Anti gay shirt conflict

i believe that the shirt should be allowed in the school because homosexual students get to give their view on the day of scilence and if that offends him and his religion then he should also have is view point stated.  from a legal stand point the school has speechcodes that allow them to tell the student, Harper, to remove the shirt because of the wide varity of people in the school that do support homosexuality and the struggles they go through enough to be extremly offended.  I see both points and I do not know which side to agree with.

Hate Speech

In the pictures everyone looks like they are having fun. However if there was pictures of black students attending the parties and having fun as well then I would assume that the parties where just fun and games where the black students know that they are being made fun of and I might assume that the white students did not mean anything by their action.  since none such photos exist I can assume that, although they claim no harm was meant, I don't see how dressing up as KKK members and hanging students in black could not be seen as offensive.  schools are an environment to promote learning if I were black and heard about these parties I would start to worry less about academic work and more about personal safety.  I would question my decision about the school i chose and would not feel welcomed.  so I believe these actions should be restricted on campuses because it threatens the safety of a group of students however i would go no further than educating students involved about what the symbolism of a fake lynching or KKK hood means to the large population of black students on that campus.

The speech codes at Illinois state is voted red I see why from the stand point of FIRE which seems to critique the schools on a radical scale. they have almost the same codes that DHS has so I say that this would not effect me as a prospective student.  as far as the legality of the codes FIRE says no they are not legal and they are intruding on our right to free speech, I would agree except i don't mind them being there.  ISU would react similarly to the way the universities in the rticle reacted they would be violating every code they made to prevent such a party from happening. While I agree with what FIRE is trying to point out it is not really going to efefct my decisions on where I apply.

flag burning

The flag is a symbol of our nation. I believe that there were other ways to protest the government than burning the symbol of peace and freedom in our nation that was fought for so many times by people who loved the flag and what it symbolized.  I understand that burning the flag was a protest against the war and fighting, but by lighting it on fire is spitting on the graves of those who fought to give people the right to burn the symbol they were dying for.  While the court did find that burning the flag was not an exception to the first amendment and that the right to burn a flag was protected under that amendment, I believe that a clause should be added trying to protect the symbol of the nation from being burned an disagree with the majority opinion of the supreme court.

9/11/2001

the documentary was very well made and very powerful. The images with the soundtrack were moving and astonishing.  The expression on the peoples faces, like the world stood.  Its sad that so many people lost their lives that day. It is hard to put into words. I could not imagine the terror on the upper floors that made the better option to jump something that nobody could possibly survive.  We should all thank and take time to remember all of the firefighters, paramedics and police officers who lost their lives and helped in the clean up of the two buildings.


In the article I read people who were living in apartment buildings near the towers where breathing in the white snowlike ash and dust.  breathing this in caused health problems down the road like asthma and other respiratory infections and problems.  they have to live with the attacks in a bigger way than any of us have to they have to take several medications every day and live with multiple chronic illnesses.  


because of the attacks people have to live with a nation considered to be no longer safe.  I do not know how life was before 9/11/2001 but we now live in a world with heightened security and a more concerned edgy nation. we can no longer take more than 8 oz. of water on a plane.  every thing with a point no matter how useless the object may be as a weapon has to get taken away by the TSA.  people are racially profiling others more than others and anyone that is muslim is a suspect.  the nation has lost touch with the fact that all muslims participated in the planing and doing of the attack a specific group of people did those attacks because of hate for america.  my family does not want to go on vacations anymore to places they cannot drive to not because they are afraid of flying or of someone taking over the plane, but because getting through airport security is a pain.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH in schools

  I do not believe that the freedom of speech is too restrictive, at least our dress code and freedoms at DHS.  If the court later decides to legalize marijuana I would not see any problem with symbols of a marijuana leaf in school.  I don't smoke or do marijuana, but i am not offended or drawn into doing marijuana by a picture of a plant.

 In the Fredrick v. Morse case I could definantly see the concern by the school, being a part of the government, being seen as supporting the use of marijuana by its students holding up a sign that includes drug references but in this case I have to agree with part of Justice Stevens dissent saying "...cannot justify disciplining Fredrick for his attempt to make an ambiguous statement..." sometimes things left alone are not as bad as when someone steps in and deals with it. Instead of a 10 day suspension which does disrupt the learning of one student for 10 days the school, after hearing that it was meant as a joke could have probably explained that the school does not want to be held liable for the promotion of illegal drug use. In Tinker v. Des Moines I agree with the courts decision 100% the schools cannot anticipate whether something is going to cause a mass disruption for the learning environment.  If the school let the students participate in their demonstration against the war by wearing armbands there would potentially be no court case and no problem on the matter as long as a peaceful school day continued. However by teachers and administrates telling the students to take the armbands off and then suspending those who did not something small and innocent enough as wearing armbands became disruptive.  As to the hypothetical that we discused in class about someone in the school having a parent fighting in the war well i would think that they would want their father to come home and the war to stop as well.