Students sent home for wearing American flag shirts

[fly boy]

I'm not saying that they were wrong. I'm responding to those that are making their motive the focus. If you read the rest of my post, you'll see that my point was not that motive was a problem. Sure, motive matters, but wait! Before you quote me, I also say that that is no grounds for them to be ordered to remove their shirts.

 

[Gray Hog]

Sure, motive matters, but wait! Before you quote me, I also say that that is no grounds for them to be ordered to remove their shirts.

I understand that we are on the same basic side of the issue, but I think this is still an important point to make.

I do not believe motive matters. Only the content of the speech and the circumstances matter. It doesn't matter what was in their heads; what matters is what others would reasonably perceive their message to be based upon the circumstances.

Regardless of their motivation, under the circumstances, I do not believe that their display of pro-American sentiment could reasonably be interpreted by anyone as provocative.

 

[vampsoul]

To offer another side, perhaps the students truly did NOT mean to offend anyone by wearing American flag t-shirts that day. Maybe they thought since they would not be celebrating cinco de mayo with their peers, they could celebrate their own country. You can only guess at these kids' motives, so you cannot punish them for a motive.

 

[Luigi59]

I'm certain that when the Russian kids wear their Hammer-n-Sickle shirts to the 4th of July school picnic it won't be provocative at all.

 

[NavIss58]

I'm pretty certain too Luigi, that's because their freedom of speech will be well guarded by the media. You see, the kids problem was that they represented the USA, there's no news in that. The news only came through the "potential" for the <insert homeland here>-Americans to become offended (assuming they are citizens of the United States of America). But we can't ask that question, they might get offended.

One doesn't really need to be offended anymore, just the possibility is enough now. And it is too bad the VP didn't see the 'teaching moment" in this.

 

[Chockstock]

None of that matters one bit.

You are absolutely correct that it was no accident that those students chose that day to show their pride in America. So what? Showing that pride is not disrespectful of those celebrating their own pride in their heritage. As I stated, being pro-something is not being necessarily anti-anything! Again, it is NOT antagonistic or inflammatory to say, "This is what I am proud of," regardless of the day you choose to say it or the audience to whom that statement was intended.

If I were to guess at the subtext of their statement of patriotic pride, I suppose it to be, "while you are celebrating your foreign heritage, we would like to remind you that you are doing so in America, which we are equally proud of (we sure hope you are too)." You can try to read your own statement of hate into their actions, but, like that vice principal, doing so says more about your own prejudices than any those students may have.

Your Independence Day analogy also is entirely wrong, not to mention moot. You are talking about an American national holiday being celebrated in America, not American's celebrating their holiday in a foreign land. We celebrated on the 4th of July every year that we lived in Germany. It would have been laughable to expect that Germans should be denied their right to display their national pride right back at us if they chose to do so...in fact, each year, several did. That display of their national pride on their part was not an affront to us as Americans; it was just them puffing up their own chests at the same time we were puffing up our own. Them [effectively] saying, "You American's are not the only ones who love your country" is not the same as them saying, "We hate you Americans; go home."

That being said, as I stated above, the point is entirely moot, anyway. Even if, as you described in your scenario, someone in America were to choose Independence Day of all days to show their pride in their foreign heritage, I would consider it an odd--even poor--choice, but it would still be every bit witin their rights (as stated in an amendment to that constitution I swore to uphold and defend a long time ago). I would wish that they were proud enough in their adopted country to join the rest of us in celebrating it, rather than choosing that particular day to show pride in their foreign heritage, but I would certainly NOT see anything about their display of pride as provocative. After all, their being pro-Mexican (or German or Sweedish or...) is not being anti-American.

Fine. But its true their intentions were in very bad taste and despite what you said, I still think their actions were provocative and meant to be provocative. Your logic is correct when you say that being pro-something doesn't make one anti-another but I don't think it applies here. The students were neither "pro-American" or "anti-Mexican." They were just trying to cause trouble and spite the other students in resentment of the holiday (they probably felt left out or something).

 

[Gray Hog]

Fine. But its true their intentions were in very bad taste and despite what you said, I still think their actions were provocative and meant to be provocative. ... The students were neither "pro-American" or "anti-Mexican." They were just trying to cause trouble and spite the other students in resentment of the holiday (they probably felt left out or something).

You seem to believe (like that vice principal) that you possess the ability to read people's minds. However, to those of us without your special ability there was nothing those students actually did or said before or since that would make it possible to conclude that they intended to provoke anyone.

In this case, because of the circumstances, there may have been reason for the administration to suspect that these students intended to do or say something provocative, and, if so, that suspicion would be reason to question them about their intentions and, perhaps, to warn them that there would be consequences if they were to say or do something provocative in the future, but the fact remains that, up to that point, they had not done anything, nor said anything, which was actually provocative in the slightest!

There may be reasons for someone in law enforcement to suspect that someone has ill-intentions (out very late at night, wearing dark clothes, luring in the shadows and acting in a suspicious manner, etc.). Under those circumstances, it would be appropriate for the police to stop and question those individuals to determine their reason for being there and their future intentions, and, perhaps, to warn them that they are being watched and that they will be arrested if they engage in criminal activity. However, that mere suspicion is not reason to arrest and convict someone. You can't just say, "I could just tell by lookin' at him that he was up to no good."

In this case, these boys were [effectively] arrested, convicted, and punished, merely because the school administrator suspected that they intended to do something (for, certainly, nothing they had said or done up to that point, including wearing pro-American clothing, was, itself, provocative).

It is a good thing for American citizens that few school administrators (and police) share in the special ability that you and that vice principal possess.

 

[fly boy]

Of course motive matters. These students should not be in trouble for wearing American flags. However, they should not do it with the motive of offending other students. And I am NOT saying that that was their motive. Not that other students should be offended, anyway. If they are, that's their problem. The reason any American should wear a flag representation is to celebrate their country, not to make others offended. But if others are offended, that's their problem.

 

[vampsoul]

Of course motive matters. These students should not be in trouble for wearing American flags. However, they should not do it with the motive of offending other students. And I am NOT saying that that was their motive. Not that other students should be offended, anyway. If they are, that's their problem. The reason any American should wear a flag representation is to celebrate their country, not to make others offended. But if others are offended, that's their problem.

I only meant that an administrator's guessed motive should not affect their disciplinary decisions. WHAT the students did is what matters when it comes to their punishment. WHAT did they do? They wore t-shirts that celebrated a different country than most of the school was celebrating. Could it have been mean to be insulting? Of course. But what the administrators did was more insulting.

 

[fly boy]

I agree.