Young Writers Society

If this girl is not allowed to wear a Confederate flag, wouldn't that make it illegal to wear the flags of certain other countries, too?

No Mexican flags because we once went to war with them. No Japanese flags/characters because they bombed the US some 60 years ago. No British flags because they fought the US when they wanted them to not declare their independence.

And why would the flag be racist? Just because the Confederacy promoted slavery doesn't mean that that's all the Confederacy stood for.

LamaLama wrote:the south was being persecuted (only partially because of its pro-slavery position) and the north was making money. (which had nothing to do with its anti-slavery position.) The south had no industry, it was almost entirely farmland. The transcontinental railway, that was in the works, was going to bypass entirely all of the south. It was going to stay in the north and in the west. Destroying the south's hopes for raising any more money for its own rail roads.

^I agree completely. If someone were to wear an American flag in an area where people still believed in the Confederate values, would that be illegal too?


I just think that it should be legal to wear what you want (unless it consists the portrayal of violence or harsh words) and that the government can't interfere in what a person believes.

I don't care what else the Confederacy stood for. How's this for an analogy: When Germany was taken by the Nazis, everyone there was poor and having to scrape a living because of the Treaty of Versailles made after WWI. The Nazis were supposedly trying to bring back Germany to its former glory, just like the way you are defending the Confederacy. So does that make it okay to wear a swastika? NO! Nothing will ever make it okay to wear a swastika, nor will anything ever make it okay to wear the Confederate flag. This argument has lost its validity, because under the Constitution, which in my opinion, has been misinterpreted, the girl is protected, but if anyone would consider MORAL values (seemingly long-forgotten), she is completely in the wrong, and should be prohibited from bearing something that HAS stood for racist beliefs.

I have several swastika's in my closet. They have nothing to do with Nazism, its a hindu religious symbol. The Nazi's adopted it for the same reason's the Hindu's still use it. Go to India, you'll see it everywhere. At weddings, at the entrance to every building, temples, home temples, in fields, on tools... etc.
Its a good luck thing. In fact, I have a neclace with a swastika on it (and yes, that is what it's called in India) and I think I'll go put it on.
Morality is not protected in the constitution. She has every right to wear what she wants. You don't have to agree with her, and you are completely within your rights to tell her that. But your right to moral living ends at your nose.

Morality is what makes gay marriage illegal.

EDIT:
Another thought comes to mind.
Hitler liked dogs, and brushed his teeth. Do you suggest we stop doing those things too?
Hitler was also a vegitarian. Are all vegitarians evil because Hitler was?

I am so sorry if I offended you--it was in no way intentional. I get so irritated about how society still accepts racism that I can tend to say irrational things, such as my comments about the swastika. I believe that people (as in the Indian culture) who use the swastika for non-racist reasons have every right to do so. But I still believe there is no reason to wear the Confederate flag.

How about we bring it down a notch.

I think that there are two sides to this. One is the argument that she has the right to say whatever she wants.

The other is that what she wears is objectionable.

Both sides, in this case, are right on in my opinion.

Legally speaking, the girl is able to say whatever she wants. This is a right protected by the first ammendment.

The other side is correct in that people find this offensive. The Confederacy represents rebellion and (to an extent) treason. These are the sort of things associated with it.

Swastikas may be just fine in India, but in America they are considered the symbol of the evil of facism. People should be sensitive to these cultural symbols, especially since the area that is defining them is American Culture.

I side with the teacher in this case though. Even though the student has a right to say what she wants, she must adhere to the dress code of the school. If she went to public school naked, she would have been sent home. The teacher is charged with the solemn responsibility of educating the youth in their charge. If a student is doing something (or wearing something) that is impeding the teacher in their duties, then the teachers should have a right to send them to the Principal's Office.

My concern over the ruling is that it gives the teacher less control over the environment which the students learn in. The teacher, however talented, can only do so much for the students if the learning environment is tainted.

Heritage not hate, I believe is the slogan used in the south protecting the confederate flag. Many still believe in a free south, without necisarily being racist. The two do not go hand in hand. The intolerance your talking about is the same intolerance you are showing because you think that anyone that wears a confederate flag is a racist. Thats not true. Many may be racists, but many at the same time are not.

Yet another thought comes to mind:
Lets say I am offended by anyone wearing religious symbols in school. I have serious moral problems with evangelism, and missionaries overstepping their grownds and trying to convert people. Requiring church attendance to give out aid, giving 'christian' names to people in Africa, etc etc. And the cross is a symbol of that. Do I have the right to make you take it off, any more than you have the right to make me take off my confederate shirt?

Even MORE thoughts come to mind:
The womans suffrage movement in the early 1900's used racism as a means for giving women the vote. The movement had existsted from before the civil war, and abolitionism was always a concern they adressed. Not for the interest of the slaves, for the interest of god fearing women everywhere. They're reason for abolitionism- sending blacks back to africa, and getting them out of this country. This trend continued all the way up until they were finally given the vote- more votes to keep black people down.
Does that mean that every time a woman votes, she's being a racist? Are you saying we should repeal that?

*sigh*

everything is going to offend someone. first amendment says that it doesn't bloody matter. unless the student's clothing a) violates a dress code or b) disrupts class, she can wear whatever the hell she wants. i know exactly how i feel about the confederacy, but it doesn't matter. what's law and what's moral are two different things.

Niamh wrote:I don't care what else the Confederacy stood for. How's this for an analogy: When Germany was taken by the Nazis, everyone there was poor and having to scrape a living because of the Treaty of Versailles made after WWI. The Nazis were supposedly trying to bring back Germany to its former glory, just like the way you are defending the Confederacy. So does that make it okay to wear a swastika? NO! Nothing will ever make it okay to wear a swastika, nor will anything ever make it okay to wear the Confederate flag. This argument has lost its validity, because under the Constitution, which in my opinion, has been misinterpreted, the girl is protected, but if anyone would consider MORAL values (seemingly long-forgotten), she is completely in the wrong, and should be prohibited from bearing something that HAS stood for racist beliefs.

yeeeeeeeah. liberty to ALL, dearest, saints and evil fascists included.

It is the same as paying respect to an ancestor by wearing the uniform of the KKK. There is freedom of speech, and there are restrictions - and particularly in schools, these restrictions are necessary.

I come to this discussion well-beyond its twilight. No matter.

There seems to be an issue at stake here; however, I can't quite see it for all the boring multicultural lingo cluttering up the view.

What some here have done is confuse the idea of offensive with racist, morality with the law, and pride with malginant intent. To be offensive, well, is to hurt somebody's feelings--plain as day. To be racist is a far different thing: it means you are actively supporting a certain eugenic ideological stance.

If, as some here have argued, that by wearing the shirt she is openly displaying a racist remark, let me ask what it means for someone to wear a Che Guevara shirt, or a Vladimir Lenin shirt? What about a Green Day shirt? What about a "Size Matters" shirt? Do you automatically assume they also actively support those causes? In the first two cases: no, hardly ever. In the second two: yes, most likely.

But why? Because the second pair is relevant, people are affected by it today. The reason Nazi and Stalinist symbols are more or less silently prohibitted from today's culture is because we are too close to those events, they are still too relevant for our culture to let the suffering of millions of people be trivialized and marginalized on someone's T-Shirt.

In the case of a Confederate Flag? I ask you, who do you know who has been personally affected by the Civil War or the actions of the Confederacy? Nobody. You can argue it affected their ancestors, but so what? The Confederacy does not have any impact on them today except when they use it to extract sympathy. To those who find it offensive: I ask how they have personally suffered under the Confederate regime.

There's a saying in American Law. One I value and keep close to my own thoughts at all times: "Only chase it if you have a dog in the hunt." These people, these sufferers who take offense, have no dog in the hunt. They need to toughen up and realize others can be proud of their heritage as well.

In all the terrifying swill produced by multiculturalists and people who see promoting a Confederate flag an act that needs to be restricted, the most terrifying of all is the cry for those heritages which offend others to be suppressed, even forgotten. These are the real offenders: those who would have you believe that because other people are offended by your ancestors, you can not display your love and affection for them. They literally want you to believe your blood isn't thicker than water.

In a few years time, when the last survivors of concentration camps and everything else that went on in WW2 are all dead, will it be right to be a Nazi? More importantly, will it ever be vlassed as inoffensive to Jewish people to identify yourself with them?

I'm not arguing that she should be stopped from wearing it, because I'm with Mill - being 'offensive' is not reason enough to take away someone's personal freedoms. However, I still think that wearing or flying a Confederate Flag is a slap in the face to anyone opposed, in principle, to the slave trade.

I couldn't really care less who is offended by such things, but the point remains: if you wear a Nazi shirt, regardless of who is alive to see it, then you say "I identify myself with people who tried to exterminate the Jewish people." That is the ramification of choosing to wear it. In the same way, if you wear a Confederate Flag shirt, you say "I identify myself with people who fought tooth and nail to keep the slave trade running." The fact that there were other issues doesn't really affect that a whole lot - there were tons of other issues affecting WW2, but claiming to be a Nazi still makes you an anti-Semite.

Wear what you want, I don't care: I think all hate laws should be abolished, myself. But if you wear a Confederate Shirt, then you claim to be part of that history and everything that comes with it; who knows, you may be lying, just like the vast majority of people who wear CCCP shirts, but that's not the point - by wearing it, you buy into it. And by buying into it, you're part of a history that includes support of the slave trade. That's just life: people's histories have strings attached, and it's not easy to get away from them.