so much for free speech II

Schools limit the speech of students in many ways,all of the time, and always have. This is not new.
No this is not new and yes most of the time these rules do serve a purpose.

But, when you consider the content of the speech in context with the anti-American agenda being pushed in our schools today, it clearly proves to be unjust.

It was a school function. The time to deal with the rules if anyone really thought they were unjust was before the kid took to the podium.

This is true, however, again in this case the rules were unjust!

One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. ...

-Martin Luther King Jr.
 
Werbung:
No this is not new and yes most of the time these rules do serve a purpose.

But, when you consider the content of the speech in context with the anti-American agenda being pushed in our schools today, it clearly proves to be unjust.

What content? I've been trying to find the full text of the speech and cannot. If you have it I'd love to read it. There's nothing unjust about cutting the mic when the student deviates from his agreement. Adults are censored all of the time too. No one told this kid that he can't speak his mind, what they did say is that he couldn't use their forum to do it.



This is true, however, again in this case the rules were unjust!

One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. ...

-Martin Luther King Jr.

I'm sure MLK Jr. would get his undies in a bunch because some spoiled kid in Texas can't ramble on and on about the Pharisees during a high school graduation ceremony. :ROFLMAO:
 
Dad of Valedictorian Who’s Mic Was Shut Off: ‘Principal Did Threaten’ My Son


In a statement, Reimer said:
“The principal did threaten Remington through me. The school board has access to information to verify this if they desire since the principal sought legal counsel concerning the actions he wanted to take on my son to destroy his future. The principal came back to me later that day, June 7, and said that legally he could only send a personal letter to the Naval Academy and strip Remington of all honors related to character. When he gave the diploma to Remington that afternoon, he did not repeat his threat; however, he did mention that consulting with legal counsel had already cost the district $3000. Lt. Col. Davidson of the NJROTC program at Joshua was in the room on this occasion.”​

Joshua High School Principal, Mick Cochran, replied to TheBlaze’s request for comment on the initial allegations with two words: “Not true.” Cochran later added, “The young man and I spoke the following day, we shook hands and moved on. The facts are being blown out of proportion. The incident is over.”
Cochran has not responded to TheBlaze’s request for comment on today’s statement from Todd Reimer, which included these observations:
“In all this, the principal’s action and reaction are what has hurt Remington’s feelings the most. As we have gone through this process, I have learned how much Remington admired the principal. I also personally like him and am grieved that this has happened.​
“One of the lessons we have learned in all of this is: Well-intentioned people who don’t know policy/the Constitution can often implement rules/laws that infringe upon the rights of others. This is a microcosm of what is happening in our nation at large.”​
Liberty Institute sent an official notice letter to the superintendent and board of the Joshua Independent School District. According to the letter, school officials broke Texas state law in two ways:
  1. by not distancing themselves from the content of the valedictorian’s speech;
  2. by not printing a disclaimer in the graduation program that should state “the content of each student speaker’s message is the private expression of the individual student and does not reflect the endorsement, sponsorship, position or expression of the District.”
 
I'm sure MLK Jr. would get his undies in a bunch because some spoiled kid in Texas can't ramble on and on about the Pharisees during a high school graduation ceremony. :ROFLMAO:

So .... a "spoiled kid in Texas" doesn't deserve to have his Constitutional Rights?

Why? Because he's from Texas? Because you assume him to be "spoiled"?

You Centrehalf, just like this principle and so many others in this Country, simply just don't get it!
 
Wanna play that game? OK:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...oning-god-graduation-speech-article-1.1369065

“I have no idea what he said,” his father Todd Reimer told the Burleson Star. “I was just as confused as everybody else was. I'm not sure what happened up there or why his mic was cut off.”

Either way you slice it, Reimer's dad lied to someone about this. Character matters.

Dr. Reimer is a teacher at the high school in question. There is no way in hell he wasn't aware of restrictions on Valedictorian speeches or of any problems his son was having prior to the ceremony.
 
So .... a "spoiled kid in Texas" doesn't deserve to have his Constitutional Rights?

Why? Because he's from Texas? Because you assume him to be "spoiled"?

You Centrehalf, just like this principle and so many others in this Country, simply just don't get it!

Already addressed this, he has a right to say whatever he wants to, he does not have a right to hijack someone else's forum in order to do it.

I don't agree with you so I must not "get it?"

He's spoiled because he's spoiled. He's from Texas because he's from Texas. Is that hard to understand?
 
Wanna play that game? OK:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...oning-god-graduation-speech-article-1.1369065



Either way you slice it, Reimer's dad lied to someone about this. Character matters.

Dr. Reimer is a teacher at the high school in question. There is no way in hell he wasn't aware of restrictions on Valedictorian speeches or of any problems his son was having prior to the ceremony.
Doesn't matter ....

The school and the principle are clearly in violation of Texas Law .....
 
Already addressed this, he has a right to say whatever he wants to, he does not have a right to hijack someone else's forum in order to do it.

I don't agree with you so I must not "get it?"

He's spoiled because he's spoiled. He's from Texas because he's from Texas. Is that hard to understand?
The school and the principle are clearly in violation of Texas Law ..... is that so hard to understand ..... obviously so!
 
The school and the principle are clearly in violation of Texas Law ..... is that so hard to understand ..... obviously so!

According to The Liberty Institute the school and the principal are in violation of Texas law, whether or not they really are remains to be seen.

No comment on the contradictory statements from Reimer's father?
 
According to The Liberty Institute the school and the principal are in violation of Texas law, whether or not they really are remains to be seen.

Did the school not cut his mic?

No comment on the contradictory statements from Reimer's father?

I said it doesn't matter ..... this case is not about Reimer's father ... it is about the schools violations of the law!
 
Werbung:
Did the school not cut his mic?



I said it doesn't matter ..... this case is not about Reimer's father ... it is about the schools violations of the law!

Yes, the school did cut his microphone.

You are the one who linked to an article and then posted a partial quote which featured observations from Dr. Reimer so yes, Dr. Reimer is in play due to your actions.

By the way, you should probably go read the letter you linked to from the Liberty Institute. You do realize that you've inadvertently blown your own argument out of the water don't you? Always read things before you link to them.
 
Back
Top