Young Turks: 'Islam Is Of The Devil' Shirt Gets Girl Kicked Out Of School

[CherylK]

Run time: 09:43 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDbMiiQZ9fw   Posted on YouTube: August 27, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 30, 2009 By DU Member: CherylK Views on DU: 3790

 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32565118/ns/us_news-education/

[DuRorch]

1. This kind of behavior is what leads to arguments that eventually leads to fights. Not cool. nt

[hobbit709]

2. Exactly what should be done.

[bullimiami]

3. fundamentalism sucks.

so the main reason they did it was because hate gets noticed? sick.

i wish they would have asked him in the clip if it would be ok for tshirts in school that said christianity is of the devil or jesus is a lie.

he wouldnt recognize christ if he came up and kicked him square in his twisted ass.

[ihavenobias]

38. Here is the follow up video to the OP...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x362162

TYT: The pastor of the girls church defends the hateful phrase.

[SKKY]

4. Her next shirt was even better! On the back it said...

"Buddah you fat faggot!" :rofl: Sorry, don't often have the chance to rehash old Salmon Rushdie jokes.

[DuRorch]

5. I like your Christ. I don't like your Christians.Your Christians are so unlike your Christ-Gandhi nt

[Jackpine Radical]

22. I don't mind that God guy too much.

It's his fan club that pisses me off.

[vi5]

6. Well, I know this is unpopular....

....but if an atheist kid got kicked out of school for wearing and anti christian shirt, or if an apolitical kid got kicked out of school for wearing a shirt by a heavy metal or a punk band that someone found offensive, or if an African American kid got kicked out for baggy pants or clothing some out of touch administrator perceived as "gang" clothing, or if a gay (or straight) kid got kicked out for wearing a pro-gay rights shirt or anything like that (all of which have happened), I was and would be the first one up in arms as a civil liberties/freedom of speech absolutist (which I am).

I find the shirt and the wearer idiotic and offensive. But if it's a public school with no dress code then.....well...yeah. I'm not for kicking kids out for self expression no matter how much I abhor what they are expressing.

Flame away. I realize it's gotten to the point where even our side believes in "free speech for me and not for thee" so sadly I know my take on this is unpopular. But whatever.

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. There is a difference between free expression and inciting with angry messages

[vi5]

27. Who gets to decide?

Seriously. As idiotic as the message on the shirt is, it doesn't advocate violence or advocate the death of anyone. It's stupid. It's idiotic. It's prejudice. But it doesn't incite or advocate violence any more than the t-shirt I have by a hardcore band called Integrity that says "Humanity Is The Devil". If I wore that shirt would that be inciting humans to violence?

If the shirt said "Kill all muslims" or something to that effect then you'd have a point.

As such, what you're advocating is something that would require some form of arbitrary decision as to what constitutes "angry".

An anti-Bush shirt would be angry, wouldn't? And justifiably so. And anti Republican shirt would be angry, no?

I'm against anyone inciting violence and that is where my support of free expression has it's limit. I'm not against free speech even when it's idiotic speech.

[jayschool]

9. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District

established that students' First Amendment rights don't end at the schoolhouse door.

However, administrators can take action against speech that:

libels or slanders
would be deemed obscene in a court of law
is false as to any person who is not a public figure or involved in a matter of public concern
OR

which creates a clear and present danger of the commission of unlawful acts, the violation of lawful school regulations, or the material and substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school or which violates the rights of others to privacy or that threatens violence to property or persons

Now what would you do?

[Bucky]

14. You raise a good point. As I teacher I freely embrace my limited fascism.

But that said, she was expressing a political opinion (it was obnoxious, but that's the very kind of speech you most need to protect). I'd be against a policy that let a kid wear any kind of message shirt. I enthusiastically enforce our anti-baggy pants and anti-gang-colors policies. Schools are instrument of socialization and we need to teach good decorum along with good academic and vocational skills.

I don't mind identity based positive messages--be they pro-gay, pro-christian, or pro-atheist--so long as they conform with the basic dress code. The problem I see here is that the message was not pro-identity, but pro-intolerance. As I posted below, there are dozens of opportunities for a kid in high school to express her political thoughts--social studies class, school newspapers, art class. Have at it, kiddo. But a school is not a city square open to any form of soapbox opinionating. The rights of others to get a full education is impinged upon by distractions. It's a place of business--public business, but a busy-ness nonetheless. Her rights of self expression don't include her right to rob other's of their right to a good education.

Anyway, she was sent home, not kicked out.

[MNBrewer]

24. Islam is of the devil is a "political" opinion?

How do you mean? I don't understand how it's political.

[Bucky]

26. You don't understand the political relevance of Islam? Really?

It's in the public domain. People fight about it. Wars get started using the ignorance people have about it.

How is this not political?

[MNBrewer]

37. Then everything is political

Religion can't be separated from politics?

[jberryhill]

43. Correct...

The key is in your last statement, in that schools should encourage independent thought, but not at the expense of providing an academic environment which others may find threatening.

It is the same principle that is applied to hostile environment sexual discrimination in the workplace.

[DWilliamsamh]

21. Here's the problem: None of you examples constitute "fighting words."

Saying "XYZ religion is of the devil." definitely constitutes fighting words and there is an established and well supported prohibition on speech that constitutes fighting words - especially in public school settings. Expression: OK. Expressing fighting words: not OK.

So no I would NOT support an atheist's child wearing a t-shirt that said "Christianity sucks balls" or "Christians are idiots" or whatever the kid in your example wore if it constituted fighting words. If a kid wore a shirt with "Imagine there's no heaven..." and got kicked out, THEN we would have a problem because that isn't fighting words and most people and I dare say judges would agree.

[vi5]

28. The difference between "fighting words" and advocating violence...

That's where I draw the difference. "Kill (insert religion here)" or "Destroy (insert religion or minority group here)" qualify and I agree would cross the line. THAT is inciting, encouraging, and advocating violence.

But setting the standard up for "fighting words" as anything that criticizes something that someone else likes or supports or believes in is a pretty broad brush to paint with when limiting free expression. Would an "Impeach Bush" shirt have qualified? Those are fighting words to Republicans. What about "Atheists suck" or "Atheists are going to Hell"? What about an anti-Iraq war shirt? Would those be "fighting words" to another kid whose parent may or may not be fighting in the war?

I'm an atheist and while I would think the shirt was stupid I can't imagine it compelling me to fight anyone.

I do understand that people have varying degrees of what offends or incites them, but how far do we take it to the point where no person can express anything on a shirt or in whatever manner they choose?

[DWilliamsamh]

29. You are making a slippery slope argument.

"Islam is of the devil," is clearly fighting words....its a specific VERY offensive statement about someone's core value that goes WAY beyond ones political views. And even if you don't see "how could that be" due to your being an atheist (and just so you know I personally think it is an oxymoron to "fight" over religious affront), that doesn't mean that the rest of society doesn't feel that passionately about their religion.

Besides even if you disagree with my assessment - the case law is clear. The fighting words exceptions to first amendment rights is well established in law AND as Jayschool specifically noted regarding student expression up thread:

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District

Edited on Sun Aug-30-09 02:09 PM by jayschool
established that students' First Amendment rights don't end at the schoolhouse door.

However, administrators can take action against speech that:

libels or slanders

would be deemed obscene in a court of law

is false as to any person who is not a public figure or involved in a matter of public concern

OR

which creates a clear and present danger of the commission of unlawful acts, the violation of lawful school regulations, or the material and substantial disruption of the orderly operation of the school or which violates the rights of others to privacy or that threatens violence to property or persons

Ultimately "how you choose" is a law suit is brought if someone thinks their (or their child's) speech rights have been infringed.

I also think it important to note that the children were sent home or made to change their clothes, not suspended or expelled.



Edited for stupid spelling mistakes

[vi5]

31. Like I said.....

I know people (including courts) disagree with my assesment. I'm not arguing from a matter of me being in the right legally and I know I'm in the minority. But that doesn't mean I have to like it and think it's o.k. or that there's not a fairly large degree of hypocricy (sp?) involved on the part of a lot of people.

It just all makes me uncomfortable on 2 levels:

1) As you said, as an atheist I don't "get it". Like you I don't get fighting over religion. But I also also don't get people being so insecure over their religion (whatever religion) that they (and we) just can't let silly things like words on a t-shirt not bother us (again, when the words do not actually advocate violence, killing, or destruction which are a whole different thing). But yeah, I get that it's a pie-in-the-sky utopian opinion so.........

and

2) Yeah, slippery slope. But I don't think slippery slope arguments are bad. In fact the entire legal statement you listed is predicated on having people not do things on the off chance that it might provoke someone to violence or disruption. That in itself is slippery slope. Pretty much everything we as liberals argue about on here day in and day out is slippery slope. People disregarding slippery slope arguments is essentially how Bush and Cheney and the right have managed to whittle away and erode our rights and the constitution the way they have. "Well, it's o.k. if we do it to THEM. But it will never go beyond that." Yeah, right.

Like I stated at the outset I know I'm in the minority and I know most people on here will disagree with me and I know that the legal precedent is that schools can do stuff like this (kicking out, expelling, making them go home and change....whichever). I'm just venting and saying that I disagree with the chest thumping and the attitude about a lot of it, when in any number of other cases if it weren't a wingnut that this happened to we'd all be righteously indignant over it.

[DWilliamsamh]

32. I respect your feelings and opinion

First and foremost I want to say I have no problem with your opinion - even if I disagree with you. I don't think you are spouting crazy rhetoric by any stretch. Thanks for being so reasoned in your approach.

I do feel though you are mis characterizing - or maybe misunderstanding - the issue vis a vis schools and student expression. I don't think the sited criteria are predicated on avoiding the off chance that someone may be moved to violence. When it comes to school... the focus seems to be that there is an enhanced need to protect the special mission of the school from interruption. Because of the nature of education, tight time frames, and the absolute premium of trying to keep the place mission focused (i.e. kids are in school to be taught and to learn the courses and information we have decided they need to know) and not disrupted by issues extraneous to that education, students may not express themselves in ways that are LIKELY to cause significant disruption - even if that disruption isn't violence.

Students are free to express themselves any way they legally wish to OUTSIDE of school - but inside school is another story. I think that is the way it should be - after all how many of us would tolerate a child's constant talking and cutting up in class - about politics or religion - that interferes with the education of other students? Is that student not 'expressing their ideas?' Should we allow that? If we don't aren't we infringing on the student's rights?

[vi5]

33. Good points......

and thank you also for some respectful dialogue and discussion.

I also admit a lot of my own feelings on the subject are affected by my school experience which was rigid and had dress codes, etc. and which resulted in kids more innocuous way of self expression being stifled. The same kids would then choose to "rebel" or vent their feelings in other, less productive (as far as dialogue and debate goes) and more troublesome and destructive ways.

So as a formerly outspoken and political teenager...my opinion is one thing....

However now as an almost 40 year old father of 2.....well what you described speaks directly to me and.....yes I would not want that level of disruption at my kid's school. I can't very well teach her to and tell her she has to behave and learn and pay attention in school but then overlook and/or encourage any other behavior or activity on the part of other kids which would impede that or prevent her from doing so.

I'll admit that much of my being upset about this also has to do with my gut feeling that most of the responses to this and many people's glee over this would be (and in some cases has been) the exact opposite if it was something equally rabble rousing or intended to incite but from a different perspective.

[DWilliamsamh]

40. The last paragraph.....

I am a dad also and spend a lot of my time trying to get my kid to express his opinion, in an effort to develop some leadership capability - the boy is too darned laid beck. LOL And we def have some common ground there.

I also "get" what you are saying about your school experiences. I had similar though maybe not quite as harsh, experiences with dress codes and codes of conduct. But being a Quaker school, they couldn't help but nurture individual expression as an integral part of the curriculum

Also my sense is EXACTLY the same as yours - I DEFINITELY think this is one of the areas where "our side" typically would prove that hypocrisy, or situational ethics, is not the exclusive purview of "the right." I have almost no doubt that had this kid been wearing a "Christians Believe Fairy Tails" shirt and had been sent home - DU would be alive with righteous indignation at the state religionists infringing on the poor waif's rights. I how ever would be saying the same thing I am saying now - I have in the past and been flamed for it.

[demosincebirth]

23. No Flame Here.

[Xicano]

34. I agree with you...

The way I see it. If someone wants to make themselves look like an uneducated hate monger. Its a free country, so, let them.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. Their church has the same sign:

http://www.doveworld.org/

[KingFlorez]

10. She wore the shirt for one reason, to start trouble

There is enough drama in schools these days, things like this could seriously cause some to get physically hurt.

[Stainless]

11. All Religion is of the Devil

Seems to me, anyway.

[Bucky]

12. If there's a school dress code, this is bound to be a violation. If there's not....

...well, there should be. School is not a forum for expressing intolerance. She's entitled to her opinion; but let her write an editorial in the school paper. Let her make a speech in English or social studies class. I don't like the school kicking this girl out for her obnoxious opinions. Free speech is supposed to protect obnoxious opinions. But schools have to have behavior standards.

[jayschool]

13. Editorial in the paper

She would not be guaranteed her First Amendment rights by writing in the school newspaper.

The 1988 Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier U.S. Supreme Court decision made censorship of school publications legal.

Only 7 states have passed laws since then that supersede Hazelwood, and none of them are Florida:

Kansas
Colorado
Arkansas
Iowa
California
Oregon
Massachusetts

If her principal wanted to censor, she/he could.

(Placist Coasters, please note the central states that have granted full press freedom to its students versus the paucity of coastal states that have done so. Check your biases and assumptions at the door.)

[Bucky]

16. Agreed, students don't enjoy full 1st Amend rights *in school*. They do out of school.

School students are a captive audience in the care of the state (in loco parentis). So, no, the school has some control over the manner of self expression. But let's don't conflate the limited school level of censorship with fascism. In the free market of ideas, there aren't limits. School is an environment full of limits--especially a limitation of time and attention space. If you disrupt a city street corner preaching crazy ass intolerance, well, it's a free country. If you disrupt a classroom full of other people's children who have to be there by law with a message of intolerance, then you're taking away their rights. That's the problem with this teeshit; regardless of its message & ideas, it's a distraction from the proper business of the school.

[jayschool]

20. Bingo

By the way, did you intentionally spell it "teeshit"?

If so, that's funny.

[izquierdista]

15. A bunch of Sapps?

You really can't make this stuff up. :silly:

[Bucky]

17. Yes, Making fun of their names is soooo funny.

PM me your last name. I'll make a pun about it and thus I'll win every argument we'll ever have, right?

 

[izquierdista]

18. Smokestoomuch

[Bucky]

19. damn

Okay, you'll have to give me a couple of days. :thinking, thinking, thinking:

[burning rain]

25. Islam is not of the Devil.

Satan is way more fun. He doesn't cramp your style with stupid rules.

[ScottLand]

30. I just realized why I don't have any Christian friends!

:sarcasm: :sarcasm:

Seriously, let the kid wear the shirt. It should be okay to wear whatever she wants, and if she gets her ass kicked by those kids whom she doesn't know why aren't her friends... so be it.

[Xicano]

35. I wonder how these folks come to their conclusion "Islam is of the Devil" ?

I'd really like to hear their thoughts on that. I got a pretty good idea what they'd say. Then I'd like to point to Christianity's brutal and bloody history and ask them how is it they can think of a religion such as Islam, who's history doesn't have as much blood and terrorism on its hands as Christianity, and think Islam is of the Devil and Christianity is not.

:shrug:

[ihavenobias]

36. Video: Pastor of 'Islam Is of the Devil' explains his message

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x362162

[Xicano]

39. Thanks for the link ihavenobias

I'll check it out as soon as I get home.

:hi:

[sorrowspath]

41. Does it mean

they will only buy Christian Alaskan Oil? After all, buying oil from the Middle East is like supporting the economy of heretics right Christo fascist??

[ScottLand]

52. Your problem is you're using logic where

they're using faith. Just gotta have faith that you're right and don't think about it.

It's those that think that start to realize it's flawed.

[Seldona]

42. K&R

Strange.

[Turborama]

45. K& Rec #5 IMO Ben's correct, Cenk not so much.

Ben also had me laugh out loud a few times, he's hardcore and really funny with it.

[Enthusiast]

46. Fundie scum, that is all. nt

[imdjh]

47. Wouldn't it be more productive to allow printed t shirts of any message?

And teach the students that no matter what a t-shirt says, it's your duty as a US citizen to respect free speech and not react physically or violently.

[Leftist Agitator]

48. Free speech is free speech.

This girl should have the right to wear a shirt with whatever sentiment that she wants, no matter how inflammatory.

To those who disagree, go ahead and tell me why I'm wrong. Please. It'll be amusing (at least to me), I swear.

Would you raise a ruckus over a kid wearing a "Bush was a Moran" shirt? How about a "Fundamentalist Christians are Fucking Idiots" shirt?

Fee speech is a two-way street, and in my case, the old axiom applies, "I may not defend what you say, but I will defend your right to say it."

[HowHasItComeToThis]

49. "TINY" WOULD POOP

GUESS WHO

[VPStoltz]

50. I want one with the now infamous Kathy Griffin quote...

"Suck it Jesus!"

[daedalus_dude]

51. I wonder what would had happened to this girl in the "good old" 1930s conservatives idealize.

She would probably have been paddled for an hour by her teachers for being disruptive.

Minors don't have full constitutional rights and never had. They can't carry guns or own a house. They don't have a right to privacy or voting rights or the right to be a member of the military, nor are they "free to pursue happiness as they see fit". It is not a stretch that their freedom of speech is also limited under some settings.

[NecklyTyler]

53. K&R