculum comparable among states.

[gkhouston]

22. Or use #2 but ban logos, and enforce the ban. We've gotten a couple of flyers

this year saying they were going to be a bit stricter about enforcing the dress code. Didn't care, since I've been buying plain stuff anyway. My kid's not into logos.

Another point about making the uniforms/school clothes inexpensive enough that kids can afford more than 1-2 sets is that a lot of kids who live in apartment complexes have to pay by the load to wash clothes. Yes, I batch my stuff up into loads to be efficient, etc., but each and every load is obvious money to them. It matters. As I recall, I changed my color choices of underwear in grad school to balance out my laundry loads. :-)

[Gaedel]

36. Right

Navy Blue "Dickies" work slacks.

White dress shirt with long sleeves in winter and short sleeves in summer.

[David__77]

11. I disgree.

They should wear what they want. If you think that only teenagers are "shallow," that is so wrong. Quite the contrary, I find that older people are more cruel and unreflective.

[AlabamaLibrul]

20. I'll respectfully disagree with your disagreement.

Sure, older folks are more bitter, but you don't see 35 year olds in the news all the time killing themselves because of a real or perceived notion that they're gay.

Older people are more cruel, but those who find themselves subjected to it are (generally) more resilient about it because they've already made it through the hellhole that can be school during adolescence.

[BanzaiBonnie]

5. This is not a matter of being offended

This is about someone calling for the death of another person.

If this happened in a school, at the very least they should have made those students change their shirts.

Calling for the death of another person is not free speech.

[jancantor]

44. Legally speaking, it often is

Note that this doesn't call for the death of a specific person, but does advocate death for a class. Generally speaking, that's not legally impermissible in public. Granted, especially ex-post Bong Hits for Jesus, a school can be a bit more restrictive than the govt. can in cases of the public commons. But there is ample case law establishing that a "mere advocacy of violence" equals neither fighting words nor other prohibitable speech.

I am in agreeance that the bible quote MIGHT be censorable by the school, however the front of the shirt definitely is not assuming the school allows "message t-shirts"

A dress code that prohibited all message clothing would survive constitutional scrutiny, since it is content neutral.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

46. That is due to the threat, not the offense

Using a standard of causing offense is a slippery slope and I have seen it used as a weapon in several novel ways.

That bible quote=threat may or may not work, but its a better approach than "causes offense"

[jancantor]

50. I agree

My point was for the "general public" wearing such a quote on a t-shirt would not be fighting words, or any other example of prohibitable speech, even though it could be argued to advocate violence.

However, I am not certain as to whether the school could censor it. I think there's a good chance they could, especially ex-post Bong Hits for Jesus, whereas I am confident they couldn't censor the front of the shirt.

As another poster said, I am certain the school was a big gunshy considering the recent case where a school was slapped down (and monetarily liable) in a similar case. They probably did the discretion/valor thing and decided to let it go since it was apparently only going to be short lived.

[Prism]

6. Aw, St. Charles

I've always liked the place. It's a fairly pretty little island in rural Illinois. Suburban Chicago is stretching things a bit. It's way off in Kane County. Full of the affluent, though. Massive houses. But not really what I would've pegged as a right-wing Biblical stronghold. I know a lot of people there who are very liberal and open-minded.

Sad to learn what is going on there. I hope the citizens do something. I think I'll give my friends there a holler and let them know what their schools are getting up to. School board types worry when their voters get heated.

[madrchsod]

18. driving through there this afternoon....

these punks were probably living in one of those homes on the north side of town.

[johnnypneumatic]

7. that is a death threat, and terrorism

radical extremist religious terrorism

"straight pride" I couldn't care less, big deal...

although "straight" is offensive in itself, as it implies an opposite of "crooked" or "bent" or "less than straight"...it is like saying normal and abnormal
so I wish people would quit using it to refer to hetero people

also the "gay-straight" paradigm leaves out bisexuals, trans people, and everyone else

[Goblinmonger]

9. Absent the bible verse, I would have no problem with it.

Well, I wouldn't agree, but it would be a free speech issue. With the bible verse, I think there is very compelling interest for the school to stop it.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

37. This is the correct answer. -nt

[immoderate]

13. Some people have little to be proud of.

--imm

[madrchsod]

15. peer pressure will make sure these dumb fucks get the due.

[JackBeck]

17. Offended? That was a fucking death threat.

Should be expelled for threatening to kill other students.

[truebrit71]

21. Ah yes, more action from the cafeteria xians...i bet they all play football and eat seafood...

..also banned in leviticus, but conveniently overlooked..

[Raster]

24. ah yes, buffet christians...pick and chose what you want to follow

[jancantor]

45. How do you know they were Christians

Leviticus is not a text exclusive to Christianity, I hope you realize.

[gkhouston]

23. If I were the principal, I'd write "narrow mind" on every one of those shirts. n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

26. And you would personally buy them new ones

I understand the anger but that would be no solution. It could also be treated as multiple incidents of assault and vandalism.

[gkhouston]

38. Fair point. Sending them home for grossly inappropriate attire would make more sense.

Every school I ever attended had a clause like that in its rules and my daughter's school still does, so it can be done if the authorities have the will. Apparently, they didn't even care enough to make them reverse the shirts.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

43. The problem is second guessing by the courts

I have a serious hunch that this was also trolling for reason to sue the school. The 2001 precedent is well known though then the hoodie in question did not have the Leviticus verse on it.

The administration seems to have made a teachable moment out of it,and that is what education is all about.

[Goblinmonger]

27. They have the right to be narrow minded.

If that shirt shows up in my classroom, the student will be requested to turn the shirt inside out or cover up the death threat with duct tape I keep in my desk. I would not require them to cover up "Straight Pride" as I think that is a First Amendment right they get to keep.

[gkhouston]

39. They don't have the right to be disruptively so at school. I like your solutions

although in my day, they sent kids home for offensive t-shirts.

[Goblinmonger]

40. That gets problematic for a lot of reasons.

At our school at least, we give them the "inside-out" option. It covers the offense and doesn't make a huge issue out of it. If they would argue about it, I would send them to the office. I think "Straight Pride" is kind of dickish but I don't think it rises to the level of disruptive to the educational process (courts have agreed). The death threat, imho, is over the top.

My son even ran into that. He's a freshmen and likes to push the limit as well as likes funny tshirts. Unbeknownst to me, he decided to wear his "Guns don't kill people, people from Texas kill people" shirt to school. He made it through 6 of his 7 periods before his English teacher said he couldn't wear that again. My son would have been fine with turning it inside out.

[gkhouston]

42. Yeah, it's the quote that's over the top. The timing's a douche move, too. n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

47. Disruptive and causing offense are slippery slopes

and can be used as tools/weapons by students and parents.

It may be hard to get bible quote = threat past some, but its clearly a better approach.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

25. There has been a prior court decsions over this in 2001 and the school lost

It was not this school and the shirt did not have Leviticus verses. However, if this school were to try, given the published precedent, it would very likely lose and there would be financial penalties. As in other cases, Google is your friend.

http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/case.aspx?id=1691

The administrators made an ass out of themselves in the 2001 case rather than us it as a teachable moment. It appears that in this case they were smarter.

[dsc]

28. with all due respect the bible verse does make a difference here

I could see a gay kid taking that as a threat which schools have every right to ban.

[Goblinmonger]

30. "Take it as a threat"? I don't think there is any doubt.

The kid wearing the shirt may not be saying that he will be the one killing the gays, but it is a clear declaration that someone will/should.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. Indeed the 2001 case DID NOT have Leviticus quote, but a man and woman icons holding hands

but I understand the schools being wary of legal action. I also think that it may have been trolling for a reason to file against the district. The 2001 case is pretty well known.

It was great to see it used as a teachable moment. Now that's education at its finest.

[dsc]

41. it what manner?

I fail to see any teaching going on here. they got talked to.

[Goblinmonger]

29. The death threat on this shirt makes it different.

This is no different than a shirt that says "Gays must be killed." Just because it is a bible verse doesn't make it any different. "Straight Pride" can be worn; death threats can't.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

31. children of rich conservatives

Country club brats

[Lex]

33. Seems like to me that in high school, EVERY week was Straight Pride week.

I guess teh gayz shouldn't dare even have Ally week. The nerve of them. :eyes:

[KamaAina]

34. Aha! The Bible verse only mentions male homosexuality!

So I guess Jehovah is cool with lesbians. Maybe that's why He created the toaster oven! :sarcasm:

[ampad]

35. Called back for a second discussion?

Calling for the death of other students and all they get is a talking to? I thought that after Columbine went down that most schools would take death threats seriously. They should of been suspended. No excuse whatsoever.

[Initech]

48. The Bible verse definitely crosses the line.

I almost called the cops on some dipshit driving a pickup truck around a local shopping center that had graphic anti-abortion and anti-gay language and pictures on it. When shit like this happens it definitely crosses a line.

[StarsInHerHair]

49. Gays & allies should wear t-shirts with Judges 1:19 on it

&/or Matthew 5:5. All year. Plus the Leviticus (or whatever) verses that says "death penalty": for eating shrimp, for doing any kind of work on the Sabbath