Teacher burns a flag

[Rekna]

This Kentucky 7th grade teacher is teaching about free speech and decides that burning two flags during class is a good way to demonstrate it. However, some students and parents get upset about it and now he is forced to resign. The article states that burning the flag was not politically motivated and instead was just an illustration for the students. Obviously it is everyones right to be upset about this or upset about people being upset about this but the big question is did the teacher do anything wrong. I believe the teacher did a very risky thing but illustrated a great point and now his point is being driven home by people. Personally I think it was quite clever and he shouldn't be fired for it. However, I hope he burned them outside or at least had saftey equipment around to show that he wasn't placing the children and the school at risk.

Kentucky Teacher Reassigned After Burning Flags During Civics Lesson
Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Old Glory Still Stirs Passion, Shows Power to Unite as Well as Divide
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A middle school teacher in Louisville has been removed from the classroom after burning two American flags in class as part of a civics lesson.

Dan Holden, a seventh-grade social studies teacher at Stuart Middle School, burned two flags Friday as part of a lesson on freedom of speech, said Jefferson County schools spokeswoman Lauren Roberts said.

The students were asked to write an opinion paper on the flag burning, Roberts said.

Holden, a teacher in the school district since 1979, has been reassigned to non-instructional duties while the incident is under investigation.

Roberts said the flag burning did not appear to be politically motivated, based on an interview with Holden.

The district also alerted city fire officials.

"Certainly we're concerned about the safety aspect," Roberts said, along with "the judgment of using that type of demonstration in a class."

Pat Summers, whose daughter was in Holden's class, told The Courier-Journal of Louisville that more than 20 parents showed up at the school Monday, upset over the incident. Click here to read the Courier-Journal story.

(Story continues below)

ADVERTISEMENTS
Advertise Here

"She said, 'Our teacher burned a flag.' I'm like, 'What?"' Summers said.

Brent McKim, president of the Jefferson County Teachers Association, said Holden has "been teaching for many years, and has by all accounts a good teaching record. It was not a political statement and was meant to illustrate a controversial issue. To fire someone because of that would be inappropriate," he said. "It wasn't like he was taking one side or another."

An attempt to pass a constitutional amendment prohibiting flag burning failed in the U.S. Senate earlier this year.

Beth Wilson, director of Kentucky's American Civil Liberties Union, said the school district is allowed to decide what's instructionally appropriate.

But "if a school is masking their objections to flag burning under the guise of safety, it raises questions about freedom of speech and academic freedom," she said. She said the ACLU would monitor the case but is not involved at this point.

Stuart sixth-grader Kelsey Adwell, 11, said students were abuzz about the incident on Monday.

"They just can't believe that a teacher would do that — burn two American flags in front of the class," she said. "A teacher shouldn't do that, even though it was an example."

[Charlatan]

People really need to get a grip...

Interestingly, I am sure the lesson will never be forgotten...

[rockogre]

While I disagree with any disrespect of our flag, I do admire his sense of how dramatic a statment can be made in our country under this same flag without fear of government retribution. (You take your chances with the citizens!) I also like the fact that an opinon paper was required from each student. How many of you, in the US, had to think this much about our freedoms when we were in school? I know I didn't.

Some of us are very unhappy to see our flag burned, bordering on the violent sometimes, BUT, it is my right and your right, currently, to protest in this fashion.

If, as stated, this was not politically motivated, AND the flags were treated with respect, then it was a valuable lesson in freedom.

I'm sure that there are other countries that allow this, but in how many countries would this be an instant death sentence? I would rather see my flag burned than my country become the land of the oppressed and the home of the fearful.

And coming from me, that says a lot!

And screw the ACLU!

[Bill O'Rights]

"It wasn't like he was taking one side or another."

Seems to me...that by the act of burning the flag...he did take a side.

"They just can't believe that a teacher would do that — burn two American flags in front of the class," she said.

Seems to me...that if the teacher were merely trying to illustrate a point...then the burning of one flag would've been suffient.

And...exactly what point was he trying to illustrate? Sounds like he was more likely trying to incite, rather that to illustrate.

[rockogre]

Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights

Seems to me...that by burning the flag...he did take a side.


Seems to me...that if the teacher were merely trying to illustrate a point...then the burning one flag would've been suffient.

And...exactly what point was he trying to illustrate? Sounds like he was more likely trying to incite, rather that to illustrate.

I do agree that one flag would have been sufficent!

OH......MY......GOD! I've posted in the politics thread because I didn't look first. Guess we'll see how it goes.

[ShaniFaye]

is it just me or is this setting an example to the kids as just how people could give a crap about freedom of speech? I think the example these parents are setting is far worse than what he did


/oh god, did I just post in the politics forum?

[roachboy]

"I'm an absolutist when it comes to the First Amendment. Freedom is not for the thought you love, it's for the thought you hate."

larry flynt

[highthief]

I'm always amazed at how little freedom of expression Americans really have.

[Deltona Couple]

While I believe in freedom of speech, and freedom of expression are two of our contries greatest assets, I honestly feel upset that this teacher chose to actually burn our flag right there to prove a point. He could have easily taken footage photos from our history and showed those photos to the class. At a bare MINIMUM, considering that people may get offended by such a thing, he should have sent a letter home to the parents of his students, leting them know of his intentions. ALSO he should then have notified the schools administration, to ensure safety was considered. I mean hell, they send home a letter every time the school might show a movie clip or something of the sort that is PG-13 or greater, when my daughter is in school. I applaude his conviction to drive a point home, but disagree with his methods.

[newtx]

Teacher needs to be looking for a new job. Made a bad choice. We all get so many choices every day. Very hard to get them all right.

[ObieX]

Seems to me nothing bad was done here at all. As Charlatan said.. people need to get a grip.

[joshbaumgartner]

My tack might be slightly different than the whole freedom of speech debate. My main question is did this provide a good learning experience for the students? Did it teach them anything? Most importantly did it teach them the most important thing and that is to discuss, question, and delve deeper into the world around them?

From what little we know of the incident, it would seem that certainly this lesson has now been much more effectively demonstrated than some dry line out of a text book.

I know everyone is going to talk about the first amendment aspects of this case, but if we go back to the idea of judging a teacher on whether or not they effectively teach, I'd have to say I don't see why one should resign. However, if one is in a school that prizes political correctness over actually teaching the kids something, then maybe I would resign in that situation for that fact alone.

[Charlatan]

Nothing like ratcheting up the fear in the class room. This is reminescent of the teacher who was fired for speaking negatively about Bush.

Teachers already have a tough job. Teachers who are trying to be creative in the learning process, (seemingly) even moreso.

[Halx]

We can agree that people were overreacting, but I hope we can also agree that the teacher should have seen this coming a mile and a half away. You don't burn a flag in a position of authority without consequences, whether its written into law or not.

[Rekna]

Originally Posted by Bill O'Rights

Seems to me...that if the teacher were merely trying to illustrate a point...then the burning of one flag would've been suffient.

Unless of course he taught the class twice to two different classes as most jr high teachers do....

[Elphaba]

Ahhh, that makes sense Rekna. He has been teaching since 1979, and considered a good teacher, but the burning of two flags seemed excessive to me.

Reading the article, it states that he has not been fired nor has he resigned, but working in an admin function for now. Maybe things have changed since the above article, but it would seem a good middle ground until the dust settles.

Did anyone else get the impression that it was the kids that exaggerated the "burning of the flag" to their parents? I would cut the parents some slack, if they believed a teacher was bringing personal politics into the classroom.

I would applaud his means of engaging his students, except for one thing. The article doesn't state where he set fire to the flags, but if it was on school property he put the school's, or even the state's liability insurance in jeopardy. I would consider that very poor judgement on his part, given his years of experience.

My 2 cents

[highthief]

Originally Posted by joshbaumgartner

My tack might be slightly different than the whole freedom of speech debate. My main question is did this provide a good learning experience for the students? Did it teach them anything? Most importantly did it teach them the most important thing and that is to discuss, question, and delve deeper into the world around them?

Yup, it taught them don't rock the boat, don't form an opinion or certainly don't voice it if it is contrary to that of TPTB, and don't try and teach anyone anything.

I remain blown away that people take a civics lesson so seriously (seriously in a bad way, not seriously in a "wow, I fucking learned something valuable today").

[Willravel]

Its not the act of burning a flag, but the meaning of the act that SHOULD be taken into consideration. If the teacher meant to be anti-American, that's his right. If the teacher was trying to simply teach a lesson in freedom of speech, he actually taught them that fear and mob rule overrides the first amendment. As of right now, flag burning isn't illegal, and unless the teacher broke a rule the school has no right to punish him (espically under the guise of 'safety' what kind of idiots do they take us for?!).

[lindalove]

Meh, I don't know why he did it. It's easier to show a toiling mob burning flags and chanting on TV, and you don't have to worry about the consequences (and if he didn't think there would be consequences, he shouldn't be a teacher).

This is something I'd expect from a college professor, maybe a high school poli-sci teacher, not a seventh grade teacher. Shock tactics to evoke opinions of a seventh grader? Color me confounded.

[Ustwo]

The teacher was grandstanding and either looking for hype or incredibly unaware of the implications.

I think what many people fail to realize is that the freedom of speech is not the same as the freedom to be heard.

Flag burning for whatever reason has become the 'symbol' of free speech to some, but symbolically its no different from bible burning, racist speech or anything else which would get a teacher dismissed with far less press fan fair and could have been used to emphasize the same point.

Had the same teacher distributed white supremacist literature, and then told his class 'oh no I'm not a racist, I wanted to prove a point about free speech', how many of you would believe him or think he shouldn't be terminated?

Now is this guy some anti-American? I'd have to guess no, he sounds just like the typical liberal educator who thought he was being edgy and clever, and was most likely totally ignorant to the fact that some people honestly feel that flag burning is disrespectful and not appropriate, even as an object lesson. He might even be one of those 'cool' teachers we all liked in highschool, but he made a mistake unless this sort of hype was a plan, in which case he is just a tool.

The teachers free speech rights have not been violated. He can burn all the flags he wants at home, wear one as a diaper, and blow his nose with one. If the school board, picked by the people of the district, do not want him teaching such a lesson in their school they have every right to fire him. I'm sure he will be able to land a nice job in some more 'progressive' school district where the parents don't mind if their teachers burn flags, and feel it is not a disrespectful act.

[feelgood]

Originally Posted by Charlatan

Teachers already have a tough job. Teachers who are trying to be creative in the learning process, (seemingly) even moreso.

I can think of more creative ways to demostrate how fragile our freedom of speech is and burning flags is not one of them.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Flag burning for whatever reason has become the 'symbol' of free speech to some, but symbolically its no different from bible burning, racist speech or anything else which would get a teacher dismissed with far less press fan fair and could have been used to emphasize the same point.

Except that burning a flag isn't racist. It's not bigoted towards religon, either. It's not really that specific at all. Usually it's accompanied by a message, and that message is what people generally get up in arms about. Sometimes it's antiwar, sometimes it's anti black, sometimes it's anti america. This time it was nothing. It was a lesson in a social issue. So they are trying to fire a social studies teacher for teaching about social issues? In my mind, that makes them alarmist idiots. It's like firing a math teacher for teaching the OTHER pythagorean theorem (...you don't want to know..).

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Had the same teacher distributed white supremacist literature, and then told his class 'oh no I'm not a racist, I wanted to prove a point about free speech', how many of you would believe him or think he shouldn't be terminated?

I read Huck Finn when I was in school, and that was only like 6 years ago. That demonstrates LESSONS in racism. It's not racist itself, of course, but there are characters in the book that are racist. I also read The Scarlette Letter, which explained how apparently mobs rule, and justice and reason takes a back burner.

Originally Posted by Ustwo

The teachers free speech rights have not been violated. He can burn all the flags he wants at home, wear one as a diaper, and blow his nose with one. If the school board, picked by the people of the district, do not want him teaching such a lesson in their school they have every right to fire him. I'm sure he will be able to land a nice job in some more 'progressive' school district where the parents don't mind if their teachers burn flags, and feel it is not a disrespectful act.

If there are no rules about burning flags - and I suspect there are none based on the weak attempt to get him in trouble for fire safety - then they have no right to fire him. If they want to pass a NEW rule against flag burning, then let them. Because Ex Post Facto prohibited by Article I section 9 and 10 in the constitution, I think he'll be fine.

If I were him, I'd give one last lesson to the kids (the 'think for yourself' speech), then move to an area where people aren't completly stupid sheep.

[CSflim]

"America is a great country! We have constitutionally protected freedom of speech! Hell, I can even burn a flag if I want to. Watch...."

*burns flag*

"Oh my god! You can't do that! You're fired!"

"shit."

[Psycho Dad]

I don't see where burning the flag was a whizbang lesson plan. But I don't see where the teacher should have been canned for it either. It isn't like he was trying to teach sex-ed by screwing a hooker on a table in front of the classroom.

[magictoy]

Lesson Plan #1: Bring in a person in blackface (because a black person wouldn't participate), put a leash on him, and lead him around the room. The students will never forget this lesson on US history in regard to slaves.

Lesson Plan #2: Come dressed as Hitler, and deliver some of his more "emotion-evoking" rhetoric. None of the students will ever forget.

Smacks of bigotry? Of course. But if flag-burning is protected speech, so are the above.

Someone needs to get a grip, but it isn't the people protesting the grossly inappropriate behavior of the flag burner.

[host]

Originally Posted by magictoy

......Lesson Plan #2: Come dressed as Hitler, and deliver some of his more "emotion-evoking" rhetoric. None of the students will ever forget.

Smacks of bigotry? Of course. But if flag-burning is protected speech, so are the above.

Someone needs to get a grip, but it isn't the people protesting the grossly inappropriate behavior of the flag burner.

Now, you've done it.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Godwin's LaW -

.....As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.....

.....Corollaries and usage

There is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. This principle is itself frequently (though perhaps incorrectly) referred to as Godwin's Law.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by magictoy

Lesson Plan #1: Bring in a person in blackface (because a black person wouldn't participate), put a leash on him, and lead him around the room. The students will never forget this lesson on US history in regard to slaves.

Lesson Plan #2: Come dressed as Hitler, and deliver some of his more "emotion-evoking" rhetoric. None of the students will ever forget.

Smacks of bigotry? Of course. But if flag-burning is protected speech, so are the above.

Someone needs to get a grip, but it isn't the people protesting the grossly inappropriate behavior of the flag burner.

Someone didn't read my post:

Originally Posted by Willravel

Except that burning a flag isn't racist. It's not bigoted towards religon, either. It's not really that specific at all. Usually it's accompanied by a message, and that message is what people generally get up in arms about. Sometimes it's antiwar, sometimes it's anti black, sometimes it's anti america. This time it was nothing. It was a lesson in a social issue. So they are trying to fire a social studies teacher for teaching about social issues? In my mind, that makes them alarmist idiots. It's like firing a math teacher for teaching the OTHER pythagorean theorem (...you don't want to know..).

The act of burning a flag ISN'T RACIST - it's not bigoted at all-, and thus comparisons to racist behavior aren't apt. Godwin's aside, and that was a massive Godwin, your argument doesn't seem to take into account the real meaning of flag burning. I believe that this is the same problem plaguing the parents and students up in arms about this: they don't know what flag burning means. They see it happen in the Middle East via Fox News and assume they understand it.

I've burned a flag before. It wasn't racist. It wasn't supporting genocide. It was to represent my disgust of certian governmental actions. Race, gender and creed never entered the equasion.

[SirLance]

Try burning a flag in, say, Saudi Arabi. You'll get a REALLY SHORT haircut.

The kids did get a lesson here, didn't they? Who has the balls to stand up for the unpopular opinion? Certainly not their parents or teachers!

We are raising a generation of sheep, and we will reap what we so. Who will defend our freedom when there is no one willing to stand up for it?

[FoolThemAll]

Morally/ethically, I see nothing wrong with this (or any other) flag burning, but it was very tactically foolish.

Public or private school? If public, I say work to change who's in charge of the school - provided that we have better alternatives available. If private, boycott. I do think that the firing was unwarranted, but my radical views on employment lead me to say that the firing should be legally allowed anyway.

[rockogre]

Originally Posted by SirLance

Try burning a flag in, say, Saudi Arabi. You'll get a REALLY SHORT haircut.

The kids did get a lesson here, didn't they? Who has the balls to stand up for the unpopular opinion? Certainly not their parents or teachers!

We are raising a generation of sheep, and we will reap what we so. Who will defend our freedom when there is no one willing to stand up for it?

Amen brother!

I am amazed. This seems to be a quite civilized discussion so far! Not at all what I expected.

[magictoy]

Originally Posted by host

Now, you've done it.....

That was why I gave two examples. Did you have a response, or do you feel that mentioning "Godwin's Law" (which doesn't really apply here, anyway) suffices to end all discussion?

Of course, I suppose it IS possible to ignore the most significant event of the 20th century, but I choose not to.

Originally Posted by willravel

The act of burning a flag ISN'T RACIST - it's not bigoted at all-, and thus comparisons to racist behavior aren't apt. Godwin's aside, and that was a massive Godwin, your argument doesn't seem to take into account the real meaning of flag burning. I believe that this is the same problem plaguing the parents and students up in arms about this: they don't know what flag burning means. They see it happen in the Middle East via Fox News and assume they understand it.

I disagree on almost every point.

1. A bigot is defined as "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ." When a flag is burned, especially by a US citizen, not only does it reveal a shocking ignorance of those who died protecting the flag, but it is hugely offensive to those who have protected this country, or lost someone who was defending this country. (Except for hypocritical publicity seekers like Cindy Sheehan.)

I won't say that everyone has a right not to be offended, but in actuality that "right" seems to be creeping into law in every arena except for those who protect our right to free speech.

2. These ever-present cries of "Godwin! Godwin!" are, in my opinion, a very childish and fallacious response. Do you and host REALLY think Hitler should never be used as a historical figure from whose life we can learn?

3. I am still struggling to determine when bigotry became the ony form of intolerance and/or offensive behavior. It's fashionable to make bigotry the worst crime imaginable, but many consider treason (as in "giving aid and comfort to the enemy")to be worse.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by magictoy

That was why I gave two examples. Did you have a response, or do you feel that mentioning "Godwin's Law" (which doesn't really apply here, anyway) suffices to end all discussion?

If you don't think Godwin's Law doesn't apply to what you said, you need to reread what Godwin's Law means. You compared buring a flag to dressing like Hitler. "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Did your comparison involve Hitler? Yes.

Originally Posted by magictoy

Of course, I suppose it IS possible to ignore the most significant event of the 20th century, but I just feel a little funny about that.

The idea behind the Godwin's law is that beacuse WWII and the Nazi final solution were so horrific that comparing them to anything in a discussion disrespects holocaust survirors.

Originally Posted by magictoy

1. A bigot is defined as "One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ." When a flag is burned, especially by a US citizen, not only does it reveal a shocking ignorance of those who died protecting the flag, but it is hugely offensive to those who have protected this country, or lost someone who was defending this country. (Except for hypocritical publicity seekers like Cindy Sheehan.)

Okay.

Cindy Sheehan's son died. Unless your son died you have no right to tell her how to react to that. Cindy, like Hitler, has nothing to do with this discussion.

The teacher was burning the flag to show kids what some people believe. He was not, himself, meaning to disrespect people. And BTW, not all veterans are against flag burning, so you shouldn't be pretending like you're representing them. Also, burning a flag might not have anything to do with the military. You see, our flag can represent anything about our country. Someone can burn a US flag because of our social security system, or they can burn it because Bush can't give public speaches. It's not all about the armed forces.

Originally Posted by magictoy

2. These ever-present cries of "Godwin! Godwin!" are, in my opinion, a very childish and fallacious response. Do you and host REALLY think Hitler should never be used as a historical figure from whose life we can learn?

Hitler has a lot to teach us, but making comparisons to Hitler is still a Godwin. You can't change that. Also, what the heck does a teacher burning the US flag have to do with Hitler?

Originally Posted by magictoy

3. I am still struggling to determine when bigotry became the ony form of intolerance and/or offensive behavior. It's fashionable to make bigotry the worst crime imaginable, but many consider treason (as in "giving aid and comfort to the enemy")to be worse.

Bigotry isn't the worst crime imaginable in my mind, ignorance in a more general sense is a lot worse. But again, this is a simple case of a teacher using a burning flag to teach about those who burn flags. That is social studies. It's really that simple.

[magictoy]

Originally Posted by willravel

If you don't think Godwin's Law doesn't apply to what you said, you need to reread what Godwin's Law means. You compared buring a flag to dressing like Hitler. "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Did your comparison involve Hitler? Yes.


The idea behind the Godwin's law is that beacuse WWII and the Nazi final solution were so horrific that comparing them to anything in a discussion disrespects holocaust survirors.

Which is why your invocation of Godwin is inaccurate. Here is an example of a Godwin-esque statement:

Conservative: The Patriot Act has prevented a terrorist attack on American soil for the last 5 years.

Liberal: And Hitler made the trains run on time!!! (It was actually Mussolini, but you get the idea.)

Here is the type of statement that you confuse for a Godwin: "Hitler was a highly significant figure in the 20th century."

If you wish to continue to try to suppress any reference to Hitler, Nazis, or World War II, I suppose you are welcome to your philosophy, illogical as it may be. However, I will not avoid mentioning his name for fear that someone will type "Godwin! Godwin!" once their knee stops jerking.

Now let's reduce the argument to the subject matter.

Is it your position that teachers should be allowed to burn flags, but NOT to appear in class in blackface, or dressed as Hitler?

Either some things are too offensive occur in classrooms, or to paraphrase Orwell, "Some animals are more offensive than others."

So far, you appear to support taking selective offense. I think classrooms should not take political sides, and none of the above should occur there.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by magictoy

Which is why your invocation of Godwin is inaccurate. Here is an example of a Godwin-esque statement:

Conservative: The Patriot Act has prevented a terrorist attack on American soil for the last 5 years.

Liberal: And Hitler made the trains run on time!!! (It was actually Mussolini, but you get the idea.)

Here is the type of statement that you confuse for a Godwin: "Hitler was a highly significant figure in the 20th century."

If you wish to continue to try to suppress any reference to Hitler, Nazis, or World War II, I suppose you are welcome to your philosophy, illogical as it may be. However, I will not avoid mentioning his name for fear that someone will type "Godwin! Godwin!" once their knee stops jerking.

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Read that a few times, and soak it in. Did your comparison involve Hitler? Yes. You can banter all you want, but that fact doesn't change. Godwin is a much broader law than you suggest.

Also, you weren't talking about Hitler being a highly significant figure. You were comparing flag burning to dressing up like Hitler. Besides being rather silly, that is a Godwin, pure and simple. By trying to connect flag burning to Nazisim and Hitler (and you can't possibly deny that), you evoked the strong political and emotional feelings about WWII.

//end threadjack

Originally Posted by magictoy

Now let's reduce the argument to the subject matter.

Is it your position that teachers should be allowed to burn flags, but NOT to appear in class in blackface, or dressed as Hitler?

Actually, I think that any teacher willing to think outside the lesson plan should be commended. So long as it's clear that the teacher isn't racist while wearing the black face paint, and he or she isn't a Nazi when wearing a Hitler costume, and most importanty so long as it's clear that the teacher is trying to teach important lessons to these kids, I will be happy. How can we learn about our history - and thus ourselves, when we shield ourselves from the nasty stuff? I say that unorthodox teaching can be benificial to students, most of which are apathetic towards learning because of the nature of the public school program. If more teachers did stuff like this, I'd be willing to bet more students would pay attention.

Admittedly, it is the acquisition of attention through shock, but if all else has failed it is a good option.

Originally Posted by magictoy

Either some things are too offensive occur in classrooms, or to paraphrase Orwell, "Some animals are more offensive than others."

So far, you appear to support taking selective offense. I think classrooms should not take political sides, and none of the above should occur there.

I do not take offence to dressing up like Hitler, but I do know a Godwin when I see it. I recognize that just because I have no problem with either flag burning or dressing up like Hitler, the same may not be true of others. Connecting flag burning to Nazism and/or Hitler is extreeme, and that needed to be made clear.

[Psycho Dad]

Originally Posted by SirLance

Try burning a flag in, say, Saudi Arabi. You'll get a REALLY SHORT haircut.

The kids did get a lesson here, didn't they? Who has the balls to stand up for the unpopular opinion? Certainly not their parents or teachers!

We are raising a generation of sheep, and we will reap what we so. Who will defend our freedom when there is no one willing to stand up for it?

I agree to a degree... But did the teacher have to go to such dramatic lengths to teach that lesson? Couldn't the teacher have explained it without flaming one up?

And there needs to be a law concerning when people in a Internet BB or chat room begin arguing about Godwin's Law.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by Psycho Dad

...did the teacher have to go to such dramatic lengths to teach that lesson? Couldn't the teacher have explained it without flaming one up?

Do you remember your favorite teacher? Why was he or she your favorite? Was it because he or she was apathetic and boring? Was it becaue he or she followed along every state approved lesson plan and never thought outside of the box?

For me, it was always more fun to be taught by someone who loved teaching, and who loved inspiring his or her students.

Yes, in hindsight it was a mistake to burn the flag. Those students and parents are nuts and the teacher should have known his audience would react like that.

[roachboy]

i am taking a bit of time out from my busy schedule of torching little american flags to post here.

the burning of a flag was, in the louisville case above, clearly an act of political speech and should be protected as a function of the right to free speech the teacher allegedly has as a citizen.

it is kind of funny to read conservative folk above harmuph harmuph about this: it is funny because when it suits their political purposes, these same folk are all about protecting freedom of speech--to wit the christian coalition's argument that preachers can mix political statements with their weekly sermons because being a preacher does not mean giving up your rights as citizen to freedom of speech.

what's good for the goose, as they say...

i understand that elements of the extreme right (does that sound suitably trotskyite?) would have the american flag be a special type of signifier, one the usages of which are more tightly circumscribed than any other--this seems little more than a strange example of what i take to be a general conservative problem with irony, with distance. it makes em nervous. some signfiying relations have to be held in place, they say.

of course a flag is just sequences of color...some lateral, some vertical.
when made of fabric, these sequences burn pretty easily and sometimes make secondary color sequences as they go up in flames.

it doesnt--or shouldnt--matter that folk are offended.
as political speech, such actions are protected.

you might wonder what constitutes political speech--if i torch a flag while waiting for my omlette to arrive in a diner without saying anything about why i am doing it, then it might be argued that the act is just tasteless or bad: but if i were to do the same thing in a civics class, and were to present it as an example of political speech, then it is political speech.

on the other hand, those fine parents and administrators in louisville sure did provide the students in that class with a real lesson in the meaninglessness of the freedom of speech in america.

[Paq]

so, in short:
teacher burns a flag to illustrate a controversial issue...and succeded...

[Psycho Dad]

Originally Posted by willravel

For me, it was always more fun to be taught by someone who loved teaching, and who loved inspiring his or her students.

Me too. But Ms. Z never burned anything to my knowledge. Although I could smell cigarette smoke on her from time to time and I suspect she may have burned a doobie now and then.

[Willravel]

Originally Posted by Psycho Dad

Me too. But Ms. Z never burned anything to my knowledge. Although I could smell cigarette smoke on her from time to time and I suspect she may have burned a doobie now and then.

That is one ingredient in making a good teacher, but don't you think part of why she was a good teacher had a lot to do with her ability to teach outside of the box?


To me this is a case of a teacher being too good for a lot of his students. Mr. Holden was trying to reach his students on a viceral level. Raw social studies, if you will. That's damn rare. Most of my social studies teachers were quite boring. Instead of trying to learn (you know, that thing you do in school), the student tattled to their parents, who are even bigger ponces. The parents, thinking that they are always right and the devil liberals are trying to possess their children, complain to the school about something that they don't understand.


Sometimes I want to just stop. It's tempting to just let the conservatives win just so they can see what it's like to not have freedom anymore. Just so they can see what they're fighting for. Then I can get burned in a prison fire, don a Guy Fawks mask, and vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the voilently vicous and voracious violation of volition.