What is wrong with this picture?

Posted by: ST on April 21, 2006 at 8:15 am

So many things. The story:

SAN FRANCISCO – A suburban San Diego teenager who was barred from wearing a T-shirt with anti-gay rhetoric to class lost a bid to have his high school’s dress code suspended Thursday after a federal appeals court ruled the school could restrict what students wear to prevent disruptions.

The ruling by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals addressed only the narrow issue of whether the dress code should be unenforced pending the outcome of the student’s lawsuit.

A majority of judges said, however, that Tyler Chase Harper was unlikely to prevail on claims that the Poway Unified School District violated his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion for keeping him out of class when he wore a shirt with the message “homosexuality is shameful.”

Tyler Chase Harper sued the Poway Unified School District in San Diego federal court after the principal at Poway High School refused to let the student attend class wearing a T-shirt scrawled with the message “homosexuality is shameful.”

Harper was a sophomore at Poway High in 2004 when he wore the T-shirt the day after a group called the Gay-Straight Alliance held a “Day of Silence” to protest intolerance of gays and lesbians. The year before, the campus was disrupted by protests and conflicts between students over the Day of Silence.

Ok, I understand (a little) why a school would take objection to a shirt that has the potential to stir up trouble (like a rebel flag shirt would at a school in South Carolina, for example). My problem with this is: if this is all about being concerned about “disruption” why hold “Day of Silence” at the school in the first place?

On Thursday, the three-judge appeals court panel said “the school is permitted to prohibit Harper’s conduct…if it can demonstrate that the restriction was necessary to prevent either the violation of the rights of other students or substantial disruption of school activities.”

Huh? What “other students” rights were “violated” here outside of Harpers’? Also, isn’t “Day of Silence” in and of itself a disruption? Yes, it is. So I guess that would mean that those who have approved and those who organized “Day of Silence” could have had their “conduct” prohibited, too?

The lone dissenter on the 9th Circus got it right:

Judge Alex Kozinski wrote a blistering dissent, arguing that the high school had in effect authorized a heated debate over sexual orientation when it allowed the “Day of Silence.”

“Harper’s T-shirt was not an out-of-the-blue affront to fellow students who were minding their own business,” Kozinski wrote. “Rather, Harper wore his T-shirt in response to the Day of Silence, a political activity that was sponsored or at the very least tolerated by school authorities.”

The school district attorney’s comment:

Jack Sleeth, a school district attorney, said that the 9th Circuit ruling supports the district’s prohibition against T-shirts with messages that are offensive to some.

“When it violates the rights of other[s], then it can be prohibited,” Sleeth said. “It is that simple of an issue.”

REALLY? Perhaps Mr. Sleeth will clarify at a later time exactly what “rights of others” he believes were violated. Is there a “right to not be offended” somewhere in the Constitution? Maybe I missed it.

The more I think of it, the more I believe that this wasn’t about “disruption” – it was about political correctness, pure and simple. And when it comes to PC, there’s not a court anywhere that issues more PC-type rulings than the 9th Circus.

Others blogging about this: Eugene Volokh, Stop The ACLU

Fri AM Update: The LA Times provides a more in depth look at the court ruling:

Schools in the western United States can forbid a high school student from wearing a T-shirt that denigrates gay and lesbian students, a sharply divided federals appeals court in San Francisco ruled today.

In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said that a T-shirt that proclaimed “Be Ashamed, Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned” on the front and “Homosexuality Is Shameful” on the back was “injurious to gay and lesbian students and interfered with their right to learn.” The court said that the shirt can be barred on a public high school campus without violating the 1st Amendment.

“We conclude that” Poway High School student Tyler Harper’s wearing of his T-shirt ” ‘collides with the rights of other students’ in the most fundamental way,” wrote 9th Circuit Judge Stephen Reinhardt, quoting a passage from Tinker vs. Des Moines Independent Community School District, a seminal U.S. Supreme Court decision on the free speech rights of students.

“Public school students who may be injured by verbal assaults on the basis of a core identifying characteristic such as race, religion, or sexual orientation have a right to be free from such attacks while on school campuses. As Tinker clearly states, students have the right to ‘be secure and to be let alone,’ ” Reinhardt said.

“Being secure involves not only the freedom from physical assaults but from psychological attacks that cause young people to question their self-worth and their rightful place in society. The ‘right to be let alone’ has been recognized by the Supreme Court … as the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men,” Reinhardt said.

Three things we ‘learn’ here from the 9th Circus ruling: 1) there is a “right” to learn in this country, 2) you have a “right” to be free from “psychological attacks” and 3) if you argue successfully that you felt psychologically and physically threatened by someone expressing an opposing opinion to yours, you can successfully convince a US court to infringe on that person’s freedom of speech rights while being perfectly free to exercise your own.

Again, I’d like to repeat my earlier claim that I could understand (a little) the school wanting to prevent “disruption” but if “disruption” were what this was about, the school wouldn’t allow “Day of Silence” in the first place because of the clear disruption it causes.

As a sidenote, when did public schools become the place to have days of recognition for sexual preferences? Is there a “right” somewhere in the Constitution for that, too?

(original posting at 12:03 AM)

Related Toldjah So posts:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Trackbacks

  • Random Thoughts Of Yet Another Military Member trackbacked with It’s The End Of Free Speech (And I Don’t Feel Fine)
  • Danny Carlton -- alias "Jack Lewis" trackbacked with San Francisco Court upholds censorship of anti-homosexuality messages
  • Church and State trackbacked with Reinhardt And Cohorts Of 9th Circus Strike Again
  • All Things Beautiful trackbacked with "Be Ashamed Our School Embraced What God Has Condemned"
  • The Debate Link trackbacked with The Hate Speech Ruling Crits Were Waiting For
  • Blogs for Bush: The White House Of The Blogosphere trackbacked with A Tale Of Two Standards
  • 48 Responses to “What is wrong with this picture?”

    Comments

    1. solitaire says:

      Ok, I’ll speak.
      If I am black and I wear a t-shirt advocating tolerance and diversity in a racially mixed school and it is countered by a white youth with a t-shirt that reads “African Americans are shameful”… who has tread on who?

    2. forest hunter says:

      Solitaire,why do you want to play the black kid in a softball shirt and show the white kid advocating hand grenades for a daily snack and expect an intelligent answer for a loaded question? Perhaps you can explain to me what race baiting means. Or are you just trying to say that African Americans are fruitcakes?

      I thought that the school sponsored or at least tolerated day of silence (for whatever that’s worth) seemed like an appropriate time, as he was apparently silently wearing his shirt…..unlike Professor Sally, who led a group and acted upon their emotions by ripping up the crosses at NKU (I think).

      What the hell’s wrong with having schools be for education as opposed to indoctrination and political rallies? Is it too much to ask for them to simply do the job assigned to them or is this the job that’s been assigned, either through a blind eye or by silent inference. Day of silence indeed……..

    3. sanity says:

      His rights were trampled that is to be certain.

      As to the crosses, we have said, that if the professor wanted to display her own freedom of speech she could have erected a display of her own, even if it was right next to the other display of crosses.

      As long as it does not take away the freedom of speech of another.

      What happened here was a a gay-rights managed ot get the school to initiate a ‘day of silence’ in support of their agenda. This student, who disagreed with this agenda, decided to wear a shirt that expressed his feelings during this ‘day of silence’.

      He was told his freedom of speech does not count essentailly.

      If I beleive homosexuality is shameful is shameful, am I not allowed to express that view? As long as it does not deny the right of others to express their rights of freedom of speech?

      What of those that wear Che t-shirts?
      Or burn an american flag?
      Or remove an american flag and put up a mexican flag?
      Or fly the american flag upside down?
      Or hold up sidns that are offensive like Bush as hitler, or the devil, or F*CK BUSH, ect?

      We allow such things to be done in the name of freedom of speech, even though we do not like it or it will possibly offend us. It is their right to voice their opinions.

      So does this right only apply to those who have a problem with Bush then?

      Or do we allow people to have a voice, a freedom of speech, to let their opinions and feelings known?

      We allow neo-nazi groups to march and protest, even though it inflames feelings. I personally detest what they stand for, but I will defend their right to say their garbage, because even though it is garbage, they have a right to say it. Just as we have the right to counter-protest or essentially tell them where they can shove their message, in a non-violent manner.

      That is why I think this student’s rights of freedom of speech was impeded.

      I am curious, does it say or does anyone know whether this was a ‘mandatory’ day of silence?

      If it was, is that not a forceable restriction of freedom of speech of the students, to be made to participate?

      Also, does that now mean, since gay-rights activists have been allowed to coem into a public school and get a ‘day of silence’ in recognition of their agenda, does this mean other groups now can also?

      Does this open the door to allow other groups with their own agendas to come in, and get students to participate for their agendas?

      What about no-nanzis that ask for a day of silnce for white power?

      or Anti-war activists that ask for a day of silnce for the dead troops?

      or Pro-war activists that ask for a day of silence, r to wear ribbons in support of the troops?

      You get my drift.

      I think schools need to concentrate on teaching school studies like reasing, writing, arithmatic, and leave activism and such to universities and colleges.

      And I definately think it should not be mandatory to participate, IF that was the case here.

    4. sanity says:

      Good grief, I need to proof read if I am going to write before having coffee in the morning…ungh

      sorry.

    5. Jim M says:

      ST, couldn’t agree with you more “The 9th Circus Court” is exactly right this is about the only way liberals can push forward their agenda is judicial activism.

      Forest, what’s wrong with schools is simple they are Government Indoctrination Centers they are a monopoly when you have a monopoly they don’t have to perform they can give lousy service what are you going to do? On top of being a monopoly you have the teachers union the largest most powerful union that is more interested in teacher’s wages than teaching children. Unfortunately liberals seem to be in abundance in schools so you are going to get the “Political Correctness” shoved down student’s throats. Just remember Zero Tolerance equals Zero Thought and just what are schools suppose to be teaching could it be to think to use your head for something other than a place to pierce and hang jewelry.

      Solitare, let’s compare apples to apples how about this, one kid wears a shirt that says “Proud to be Gay” and another kid wears a shirt that says “Proud to be Straight”. I will guarantee the kid with the straight shirt will be told to remove his or her shirt because it could be offensive to the gay student. With this ruling of the 9th Circus Court there is a double standard with people in the minority status you can not offend them by wearing or saying anything offensive. Just tell me where it is, a law or a Constitutional Right that anyone is guaranteed not to be “offended”. Maybe schools should have uniforms that way there will be nothing worn with anything “Offensive” or “Politically Incorrect” on it. With uniforms it could go along with zero tolerance the faculty would not have to decide what is offensive and what is not “no thinking”.

    6. stackja1945 says:

      The left is easily offended by anything they think is right.

    7. delen says:

      Jim W

      Proud to be straight would no matter how much it pains you would be allowed as would proud to white (given that there are no white power symbols) neither of these says anything negative about another group. However the mention of the oh so offensive day of silence makes me think the real target here was the schools GSA (gay-straight alliance) chapter. This sexually oriented group(except for the fact they never discuss sex) has been the target of certain groups for some time and apparently these groups will use their children as targets to get national attention. I suspect this kid went to school wearing the shirt in the hopes of winding up in a high profile court case, because this it a win-win situation if you win the case it allows pushing the envelope further and if you lose well this post says it all-nothing like appearing to be the victims of the gay agenda

    8. sanity says:

      Trouble is delen, why should there be a gay-agenda in a public school?

      I chalk that right up there with be a muslim for a day, or be a jew for a day.

      If you hadn’t heard of the be a jew for a day, no one was notified, not even parents, kids go tto school and a portion of them were given yellow stars to wear. All around the school, bathrooms, water fountains, ect, were marked not for those wearing yellow stars. They were made to sit in the back, ect.

      At the end of the day, these kids were not givben any lesson in what jews went through.

      When asked what the kids learned, the kids all said, that I don’t want to be a jew!

      Things like this should not be taught in the classrooms. I did not have this when i went to school, and I am not homophobic, I am not a bigot ect.

      So why the explosion of gay-activism in school?
      Why the day of being muslim?
      Why the day of being a jew?

      Especially when most times it is not showing anything of real importance, just like in the what its liek to be a jew for a day- all it taught the kids was to hate being a jew.

      Teachers need to stick to what is important.
      Teach the children to read, to write, to do arithmatic. TEACH!

      Quit trying to play politics with the children.

      I would be interested in how other countries, like India and such teach their children. I see a disporportionate amount of engineers where I work come from other countries like China and India..ect.

      How do they teach their children?
      I wonder, do they play politics with the children?
      Or do they teach them, and make them learn, and they come to the US….where our children are stuck being taught what its like to be a jew, or muslim, or silence for a day for gay-activism…

      Where does the US rank in the world for teaching and learning for our children?

    9. G-Monster says:

      I really don’t think highschool is a place to promote sexuality. It is a place to learn history, math, etc. These kids are going to need these skills to get a job. Letting political action groups into your highschool is a really stupid idea. Let the kids be kids, and let them learn the things they are suppposed to be learning.

    10. forest hunter says:

      delen: I don’t see where the day of silence was referred to as being offensive, nor was that the thrust of this thread, as far as I can see.

      Your analysis of the parents using the kids to advance their GSA agenda is no surprise, but as I have stated many times, schools are for learning the basics, not indoctrinating minds into copying patterns of behaviour that more often than not, follow the socialist/communist mindmeld.

      As to your suspicions about the kid wearing his silent statement, it’s of course your unsubstantiated opinion and you’re free to make that leap. Having breached that cloudy concept, you then begin building a case of moore airy proposals, without the benefit of any visible foundation.

    11. forest hunter says:

      Sanity: “I would be interested in how other countries teach” -in Japan there are no political or for that matter any things that aren’t curriculum based allowed at the highschool level on down, as in zero, as far as I have seen in nearly ten years.

      It’s only when they are in their late teens and early twenties, when they know everything that there is to know, that they start to demonstrate their ignorance at or from the Universities. But it’s rare, as they are a very focused group of people and serious students. In fact, the ones that grab the face time have more points stickin’ outa’ their heads than what they actually have to say. They look like a jewelery landmark, complete with chains and pants fallin’ off their ass, to highlight their supreme intelligence.

    12. Jim M says:

      Forest, John Stossel had a great segment on 20/20 called “Stupid in America” you need to read it, it’s a great article on how lousy public schools are and the one that followed on teachers unions and NY Public Schools (Government Schools).

    13. - So its ok to advocate for gays/gay life style, but offensive to have displays of Christmas in the schools. Sexual orientation belongs in the privacy of peoples bedrooms, not paraded in public with the usual “in-your-face” flair, and in schools its just absurd. But in this day and age, apparently the Liberal courts think they’re leveling the playing field with these sorts of lop-sided jusdgements.

      – Apparently if you’re in the minority, you get a pass and do not have to respect others free speech rights.

      – I guess I’m fortunate because the high school my son attends has zero tolorance for all forms of “activism”, and disciplined every student that went AWOL on the Hispanic “hookey days”. Same with the dress code. Advocacy is permitted, but not disparagement, and his school is a real mix of every nationality, primarily hispanic.

      – I’m intimately familiar with the Poway district. At one time it was sighted as the top school district in the country for academic excellance. Then it was targeted by certain minority focus groups, and its been one thing after another ever since.

      – Maybe we need some sort of Constitutional amendment making it illegal for the public school system to engage in any sort of political advocacy. Politics and sex have more than enough venues, and the public school system should not be one of them, no matter how much it upsets the Liberals.

      – Bang **==

    14. Robert says:

      Tolerance shouldn’t be considered political.
      In fact, its something that should be taught in school.

      The kid w/ the shirt should be allowed to wear it at school.
      It should have opened up a discussion. (Asking him why he thinks homosexuality is shameful would be a good start in getting a discussion going).

      BTW, flying the Mexican flag above an American flag should be no more a taboo (in fact, less of one) than having a Confederate symbol on a state flag like Georgia.

    15. Randy says:

      Yeah, his right to be a bigot should be tolerated. If I were his teacher, I think I might just challenge his assumptions and even humiliate him in front of his classmates. That should be tolerated speech too. I’m serious. I’m for free speech. Period. It’s pretty shameful that they took that poor lady away for shouting at Hu. People’s rights are 1st amendment rights are being trampled on every day, from all sides. By the way, I think that “Day of Silence” crap is stupid and I’m a lefty.

    16. Rogrog says:

      The difference is that it’s no disruption if some students elect to remain silent for a day as a demonstration – as far as I know the school had nothing officially to do with that.

      In the same way that a Christian group can hold ‘see you at the pole’ events, gays can hold ‘days of silence’, as long as it’s not disruptive. If the school does nothing about events organised by groups of students, that doesn’t mean the school is sponsoring them or forcing them on the students (and I’ve not seen any evidence that the school had anything to do with this Day of Silence thing, seems like the GSA handled it on their own).

      If a student were to wear an Aryan Nation shirt during Passover (or indeed at any other time) I’d expect that he would be asked to change his outfit as well, since a charged message like that is likely to cause a significant disruption, as opposed to remaining silent which is not.

    17. Jim M says:

      Randy, The only thing I would say about the right to free speech is you have a right to speak put you have no right for people to listen. Other words you have no right to make people listen to what you have to say and with free speech depending on what is said there could be consequences. Just ask the Dixie Chicks. Remember for every action there is an equal and positive reaction.

    18. “I think I might just challenge his assumptions and even humiliate him in front of his classmates.”

      – No. A teachers job is to teach, not advocate.What you should do is campaign for no displays that will incite. Thats one of the main problems with the left. They think freedom of speech extends to freedom to incite a riot.

      – There used to be serious “disturb the peace”, and “for the better public good” laws in this country, and rather than less we need them more than ever as the population grows.

      – Individual, or minority rights do not trump the greater public good. If you have any common sense you know that as a group/society grows in density you have to adjust or chaos will ensue. Trying to apply ideal answers to real world problems and disagreements will usually get people hurt or killed. Its really a question of acting responsibly, not some social studies 101 theorum.

      – I don’t like it either, but pretending the world works otherwise is just willful ignorance.

      – Bang **==

    19. Jim M says:

      Robert, FYI the Georgia flag does not have the St. Andrews cross on it.

      :-?

    20. Jim M says:

      Also Robert if you want to fly another country’s flag over the flag of the United States why don’t you move to that country.
      **==

    21. PCD says:

      Randy, if I were your principal, I’d fire you on the spot the first time you tried humiliating a student who differed from your political positions. This is a high school, not “The Paper Chase”.

    22. G Monster says:

      The kid doesn’t need to wear the t-shirt. There should be no gay day. There should really be no debate. In fact I am not even going to post this. Everyone get back to thier jobs.

    23. solitaire says:

      Oh sure, you’re all so ‘free speech’ oriented unless it’s speech you don’t agree with, like the general’s.
      Listen, if I sent my kid to school with a t-shirt that read “Christians are idolators” or “white people hate”, you can bet there would be an uproar.
      You want to make this about “Individual, or minority rights do not trump the greater public good”? What public good did wearing an insulting and offensive “Homosexuality is shameful” message on the T-shirt serve? It’s just another form of bullying.

    24. Tyler Chase: raging homo. I bet he has a stack of “body building” magazines under his bed.

    25. steve says:

      I learned that Tyler Chase Harper’s response to a pro-tolerance demonstration, was hate speech. Hopefully, bush doesn’t take note of Judge Alex Kozinski, an obvious catholic, and anti-gay ideologue, or he will have him on the Supreme Court. How judge Alex pulled sexual orientation into the arena only shows his own complete lack of tolerance. The Left is only against what is wrong, not what is Right. It just so happens that the Right is, in general, wrong. Peace

    26. sanity says:

      Really now steve?

      Wrong?

      Like you?

      Still waiting for your answer and proof on where you got your information in another post, that you were completely wrong on steve.

      Still waiting for your proof and where you got your information.

      Because the Left is, in general, wrong.

    27. delen says:

      First off I should have put “gay agenda” in quotation marks as I don’t believe there is one any more then there was a “black agenda” in the ’60’s.I mentioned the “Day of Slence” because it was brought up in the original post and DoS is a GSA function and is not manditory. To those that are concerned about playing politics with children-why then did this kid wear the shirt (I wasn’t aware that it was in conjuction with the DoS) and why was it then taken to court (by the kid or his family) if not for political reasons. GSA does not promote homosexuallity it is for gay and straifgt kids to get together and discuss issues that surround these kids. No actual discussion of sex takes place. And finally why am I so sure- my daughter has been a member during all 3 of her high school years, yes I was concerned, but only for her safety (Ihave attended) meetings). Having said that, there is an obvious question which I will answer the same way my daughter does when asked or confronted both have happened-she simply repetes the name of the organization verrrry slowllly incase anyone misses it. ’nuff said on that. Now I have a question why do right wingers fall back on “freedom of speech” only when supporting hate speech would allow a kid to wear a shirt with derogitory statements about race or religion or does it depend on exactly who is being derided.ie Christan kid wear shirt derogitory to muslims vs muslim kid wearing shirt derogitory to Christians- personally I don’t think either shirt should be allowed but hey I’m a “moonbat”

    28. “….Judge Alex Kozinski, an obvious catholic, and anti-gay ideologue….”

      – Would that be something like your anti-success, anti-Catholic, anti-Jew bigotry Steve?

      – Or is your bigotrys somehow “better bigotrys”?

      – Bang **==

    29. forest hunter says:

      Who keeps knockin’ over the damn petri dishes?

    30. G Monster says:

      I’m not for or against the gays…I actually think the lesbo’s are pretty hot though.

    31. G Monster says:

      Well…I mean the good looking ones…not some of those beasts you see at protest rallys…

    32. forest hunter says:

      Or steves underpass

    33. G Monster says:

      eeewwww

    34. steve says:

      The only thing I’m “anti” is intolerance. Well, anti-war and anti-violence and anti-spying without a warrant and anti-prunes, I really don’t like prunes. Peace

    35. - Actually steve, you should try to get used to prunes, then maybe you wouldn’t be so full of s***.

      – Bang **==

    36. stackja1945 says:

      The left is intolerant of anything they think is right.

    37. - Ok Steve. You’ve made a claim.

      “The only thing I’m “anti” is intolerance.”

      Where are all you words of outrage about Mz Jacobson physically attacking the student cross display, and letting her “intolorance” rule her common sense.

      – I don’t recall any.

      – Thats the ongoing problem of the left. the carefully crafted “activism”, only when it suits your agenda, and opposes the Right. Amazing you go on thinking that people do not see through your feckless hypocricies.

      – In other words what you’re really against is anything on the “Right”. Period. Dumb. Transparent.

      – Bang **==

    38. gil says:

      Sanity.

      In response to your comment of 4/21.

      You have really strange ideas.

      To who is the Che offensive hair stylists?

      Would you care to try your flag burning, flag changing stunt in a public school? You may need to find out first hand where would the Police shove your “Freedom of Speach” ideas.

      Fortunately in our country there is a place and a time for almost everything. If the kid wants to wear his T-shirt, burn a flag or two, and piss on the Che he is more than welcomed, provided that he does it IN THE RIGHT PLACE and TIME.

      Our kids go to class to learn not to parade the latest T-Shirts slogans….. or at least that is how we want to keep it.

    39. - solitaire – I made it abundently clear that any displays that incite are not in the best interest of the greater good.

      – The issue is permiting one voice and not the other. in a word “partiality”. If there has to be any “messages” I would support positive ones, nothing disparaging. But really I just don’t think sexual orientaion/political messages belong in the school system. Clearer?

      – Bang **==

    40. Jason says:

      Gosh, I can’t wait to wear my “Being black is shameful.” T-shirt…Free speech is so important…It’s about time the right stands up for my right to hate!

    41. Marshall Art says:

      First of all, let me just say that steve is a freakin’ idiot. I know that’s just the type of ad hominem attack that is usually discouraged at sites like these, but it’s no worse than allowing his posts where it is all too evident. Besides, I mean it in a very clinical sense.

      Next, despite the alleged fact that teens are incapable of controlling themselves, I believe it is indeed a fact that they controlled themselves in greater percentages back when pre-marital and other forms of sex were widely considered improper behavior. (That would be pre-Hefner.) Thus, all discussions of sexual behavior, straight or otherwise, should be restricted in schools to that which discourages it until adulthood. Self-discipline, character, honor, as described back during those halcyon days (pre-Hef) should be highlighted. The current attitude of “they’re gonna do it anyway”, is total abdication of parental responsibility and there should be a T-shirt depicting it’s shamefulness as well.

      There seems to be an imbalance regarding the push to protect gay/lesbian students from harrassment or heckling in schools these days. Yet, school has always been a place where some kids will unload on other kids. If a victim ain’t gay, he’s fat, homely, geeky, or a hundred other possibilities for attack. It’s what kids do. Some teachers put rainbows or other “gay” symbols on their classroom doors or windows to proclaim them “safe zones” for gay kids. Fine. How about a cheeseburger picture for the fat kids, or something for the poor kids or a dunce cap picture for kids like steve? There is a push in schools that is aligned with the gay agenda of total acceptance that is inconsistent with any valid scientific data to support it. The GSA may not talk about sex in their meetings, but do they ever mention, for the sake of the kids they purport to protect, the dangers of the lifestyle? Not to my knowledge. The GSA is indeed an advocacy group no matter how it’s dressed up. The Day of Silence is also an advocacy event and the T-shirt worn by Harper is an appropriate message of opposition that is in no way “hate speech” as it’s message is not hateful. Rather, it is merely a different point of view. Different POV’s are often hurtful by virtue of it contrary position, but that doesn’t make it hate speech. As said by others, if the school allows one side of an issue, it must allow the other. Those who claim offense are stifling the free speech of their opponents. In this case, it’s just more shameful behavior and a T-shirt is needed for that.