Slog - Comments on No Bong Hits For Jesus and No Free Speech for Students

Comment by monkey

monkey — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:20:50 -0800

Except, you know, HE WASN'T ANYWHERE NEAR SCHOOOL OR ON SCHOOL TIME WHEN HE MADE AND HELD UP THE SIGN!!!

I don't see how they can dictate a students speech outside of school.

America scares me more and more every day.

Comment by Original Andrew

Original Andrew — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:31:25 -0800

Why does the Supreme Court hate us for our freedom?

Comment by elswinger

elswinger — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:32:18 -0800

It was on school time. The class was let out to watch the Olympic Torch relay, and the students were being supervised by faculty.

I think the ruling is bullshit, but lets get the facts straight.

Comment by It's Mark Mitchell

It's Mark Mitchell — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:36:54 -0800

So scary. And it's not a movie.

Comment by Phelix

Phelix — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:47:46 -0800

Damn... this doesn't hold much hope for the case right now with local students suing Everett School District for Free Speech violations.

Comment by Sam

Sam — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:48:27 -0800

Also he was directly across from the school. Just another fact.

Comment by Sam

Sam — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:53:38 -0800

Another interesting note: After the school district decided to appeal the lower court rulings where they lost, Ken Star, that intrepid special prosecutor who caught President Bill Clinton with his pants down and wrote a big ol' report about it, took up their case as a private practice attorney.

Comment by Phenics

Phenics — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:02:16 -0800

My reading on this is that the speech being limited is narrowly focused to "drug speech", assumedly �pro-illegal drugs/pro-drug abuse� and not some other �ask your doctor about up with Viagra or down with percodan� slang-slogan ... "bong hits for Jesus"=not ok speech. "(some-thin, some-thin) hits for Jesus", then maybe its ok, but that�s when the whole "not on school property vs. school running everything� argument kick's in. Sucks to be in High School, that�s for sure.

Comment by keshmeshi

keshmeshi — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:06:36 -0800

Does it interfere with a school's educational mission when a student disagrees with a teacher over intelligent design, popular interpretations of American history, and so on? What fucking bullshit.

Comment by elswinger

elswinger — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:15:41 -0800

Remember the good old days where pot was kinda sorta legal in Alaska?

Comment by torrentprime

torrentprime — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:39:54 -0800

I think the ruling is bullshit, but lets get the facts straight.
Shouldn't we then also get straight that the student hadn't gone to school yet that day (had a flat tire, I believe), drove himself straight to the event, and stood there on his own? So his connection to the school or even being a student is even more tenuous? (Someone check me if I'm wrong, but those details weaken the school's case even further)

And yes, this will bite down on the right almost immediately. Progressive/liberal-run schools will be able to use this ruling in a host of ways immediately: gay rights, abortion, intelligent design, stem cell research, etc.: Administrators will be able to lasso all sorts of ought-to-be-debated issues into an "educational mission" catch-all, and student's rights (including regressive/conservative students, yes) will be further trampled.

Comment by Garrett

Garrett — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:57:04 -0800

He thinks in terms of losers and winners. He will be a winner. He will take it all. So he sets out to do just that. He will eliminate all unprdictable factors. He will set up the American Non Dream.

This William Burroughs quote comes from a pretty nice book about the evolution of literature linked to drug usage.

Comment by giantladysquirrels

giantladysquirrels — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:14:56 -0800

keshmeshi @9, the court determined that "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" was not political or religious speech, and that the analysis would be different if it was.

Comment by Gabriel

Gabriel — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:15:17 -0800

I love that on the same day John Roberts said we need to err on the side of free speech regarding campaign ads, he also presided over a ruling against this student's free speech.

Comment by Josh Feit

Josh Feit — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:24:43 -0800

@14,

Totally.

Comment by Garrett

Garrett — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:43:57 -0800

Gabriel, I love your post just prior to the John Roberts story-- off the top of my head, I'd call the field Cultural Genetics. This sort of study has been around for some time and I get excited when it pops up in blogs or mainstream media, or are they one in the same now?

uh, this comment it relevent to me because... Wrong 'snips' for G-e-CA-s-T!

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:48:34 -0800

@1, @3 - actually, if you're a student at SPU or the UW, you are subject to the student code of conduct anywhere, including outside campus, and the UW police can bust you even in Wallingford or Fremont ... or Capitol Hill.

Not that they would, but just FYI.

Comment by Phelix

Phelix — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:11:56 -0800

@ 17 -

Currently, UW students aren't bound by the conduct code off campus. Yet.

Yes, the ASUW, in a less than brilliant move, approved extending the conduct code. But, the administration is only now working out how to apply the conduct code off campus. The UW's student conduct code, as laid out in the WACs, does not yet apply off campus. They'll need some legislative action to adjust the WACs and some new enforcement techniques and guidelines before it happens.

I don't know about SPU though.

Comment by Gomez

Gomez — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:15:45 -0800

17 & 18. If the continued boorish behavior of kids on the Ave and frat row is any indication, UW is clearly not enforcing the code off campus.

Comment by Phelix

Phelix — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:38:48 -0800

The UW shouldn't be enforcing the code off campus. If UW students are behaving in ways that are against the law, such as being drunk in public, underaged drinking in public, making a public disturbance, then the police should handle it.

Why should students have their school take them to task for behaving poorly off campus? It's a matter for the city to handle, not the school.

If you're out on the Ave, Gomez, drinking, being stupid, making a disturbance, should we call your employer and have them discipline you too? No. If you're that big of a problem, the police will sort you out.

Students at the UW, or any University, are adults and should be treated that way. If that means jail time, a criminal record, or convictions, then so be it. As students, we need to learn that the Real World applies to us, and our behavior in it has consequences in it.

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:33:59 -0800

All your rights are belong to us.

Thanks, King George!

Comment by Phelix

Phelix — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:43:04 -0800

*giggle* Thanks Will. :D