Teen sues over Confederate flag prom dress
 

What do you think of this?

I'm amazed. Surely she has no case? I don't agree she should be allowed to wear it. And I think the fact that she was told beforehand, but decided to wear it anyway, goes against her chances.

Thoughts?


Mr Mephisto

I'm a strong supporter that the "confederate flag" really has less to do with slavery than states rights and southern pride...

But this is a case of being a jackass. She was told before hand, she knew the consiquences, and she did it and now is sueing. She had plenty of time to appeal it the right way.

I hope her case get's lynched. The school said no. She wore it anyway. This is cut and dry. 'Duty' should get on with her life and not try to extort the poor public school system.

Do people also think the school is right in this case?
This case led to a $30,000 settlement. I believe the confederate dress case will come out similarly.

I don't agree with either decision, but I don't see how there are really different. Both come down to freedom of speech/expression, and the current climate seems to favor no limits on either.

alan, it seems to me that she did have a case, as she was ridiculed in class. She was also held in detention.

With regards to the confederate flag story, the girl was warned beforehand not to wear it and she arrived with it on anyway.

Different circumstances in my opinion.


Mr Mephisto

She was warned beforehand, and if there's such a law in Greenup county, Kentucky that would keep her from wearing the dress, then her suit should be thrown out. I think the real crime here, though, is that she wore a confederate flag dress! Thats got to look tacky, she was probably arrested by the Greenup county sherrif's dept's fashion patrol, and rightly so. I don't have feelings on the confederate flag either way, except that it makes a really bad prom dress.

sorry, a little off topic...
is the confederate flag the one that was used in dukes of hazard?
just that someone on my street in edinburgh has the confederate flag in their window (red, with the blue and white stars diagonally striped across it) and i wondered what it was and why they might have it up?

I read this, with a picture of the dress, (which was not that bad as I thought it would be) and to be honest I do not see the problem of wearing such a dress. Unless, as is in this case, the wearer was warned beforehand and knew what she was getting into.

However I might be misstaken, but was the Confederate Flag just that. the flag of the states that no longer wanted to be a part of the USA? However since my American history is hazy (at best) I am not sure if it is a racist attribute by nature or by (later) association. Can anyone clarify that to a unknowing European?

She would of been better off to sue before the prom for the right to wear the dress. I don't think she has a case since the school told her she couldn't. She had plenty of time to look into this, she spent four years designing the dress.

The little lesbian had a case because no one warned her and the teacher laughed at her.

Just my opinion.

The only crime here was a crime against Fashion. That was one fugly dress.

This girl has no class or taste...didnt her momma raise her any better than that?

hell my mother wouldnt even let me wear those union jack shirts back when Def Leppard was making them popular.

Suing in this case is completely idiotic

She was an ass, but concerning the flag I don't see it as a sign of Racism (I'm asian, born in the south so I'm kinda a paradox I guess)

THe 7 stars represents the states of the confederacy and I appreciate that. THe only thing I didn't care for is the Georgia Flag which had the confederate flag introduced to it in the 50/60's to incite racist behavior.

The girl is an ass, that's my view point.

The flag commonly refered to as the confederate flag, was actually a battle flag that was used to identify Confederate troops on the battlefield.
http://members.aol.com/gopherswheels...e_flag_150.jpg
Tha actual Confederate flag looked to similar to the US flag, causing much confusion in the the early stages of the American Civil War.
http://www.dixiegeneral.com/921.gif

The war had less to do with slavery, at the time, as relatively few southerners actually owned slaves. Slaves were an expensive commodity. The war began over the issue of states sovereign rights, then evolved into an issue over slavery when President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclomation, freeing slaves only in those states in open rebellion to the US.(border states, loyal to neither, were left alone). This issue effectively kept England from formally recognizing the Confederate States as a nation, severely limiting their chances for winning the war. Which, of course, they did not.
The image of the confederate battle flag has since been adopted as a symbol used by various white supremacist groups, most notably the KKK, and the Aryan Nation. This fact, coupled with revisionist history of the Civil War, has turned a once proud symbol into a feared, and much maligned, emblom of hatred.
This has been your Bill O'Rights history lesson, for the day. By the way, I am a Civil War Re-enactor, and have portrayed soldiers, and officers, from both sides of the conflict. Hope this helps?

Oh, and by the way, the kid knew better. Kick her in the butt, and tell her to get on with her life.

Thanks, Bill. I've always loved Civil War history :icare:

Free speech applies to all political speech, not just the ones you support.

If a girl gets a judgement for a 'lesbian' t-shirt, then this one should get a judgement for a 'redneck' dress.

In that respect, it seems pretty black and white to me.

History lesson read and understood. Now certain pieces come togehter.

However makes this case in porticulair even stranger. Why was she not allowed beforehand to wear that dress? However she was duly warned and could have known this was coming.

As for the Barby is a Lesbian thing (besides being true, I mean she was with ken for such a long time. And never married? Sounds suspicious) I find that completly different. She was gay and was ridiculed for that and sent to detention for wearing a shirt (luckily Dutch schools are more relaxed otherwise I'd never been in any classes due to my "casual" atire). Furthermore she was not warned in advance.

In the Netherlands only the dress would/could be an isue and probably be settled out of court, or she probably could have worn the dress with nor probs.

Because, as I stated earlier, that particular emblem has been adopted by by groups espousing racism and hate. It is a heated topic between historians, preservationists, heritage organizations and civil rights groups. It's an issue that's bound not to be resolved anytime soon.

Oh, and thanks Averett. I bet you'd looking fetching in a hoop skirt. ;)

The confederate battle flag actually belonged to the confederate navy, about halfway through the war it was so popular it was adapted from the square form into a rectangle for land battles.

It was adoped by racist groups and suddenly instead of a proud symbol it became to many a symbol of hate and ignorance.

Well the KKK has adopted the goddamn cross as well, so the next time I see a cross in a church window or around someones neck, I'm gonna beat the shit out of their racist ass......please.

-fibber

apparrently it is well understood here that the flag is not intended to be racist and that wasn't what the war was really over. (it wasn't a war over race untill the emancipation proclimation. it was more over the tarif that helped manufacturers in the north but hurt southern exports.) it is unfortunate however that a large percantage that display this flag atleast in my experince show for racist reasons that they believe it shows

To those who perceive themselves to be victims of the philosophy and
deeds practiced by the institutions that a flag, over time, is generally known to represent, the associated flag becomes an offensive symbol. If the pool of
victims is large enough to wield political or economic clout, and the flag
is the symbol of an entity that ends up on the losing side of a military conflict, the losing side often loses it's ability to openly display it's "colors".

In the historical acounts of naval engagements, an easy example is the
practice of commanders of defeated ships lowering their flag to signal their
submission and surrender to superior forces.

The Confederacy surrendered to the Union almost 140 years ago. Will it be
acceptable some day for another flag of a losing side, a 1940's German SS
unit, to be flown on a staff or sewn into a dress pattern and publically worn
at a school sponsered function?

You may not find the confederate battle flag to be a particularly offensive
symbol, but I believe that since it is nearly universally associated with an
institution that was financed by slave holders and embraced the legal right
of wealthy caucasian planters to own and trade non-caucasian, enslaved
humans in large numbers, it is offensive and profane. The institution that it
represented also perpetrated an armed insurrection against the United States. The insurrection was put down and it's military forces eliminated,
only after a huge cost in lives and in property to both sides.

If you believe that the girl with a dress patterned after the flag of a militarily defeated, repressive regime, guilty of the practice of a widespread crime
against humanity; in this case, slavery, and of armed rebellion, has a grievance that should be granted relief in civil court, can you offer a similar
argument in support of wearing a prom dress patterned after the SS flag ?

<center><center><img src="http://me.to/ssdanzig.jpg">

Nevermind...

She has a case because as someone stated, the flag does not just stand for slavery. It stands for the south, as the states them selves how they were united. If she wore and iraqui flag dress before 911 no one would have cared, but if she wore one after 911 what would have happened?

Just because her dress was a flag does not mean anything when it comes to how she feels twards black people she is just proud of her states

Um.. you know Iraq wasn't involved with 9/11, right?


On topic:
Should she legally be allowed to wear this dress? I would think so.
Does the school have the option to disallow it? I would think this is a local issue (school boards, pta, and such).
Is that dress ugly? Yes
Is she trying to be an attention whore? Most likely.
Why am I still typing and being involved? I have no life.

Merry Holidays!
:icare:

To those who claim the Confederate battle flag (thank, BOR) is a symbol of Southern pride, not of racism, I offer you the swastika, which was, among other things, a Buddhist religious symbol before the Nazis adopted it. Southerners, find another way to celebrate your pride in your birthplace, because racist jackholes have ruined that one.

This girl was told not to wear her dress. Rather than take the issue to court before the prom, she decided to just go ahead and break the rule. No luck, no money, please take your nuisance lawsuit and go away. Also, her attorney is named Earl-Ray.

She should have questioned why she was prohibited to wear the dress when she was first told not to. Then taken legal action upon that, instead of disreguarding their word, and suffering the consequences. If she had taken legal action when told not ot wear it, she wouldn't be having problems, and probably would have been allowed to wear the dress.

With the lesbian story... why the hell would a teacher make her take rainbow colored beads out of her hair?!? Thats absolutely ludicrous, and blatantly showing thier bias against homosexuals. Those teachers should be fired.

If it is a public school, then she should be allowed to wear that dress. Freedome of speech is a funny thing. Even people with unpopular opinions get to enjoy that freedom.

I hope the money she will recieve doesn't cost the teachers, but rather the administration, any future raises.

Schools should be allowed to dictate whatever dress codes they want. They told her not to wear it, she did anyway. She knew beforehand it wasn't cool to do. The school would be expected to not allow her into the prom if her dress was covered with racial slurs, that's not violating her free speach. It's common sense. School prom = school policy, deal with it people. She'd only have a case if she was told beforehand it'd be ok and they changed their mind at the door.

Host,

Given the same set of circumstances, I would indeed support such a dress.

You've made a bad assumption, e.g. that I don't find the stars and bars offensive, when in reality I do. I think that it has become inextricably linked to racism, even as the swastika has.

I also think that I need to say that I think that schools need to be allowed to set dress codes and that children should be censored in some ways that adults are not. What I see in the offered comparative case is hypocrisy, that a school cannot censor a child for wearing a homosexual related t-shirt, but that they can for wearing a confederate dress.

IMO, neither should be allowed if they become a disruption or both should be allowed. (I would actually institute manditory dress codes banning t-shirts, but that is another thread.)

I disagree with you, as do many Civil War historians.

A lot of (revisionist?) historians seem to like arguing this point, as I guess they don't like the taste of defending slavery. But the fact remains that slavery was fundamental to the outbreak of the war. The Southern States warned that they would secede if Lincoln was elected or inaugurated, due expressly to his anti-slavery position.

Yes they were. As were plantations and large houses and horse carriages and holiday homes etc. The point is that the monied classes, those in positions of power, had slaves. And because of the invention of the cotton gin and the emergence of cotton plantations, they had most to lose.

The fact that most Southerners had no slaves has no relevance at all, as most Southerners had no real power or influence over Southern politics.

The right to hold slaves, the right to extend slavery to new states, the right to have escaped slaves returned etc etc.

To say that slavery only became an issue after the Emancipation Proclamation is, at best, wrong and at worst, disengenous. It was an issue over 40 years BEFORE the war even started.

Absolutely correct. And there was a very real danger that this would have happened. The only thing that stopped Great Britian (the world super-power of the time) from recognizing the Confederacy was the repugnance of slavery. Had the Confederates themselves considered some kind of emancipation (as recommended by several of their own politicans and generals) would have swung it towards their favour. But the fact they did not (another example of how slavery, and not State's rights were foremost in Confederate minds) coupled with the North's Emancipation Proclamation effectively sealed their fate. Britian now withheld recognition from the South, despite the Trent Affair, despite the damage to their cloth-making industry, despite the cotton embargo.. Once the North "freed the slaves" (even if it was only a first step), Britian had no choice.

Well, to be perfectly honest, it was the battle flag of a confederation of States, who seceded to protect slavery. It has been used ever since by racist extremists. And, as far as I remember, it's actually illegal to fly on State buildings in many countries.

In another thread I used the phrase "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck." The fact remains that the flag represents racist extremism to the vast majority of people. You may find that lamentable, but it's a fact.

The swastika (or tetraskelion) is actually a spiritual symbol and is quite important in Hindu and Budhist religions, amongst others. But most of the world relate it to Nazism. Same issue here.

And a rather revisionist one at that. :)

I'm an armchair Civil War historian (ie, I love the subject and buy and read far too many book on the subject). Interesting subject.

Agreed! :-)



Mr Mephisto

Public schools can not, and should not, dictate what you should wear. Especially at paid functions.

Wrong. She wouldn't be allowed into the prom/class naked, now would she? Same with clothing that is offensive. Same with gang related clothing. She was told before hand it wasn't ok to wear - she's either completely stupid or vying for attention. Possibly both. Either way she's in the wrong.

The dress in question was a poltical flag. Are you saying that certain poltical flags and or statements are not permited in public settings? If so, which flags are not permitted?

I don't see how my post was unclear, but here goes nothing (again)
 

I'm not saying "certain political flags or statements" are not permitted in public. Reading my post reveals this.

I'm saying she was told her dress wasn't appropriate, then she went ahead and wore it anyway. Of course they wouldn't let her in. This is not a free speech issue, this is about her doing what the school told her not to do at a school function and her being upset about the results. Duh.

just about schools and dress codes here...most public schools with which i am familiar have some form of dress code normally involving phrases such as, 'nothing offensive, nothing obscene, nothing too short/showing a great deal of skin' etc.

now, what i am wondering is how the school officials knew the girl was planning to wear a confederate flag dress. next up, i don't think they should have told her 'not' to wear it as that opens the door for her to do exactly what she did..wear it against the rules, get large scale media attention, and make a statement......i have also never heard of a school dress code that prohibits political flags...then again, i do remember my highschool barring the confederate flag in question here from being larger than a patch on a tshirt. That was definitely a strange rule, but the school was close to 50/50 white/black.

about lincoln's slavery position: when lincoln and co walked into richmond, the only LEGAL slaves in the state belonged to his wife...

I don't think wearing the Confederate battle flag to the prom is good taste, but I think she should have been allowed to wear it if she wanted to. If she was told in advance that should wouldn't be allowed in with her crazy dress then she should have contested it before she got there, of course.

C'mon, if she wants to make a fool of herself with a racist symbol then let her. People need to grow some thicker skin. If we censor everything that could possibly offend anyone we are going to find ourselves in a very bland, boring country.

she was warned...that's all I gotta say. She knew the school would stop her and then instead of fighting then...decides to sue after she wears it....I say she is crying for attention.

second. That dress is FUGLY.....why someone would wear it I dunno

third. The flag has been adopted by various white supremicist groups and thus has become a racist symbol to an extent...Although I will admit not as much as the swastika...


just like the swastika
just like the Spanish holy week celebration costumes (look exactly like KKK garb)

(what sets apart the KKK cross is the whole burning thing..)

I'm not saying these things should be banned...actually as long as they just speak their bull and go home I have nothing wrong with them them spewing anti-whatever crap....as long as I'm on the other side of the street..

The problem with saying she was warned is that that doesn't allow for a legal challenge. It isn't until a (potentially) unfair law is enforced that it can be challenged. If she didn't wear the dress, there could be no legal recourse.

And I think Lebell said it best earlier, there is no real difference between the cases. Everyone said that the teacher insulted the lesbian girl, but nobody mentioned that the principal hit the vehicle of the girl who was wearing the prom dress. If one is allowed, both should be. Personally, I think neither should be allowed, and that schools should have mroe rights in restricting what students can wear (and do), but that's not the issue. The issue is if the girl wanting to wear a confederate flag has a case, and I think based on the earlier settlement she probably does.

Lebell, I assumed that you were taking a stance that I fully support; "I may
not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to my death, your right to say
it." I did not intend to infer that you, personally, held a bias in favor of the
stars and bars flag.

This issue is about freedom of expression. I argued that there is a defense for
a school's administration setting limits to the manner of student dress and
conduct on school property and at school sponsored events.

I don't think that an adult wearing any flag or symbol in public, no matter
how offensive I personally find the flag or symbol to be, rises to the level of yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater. Since I am resistant to cede judgment of what is or isn't offensive, to any regulatory body, I am willing to
accept the inevitable fallout of living in a country where adults are free to
speak their minds and to express themselves peacefully. I believe that
the prohibitions in France and in Germany regarding the sale of Nazi paraphenalia and books, such as "Mein Kampf", are misguided and compromise
the right to truly free speech.

Laws designed to "protect" the American flag from being burned or worn as
clothing are also infringements on our bill of rights, and until now, the U.S.
Supreme Court has found such laws to be unconstitutional.

Adults are free to say what they will and to wear what they want. Citizens
who take offense are free, in each instance, to protest and to ostracize as
they see fit. Institutional behavior, such as the design of some southern state flags that contained the stars and bars of the old confederacy, was
changed by new attitudes that came about partly because of the migration
to the south of millions of Americans from other parts of the country who
were not steeped in the traditions of white "southern pride". This new influx
responded to those who found the stars and bars to be offensive, and elected legislatures who voted to eliminate this confederate icon from their
state flags. States that were defiant suffered consumer boycotts and unfavorable publicity. In the public domain, this is the constitutional way to
eliminate governmental policy that the majority finds to be offensive.

I'm sorry, but you are ignoring part of the problem. Why the hell did the school tell her she could not wear it? Do they have the right to tell you not to wear it? And what is the justification? Is it really because the flag is racists or just because the administration decided it is a racist symbol.

It's a really a big issue. I don't know how many of you were in high school recently, but the over-conservative administrations are becoming ridiculous. I had a label on a pair of my pants about a quarter of an inch in size(accidentally left it on the pants) when my school had a dress code against labels. I was initially suspended for it. I had friends that were reccommended by administration for expulsion for a video that expressed beliefs that were not entirely Christian in a school with Christian administration. So I think the issue of an power hungry administration that forces their beliefs on other people need to be addressed in this post.

Now, I'm fairly both sides in this situation. Alot of people the fly the confederate flag are not racists. But everyone knows that it's going to piss off alot of people. The girl should have just avoided controversy in this situation. However, she is a teenager, so what do you expect really? While this issue is an attack on rights, the girl probably needed to just use common sense.

From ACLU legal research found in an April 12, 2004 letter written to Bay City,
MI school system administrators by ACLU, Michigan, Legal Director, Michael J. Steinberg, <a href="http://www.aclu.org/StudentsRights/StudentsRights.cfm?ID=15672&c=159">(Link to page with wordpad doc.)</a>
(Kentucky is also located in the 6th Federal Circuit Court Jurisdiction, a
fact that provides a more compelling argument that the school system should
have abided by the 6th District Court's recent rulings) <a href="http://www.findlaw.com/11stategov/ky/laws.html">findlaw.com</a>

Since I am an ardent supporter of free speech rights, I'll revise my opinion
by supporting the court ruling cited above, since it is obvious that a school
sponsored social event such as a dance or a prom is extra curricular and
thus cannot "cause or threaten material and substantial interference with a school’s educational environment".

Since it was not difficult for me as an ordinary member of the public to
obtain the legal research quoted above, the Kentucky school administrators
seem to have been derelict in not seeking and or not abiding by the most
recent and most authoritative court rulings before restricting the rights
of the student who wore the stars and bars dress. It appears now to me
that she has a strong civil case and is entitled to seek monetary damages
from the school system as a remedy for it's illegal restriction of her rights.

So you believe in obeying unconstitutional orders? Again, I hope the school lists what flags are not covered by the first admendment. And I hope the settlement from this case doesn't come from the teacher's future salaries, but the administration's.

Why couldn't she of just worn the other Confederate flag,its all the southern pride without the hate...

Seems like she wanted attention.

oh yes...and no minors do not have the same constitutional rights as adults....I learned that one the hard way....
therefore the school could dissallow things that they deemed obcene...I have no personal problems with that dress but I wouldn't care if she wore a nazi flagged drapped around her as long as she didn't start threatening people...(and kept a good distance away from me)

I think she had every right to wear the dress. however, I do not believe she has the right to sue them about it.

I've never really looked into it, but I think it would be fascinating to hear the reasoning for stipping people of less-than an arbitrary age of their rights as humans.

Since the "Stars and Bars" did not originate as a symbol of hate, it must be the case that if it has become a symbolic of hate for some, it has done so through free speech making that association. If someone is not making that association in their use of the symbol (and this girl claims she isn't), then even if you agree "hate speech" can be supressed, her speech is not hate speech, and should be protected.

If a buddhist wanted to exhibit a wheel of life pendant, that should certainly be protected... even if a bunch of folks incorrectly assumed it was a swastika.

I dont know what school you went to but where I went we didnt have the first ammendment between school hours and at school sponsored events. The girl has no case.

Just because a school administration has the ability to supress student speech doesn't mean they are doing so lawfully. Since it's fairly difficult for a minor to bring a legal challenge, I would think the body of law that allows the rights of young people to be abridged isn't well tested.

The girl might have been acting contrary to the rules set up by the school's administration, but the school does not necessarily have the authority to make such rules. That is a possible basis for her case.

Sounds like you went to a school outside of the United States.

Try again.
I doubt you would be able to find a school where you could attend and dress up like Hitler, Tojo or Stallin, yell obscene things and pass out fliers with your plans of genocide and recipes for fetal quiche or gimp leg stew. People will be offended. Seems to me like schools limit freedom to not just for "shits and giggles" but to prevent people from being offended ( the best they can ) and to maintain a comfortable learning environment. And while this was at a dance, it was still a school sponsored event, which means school rules still apply.
What if the school had given in and let her wear the dress and other people had been offended and sued? I dont really like PC crap but I think schools are the most effected by it. Had the school allowed her to wear it, they could have been possibly dealing with even more crap than this right now.

To me, and to millions of other people, the confederate battle flag is a symbol that marks racism and white supremacy. Make all the arguments you want, But I went to school in the South, and you had the occasionaly dipshit ask "are you a nigger lover?". So I can recognize a racist symbol and what it entails.
As far as the 14 year old girl, is no one upset by the fact that this girl has such a sexual statement on her shirt, regardless of the sexuality preference? I don't think the school should condone a shirt stating Barbie's sexual preference. This girl is 14 years old, dammit. 14 year olds are way too young for this, and the school has every right to make her change her clothes or go home. Sexual discussions do not belong in school except for in a classroom with a qualified teacher.

By what justification does the state deprive students of various rights while at school?

Does that reasoning stand outside of school and outside of an educational setting? If not, the state has no authority to invoke "school rules" to deprive young people of their rights.

The majority doesn't get to supress alternative interpretations and uses of a symbol just because they choose to interpret the symbol in a certain way. Others are free to ascribe different meanings to the same symbols, and use the symbols for those meanings.

Though I'm willing to bet to you, and to millions of other people, if someone says they interpret the confederate flag in the context of historical southern heritage, you take "southern heritage" to mean "racism and white supremacy". At which point meaningful discourse ends.

Both the United Methodist Church and the Ku Klux Klan use the symbolism of the cross and flame. Seems like it would be slightly stupid to go into a conversation with a random Methodist assuming they're a KKK member, no?

How do you go about deleting posts? See above post for content.

If a student wishes to dress up like Hitler, Tojo or Stalin, that is their right. A public school does not have the authority to dictate what you can or can not wear. Just because some public schools do this, doesn't mean that they are permitted to do so.
As far as yelling, and such, as long as they are not in class, they are also permited to do so. Remember, public schools are PUBLIC.

I think it is important to remember that in the context of current events, the confederacy was nothing more than a treasonous, terrorist organization.

Beyond that, i don't really care either way. If the courts decide she deserves money, i hope her school district can afford it.

If you're going to go out of your way to be offended, then you deserve to be offended.

She was told beforehand and chose to wear it anyway. For that reason, I can't agree with her position.

However, I will say that a dress is just a dress and the school district probably shouldn't have issued the edict in the first place. Like I said, if you're going to go out of your way....

Everyone here needs to read Host's post on the Supreme Court's ruling in the Tinker case. Rules that pertain to issues of the 1st ammendment are not up to school teachers, administrators etc. to decided These are constitutional rights guaranteed to all Americans. Are there some limitations to those rights based on the educational environment, yes; but as the supreme court ruled, just because you are a fifteen year old high school student you do not lose your right to express your ideas.

Regarding the young lady, I am really suprised at the number of people that responded with "she knew it was wrong she shouldn't have done it". So then should Rosa Parks not have gotten out of her seat on the bus because she new that it was wrong? It's called civil disobedience people. One of the tactics that has proven extremely effective in inducing social change in, not only this country, but the world. Think Ghandi, Thoureau, King, etc.

We can argue about what the Confederate flag stands for (I personally agree with Mr Mephisto in that it is a racist symbol), but the point of all of this is that this school violated the Constitutionally gauranteed civil rights of one of its students and should, in order to keep this from occuring again, be punished.

If I tell women before I hire her, that she will be the object of constant harassment, does that make it legal to harass her at will? If I warn you not to say another word, and then punch you, is that legal? The warning does not change the legalities here.

Personally, I do not care about kids ‘dressing’ rights. If I had it my way, all public schools would have uniforms. However, a ‘warning’ here is not going to suffice in court.

If I wore a shirt to school that stated "I support Al'Queda" or "Thank God for 9/11" do you think that would be apporpriete? How about if I wore a shirt that said "Hitler had it right, kill all the Jews" Or what if it was a shirt that said "It's time to clense the races kill all the N*ggers" There is a point where free speach stops and that is when it becomes inflamitory. Wearing a confederate flag is simalar to these statements above to some people. This is why the school said don't wear it, this is why she should have listened, and this is why she will have no case.

I prefer the "9/11 was a Faith Based Initiative" and "Support Our Troops" (with pictures from Abu Ghraib) t-shirts, personally. If you wore any of these shirts out on the street, do you agree it should be okay for the police to arrest and/or detain you? Hopefully not.

Correct. And if you cross that line, it doesn't matter if you're a student or not. Since I presume you agree in most circumstances the State has no authority to supress the use of the confederate flag by citizens, it's clear the flag is not across that line.

There is no text with a confederate flag. A shirt that says "Kill the Kikes and Niggers" is not the same a shirt that is brown... though they can both be used to say the same thing. It would be ludicrous for a school to ban the wearing of brown shirts on the off chance that someone might make a Nazi association and offend themselves.

Just because people will choose to be offended by a confederate flag does not mean the school has any grounds to supress inoffensive speech using the confederate flag.

You're assuming the school has the authority to make such judgements. If it does not, then it's not The School issuing orders to A Student. It's one citizen talking to another. And if the second decides not to take the first citizen's advice, the first citizen doesn't get to exploit an irrelevant relationship (I.E. the school/student thing) to coerce the citizen.

I agree it's a bad idea to wear a confederate flag, even with the best intentions. You will be misunderstood and probably upset a number of people. But people are Free to make mistakes- and learn from them (or not). That goes for the people trying to use the confederate flag inoffensively AND for the people who choose to be offended by its use.

I just want to see the dress!

Its in the link from CNN

Pic of dress at top

I don't know about your schools but mine had a handbook that had rules, a couple of the rules were "Failure to listen to faculty can result in disiplinary action" and "Anything not covered in this handbook can be delt with disiplinary action" (aka elastic clause).

Would it be ok for me to wear a shirt with a picture of Bin Laden on the front and 2 thumbs up on the back? There are no words on it yet it would cause a problem. Freedom of speach can not be used as a legal reason for saying something if that something would reasonibly insight violence or hatred.

Thank you for one of the very few ACCURATE recitations I've seen on this subject.

I'd like to offer a small correction. When Lincoln "freed the slaves," he excluded all slaves in the Union, and all slaves in portions of the Confederacy that were under Union control. The fact that they were border states was only peripheral to his plan, which was an attempt to instigate an uprising, not to free any slaves.

In fact, as I'm sure you know, Lincoln had plans to ship US blacks back to Africa. Some "emancipator."

Oh, and Mrs. U. S. Grant had slaves for about ten years after the war ended.

So what were the 13 colonies?

"because racist jackholes...Also, her attorney is named Earl-Ray."

Hmmmm.

Thanks, missed that one :)

I think that such a dress would look utterly ridiculous.

They were treasonous terrorists too, but our country is the result, rather than the victim of their treason.

The winners write history?

Just because a school has put something in their rulebook does not mean they have a legitimate power to compell students to comply. The question is no whether the school had rules against it, or if the school told the girl not to wear the dress. Those are accepted facts of the case. The question is whether or not the school has any authority to enforce such rules or orders outside of the school. A further question would be whether schools have the authority to enforce such rules inside the schools, either.

Would it be ok for you to wear a shirt with a picture of Bush on the front and 2 thumbs up on the back?

To the extent that a t-shirt (or a dress) causes disruption, it is caused by the reactions of other students. So if someone wore either of those shirts, and disruption resulted, it should be suggested to the student to turn your shirt inside out, wear your jacket, etc. and the students who participated in the disruption (which may or may not include the student wearing the shirt) should be disciplined appropriately.


Just to clarify, the wheel of life IS a Buddhist religious symbol. The way to "ruin" a symbol is to supress its use except to represent the offensive interpretation in a negative context. If people wish to recover inoffensive/positive meaning for a symbol, they have to use it in inoffensive/positive ways. The fact that ignorant people may choose to misinterpret the symbol in ways they find offensive is a seperate problem... and it should be up to the people trying to use the symbol in an inoffensive/positive way to decide how to deal with it.

http://spofga.org/flag/2004/dec/prom..._lawsuit.phtml has a several more pictures.

Yes, the winners do write history. That is why history is only relevant if everyone can agree on what "actually" happened. I would argue here that the history of the confederate flag is a great deal less important than its meaning in contemporary society.

I am frankly flabergasted by your comment.
It's like insisting "Why do buddhists hate jews?" is a reasonable question.
If the symbol is being used to refer to its historical context, and not to (one of) its meaning(s) in contemproary society, I'd say it's the other way around.

I completely agree with this.

The only reason I see to ban nudity in public places is hygeine (I know I misspelled it) issues. I have no problem seeing people naked or having them see me naked, but I would rather everyone wear pants to keep it relatively clean.

My lord that dress is u-g-l-y.

Swastikas can be a symbol of good luck. Very few people would have the balls to plaster it all over their clothing and wear it around under the pretext of luck though. For most people, the contemporary significance of the swastika can be traced directly back the ww2. Certainly one could wear a swastika as a good luck charm, but that person would be a fool to be surprised if that swastika were to be associated with naziism. Maybe it's not fair or rational, but then again, that's the way humans are.

You could claim that the confederate flag represents state's rights, but it could also easily be claimed that the confederate flag represents treason, and the fight for slavery with equal validity. It all depends on who you ask.

As for this particular instance, i'm all for people wearing whatever the fuck they want. Getting offended is a choice, often a very unproductive one. Looking at the dress i find it difficult to believe that she worked on the design for four years, though.

I thought the German swastika was reversed, and the other way round to the old sun symbol?

I don't know about the rest of the world, but i think many americans would be incapable of making the distinction.

Gosh, wouldn't it have been a better tribute to make the flag out of curtains.

But then again, I don't give a damn.;)

Sort of, the german is right-winged. Buddhism uses both variants, as far as I know

Going to prom is not a right, the school can make whatever rules they want (within reason) for the prom and students must abide or not attend. The prom is a private function the school holds and as such they have full control over it. This is not a free speech issue at all. This is just a kid craving for attention and now a free ride. I seriously doubt not wearing that dress caused 50k in emotional dammage.

A simple GIS for manji shows many variants. Hell, it was in the Legend of Zelda for fuck's sake.

That's swell, unfortunately most people would disagree. Because you're ready for it doesn't mean society is.

Well, it's good we haven't strayed into the land of ridiculous hyperbole, isn't it?

If she wants to wear her dress out in public, I'm all for it. If she wants to parade around town, visit Wal*Mart, go to the grocery store, sit in the park or mass produce her dress and sell round the world for profit, I really don't care.

However, as I understand it, the prom is a private event held by the school and at their discretion. They get to make the rules because they sanction the event. Their ball, their rules. In this case at least, it really is that simple. The sacred "Prom" isn't necessary, it isn't mandatory and it isn't tied to any 'rights' a student might have.

If they had kept her out because of her race or because of handicap, then we have a story. Unfortunately, as far as I know, there are no federal laws protecting those that suffer from 'bad fashion sense.'

It's a private event. It had rules. She was warned that if she violated those rules, she might be barred entrance. She's not a patriot, she's not a martyr, her civil rights aren't being violated, she's just an idiot that tried to push back the rock of authority while standing in loose sand.

No, because the school uses its own money which is drawn by public funds. It's a public event for the members of the school.

Just a comment; this thread has certainly created a lot more debate than I had imagined.

It's interesting to see people defend the "right" to abuse, threaten or intimadate others just because of the US Constitution.

Truth be told?

I think the Constitution is often used as a shield to defend what it was originally intended to abjure.


Mr Mephisto

That would be interesting, but I guess I'm not looking in the right places.
Could you provide some examples?

Those who said, in this thread, that their rights to dress up as Hitler, Nazis or KKK was enshrined in the First Amendment.


Mr Mephisto

I enjoy how people say the confederate flag has nothing to do with slavery and is about southern pride :lol:

Yeah, just try putting one on your car and drive through Detroit and see what that gets ya.

It's no different than a German girl wearing a Nazi-flag dress saying, "My grandfather was in the SS. This is part of my family's pride!"

Freedom of expression gets you so far. Yeah, you could twist the subject in such a way to try and convince people it's a "pride" thing, but deal with whatever consequences arise from it if that's how you're gonna take it!

Someone could wear a KKK uniform to an NAACP rally, but they do need to sit back and ask themselves, "Is this a smart thing to do?"

Well said Stompy. Very well said.


Mr Mephisto

Each has the right to express themselves as they see fit. Just as I have the right to form an opinion of them because of it. Personally, I rather enjoy the fact that people show the depths of belief in such a way....as I can avoid them in the future.

Ask yourself one question from the point of view of the adminstrators. Do you let 1 girl ruin the prom for many of the other students or do you tell her to wear something else? The girl is completely in the wrong here. The bill of rights should never be taken out of context to justify discrimination against others.

A person standing outside a church with a sign of "God is dead". She's not on private property, she isn't stopping the flow of traffic, nor is she saying anything. Do you allow police to arrest her because she ruin that day for all those church members? Freedom of speech is a double-edged sword, you cant just let it go when it has the chance to cut you.

Your analogy would make more sense if the person was attempting to walk into the church with the sign.

Now, ask yourself, can the congregation make sure she doesn't enter?

I say yes.

Yes, but the church does not take large amounts of money from the government. Churches are allowed to only allow certain races, or only one sex, or only red haired, or whatever the heck they want to enter. Why? Because they are a PRIVATE group that does not take public money.

Public schools can not do this because they take public government money thus need to follow ALL of the rules.

I'm not saying this girl was totally right, read my posts earlier. She should have gone about the right ways before the prom. But the court rulings have stated that freedom of speech is allowed in school therefore they must be allowed no matter whos feelings get hurt.

I'm not sure what kind of government money you envision schools obtain.

You seem to be linking your discourse of federal rights on the hinge that schools receive federal funding.

Schools are funded by local dollars. The money they receive is based on local property taxes, which is why there are such large discrepancies between schools located in poor, urban regions versus those in wealthier, suburban areas.

While there are some programs that purport to provide additional financial support, such as, No child left behind and magnet programs, they are not how schools derive their funding.

The girl should have been allowed to wear her dress.

The more non-racist people fly the stars and bars as the symbol of southern pride that it is, the sooner it will be accepted as such. If we do nothing then the racist groups that want to use it as a symbol of their hate will have won.

We should not let racists or those who are easily offended destroy such symbols. It reminds me of the Washington D.C. Public Advocate that was forced to resign for using the word niggardly to describe the administration of a fund.

IMHO, this kind of stuff is an example of politically correct racial insanity.

I'm not talking about federal dollars. Brown vs. Board was LONG before federal funding was pumped into schools, yet it still outlawed the schools segregating based on race. So, as I said, as the schools recieve public funding (aka local or state taxes) they have to observe the rights of those students who attend (based on court rulings that uphold those rights).

OK, so you aren't talking about federal funding.

I understand you to be stating that constitutional rights are only protected when the violator receives public money, regardless of whether they are local or federal dollars.


I disagree with that sentiment, too. I don't agree that personal, constitutional rights are guaranteed any more or any less depending on whether one is interacting with a private or public institution.


Rights depend on the context of the situation. And that analysis would need to address the rights of all the individuals involved--this is not some state agency versus the personal opinion of one citizen, although it's being represented that way.

The school board and organizers of this dance represent each and every student in that school. They have a right to assemble without intrusion just as you claim she has a right to express herself. You may not agree, but without checking the case law, I am going to assume the police and other officials are acting constitutionally when they limit the demonstrations of anti-war/peace protestors, or anti-Bush protestors, or WTO demonstrators, or "free-speech" zones on campuses, and a myriad of other types of restrictions on where or when someone can utizilize their freedom of speech.

Now, the case may settle, but that's usually do to the lengthy and expensive process of litigation, and less about the culpability of the accused.


Really, we can sit here and speak about hypotheticals and such, but the reality is that no sane attorney or judge is going to go with the argument that she is being denied a right to prom in a similar fashion as blacks were excluded from equal education by attending segregated schools (which is a somewhat different take on Brown v. BoE than you seem to be implying). I'm not arguing that you claimed they were similar, but they would have to be in order for your analyses of what the court must do to protect one's rights if the offending institution is publicly funded.

In my school prom was not funded by public dollars. It was funded by fee's charged to all attenders. That sounds like a private function to me.