Freethought & Rationalism Archive

03-15-2003, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Does the school choosing not to exercise its right, negate that right? No. Nor does it invalidate my argument. It does however, enforce my statement that the school is failing to teach her the difference between an administraion and a government.

Your use of the term "unquestionable" is questionable.

In Tinker v. Des Moines, the issue was suspension. A student may be prohibited from extra-currilular activities without suffering suspension. Therefore, the case does not set a direct precedent.

In WV v. Barnette, is not relevant for the same reason as Tinker with the added difference of the distinction between the "Pledge" and the "Anthem".

So unless there is wording in the decisions of these cases that extends their precedent beyond the circumstances of the individual cases then, their application in this situation is null.

Just to throw a little variance on the perspective, what kind of support do we suspect the school would show if, Smith's actions had been taking in protest to the governments's war on drugs?

Yes, you would be suspended from the after school activity, therefore it is not suspension from the school but the activity.

The pledge and the anthem could have the same logic applied to each, from the cases: The government should not force patriotic acts and has no power to do such. Im not sure of the exact wording, but I'll find it on tuesday, although I'm 99 percent sure it extends to the anthem.

The school has no right to tell anyone to stand for the anthem. I don't see how you can reconcile freedom of speech and forcing someone to support a patriotic anthem. There is no reason the government shoul be able to force patriotism at any time, and I'd love to see a court case where it claims the government has that power.

Even if the school doesn't support her, she'd sue, and most likely win.

Quote:

So, why do "they" have a right to kick her off the team if, she refuses to submit a urine sample upon demand?

A drugged up athlete posses a *danger* to others in school. I disagree that the government can order these random tests, but the logic cannot be applied to a freedom of speech issue when the drug issue is search and seizure and the right to privacy.

03-15-2003, 02:37 PM

I take that back, if she sued, she would probably not win anyway, because Manhattanville College is a private institution. If however, this was a public college, she would.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-15-2003, 02:37 PM	#82
himynameisPwn Guest Posts: n/a	I take that back, if she sued, she would probably not win anyway, because Manhattanville College is a private institution. If however, this was a public college, she would.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.