Analysis Of The Article ' Bong Hits And Arms Bands On School '

In December of 1965, a group of Des Moines students held a meeting at 16-year-old Christopher Eckhardt’s house to plan a public showing of their support for a truce in the Vietnam war. They came to the decision that they would wear black armbands during the holiday season and fast on December 16 as well as New Year’s Eve. When the principals of the Des Moines school learned about the plan, they met on December 14 to create a policy stating that any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it, and would be suspended if they refused to do so. On December 16, Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore their armbands to school and were consequently sent home. The next day, John Tinker did the same thing, and was also suspended. The students did not come back to school until after New Year’s Day, the planned end of the protest.

Citizens in America are born with a various amount of rights. One of these rights include the freedom of speech and expression. However, school administrators have the ability to restrict a student’s expression. The Supreme Court Cases ‘Bethel School District v. Fraser’ and ‘Frederick V. Morse’ gave schools the right for the administrators to discipline children when they see fit. Students should be able to express themselves in any way without fearing that their school administrators will discipline

Over five years have passed since high school senior Joseph Frederick was suspended for 10 days by school principal Deborah Morse after refusing her request to take down a 14-foot banner he was displaying at a school-sanctioned event which read “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” Born as a seemingly trivial civil lawsuit in which Frederick sued the school for violating his First Amendment rights to free speech, the case made its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the long-awaited ruling of Morse v. Frederick has finally been released. In a 5-4 split decision, the court ruled in favor of Morse and upheld the school board’s original ruling that Morse was acting within her rights and did not violate Frederick’s First Amendment rights by taking away his

December of 1965, a group of adults and a few students of Des Moines Independent Community School District including John Tinker, Mary Beth and their friend Eckhard gathered to show they disfavor towards American involvement in the Vietnam war. Few students decided to wear black armbands to express their objections to the hostilities in Vietnam. The three Tinker students among with their friends were suspended for wearing the armbands. All of them did not return to school until after New Year. Acting through their parents, they all went to the Federal District Court to ask for injunctions but the court declined the idea, forcing them to take the case to the Supreme

During the Olympic Torch Relay through Juneau, Alaska on January 24, 2002, Joseph Frederick, senior at Juneau-Douglas High School, held up a banner saying "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" Principal, Deborah Morse, told Frederick to put away the banner, because she was concerned it could be encouraging illegal drug activity. Frederick refused to take the sign down, so she took the banner from him. Frederick was suspended from school for 10 days for violating school policy, which does not allow any use or advertisement of illegal drugs. But later, Frederick took the principal in front of a jury to settle the consequences. Frederick believed Morse was going against the First Amendment, Freedom of Speech. The U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska ruled in Morse favor, saying that Frederick's action was not protected by the First Amendment.

A public school student who was named Joseph Fredrick attended Juneau-Douglas High School. He was suspended for displaying a banner saying " Bongs Hits Jesus", at a Olympic Torch Relay that was part of a school activity. Deborah Morse the principal at Juneau-Douglas High School was worried that the sign could be interpreted by people as advocating illegal drugs. Fredrick was then suspended by Deborah Morse for not obeying and violating the schools policy that doesn't allow advocating the use of illegal drugs. Fredrick sued them because he believed it was violating his right to freedom of speech.

In December of 1965 Mary Beth Tinker, John Tinker, and Christopher Eckhardt were suspended from the Des Moines public school system for wearing black armbands supporting a truce during the Vietnam War (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, n.d). Mary Beth and John’s younger siblings, Hope and Paul, also participated in the protest (Tinker v. Des Moines, 2013). Mary Beth, John, and Christopher’s suspension was lifted following the Christmas break when the students’ planned protest ended and they no longer were going to wear the armbands (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, n.d). The students’ parents sued the school district on behalf of their children (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community

In the case of Shanna’s Shirt, the school district had a written policy in place stating that “clothing may not advocate or advertise drugs, alcohol, or tobacco and may not contain lewd, profane, or vulgar language or symbols.” Clearly, Shanna’s shirt did not violate the policy. The school district should consider adding another criteria that bans clothing that causes substantial disruption and also include banning hate messages. In the case of Shanna’s shirt, a previous case of Harper v. Poway (2006) ruling by the U.S. Supreme court upheld the ban of a similar shirt that read “Homosexuality is Shameful. Romans 1:27.” The court used the reasoning that the language violated the rights of other students by being hurtful to the offended

Paul Simms is asserting how a foreign power enters an uninvited space and forces the people of that space to give them all of their goods. This is not right, because it is practically using these people as only tools, or an even worse comparison, slaves. Back in the old days when the European countries started to colonize, they drifted to the undeveloped country of Africa. Without their consent, they were forced to export their goods to the Europeans and even become their slaves. After that it was again the Europeans with the Natives in the Americas. It is not right, it’s taking other people’s belongings without their permission, without any right to take it, and then using it for your own profit. It’s selfish and cruel to the people because

School boards often do not adequately justify their reasons for denying High School Students their first amendment rights. Usually, the

The subject of student rights has caused a lot of confusion and anger for decades now. There are two different sides that everyone seems to fall into. Some people want the constitutional rights of students to be fully protected within the school. The other side believes that, as a public institution, schools should regulate what is said or done by students to protect everyone involved. This is where it gets confusing, because it is hard to draw the line between what is allowed or not. The three most interesting topics that I chose to cover are a student’s right to free speech, religion within the school and student privacy.

There are lots of different situations where students of a public school are deprived of their right of free expression given in the fourth amendment. One example of this is the case of Engel vs Vitale. This court case took place in 1962 when a parent of a child sued because of a New York State law that required students to recite a nondenominational prayer every morning, "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and beg Thy blessings upon us, our teachers, and our country”. This law goes against the Establishment of Religion clause of the fourth amendment. Another violation of The Bill of Rights is the Tinker v. Des Moines case. This case took place in 1969 when two students, MaryBeth Tinker, and her brother wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam war. However, the result of this action, according to the article, Supreme Court Landmarks from the United States Courts, “ Fearing a disruption, the

“Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech...”. This is what our first amendment speaks about. The freedom of speech and expression. Schools have been violating this law in the place of school dress codes. There should not be a dress code in school because it violates the first amendment, they do not support creativity and they are expensive.

The life of Siddhartha Gautama has captivated millions of people around the world. Millions of humans practice and try to live a life free of possessions and free of distractions from the materialistic plane of existence we call society. In essence, a popular belief about life becomes mainstream and therefore a new religion is created. I would argue that Buddhism is merely a way of approaching life from an uncharacteristic perspective. Therefore, I am suggesting that the Buddha created a philosophy and deserves a place among the great fathers of human thought such as Aristotle, Plato, and many others. Where Buddhism differentiates from the three major religions of the world, is the amazing techniques that Buddhists pursue every day to optimize their inner thinking within. The philosophies of Buddhism and new research in the scientific community surrounding techniques done by its followers, has created a growing interest in the way of life, especially in western culture. Going along, we will explore what makes this so.

As an educator, it is extremely important to know educational policies. On top of the knowledge, it is also imperative to respect the rights granted to students in the democratic society. Attached above is an article, published by the first amendment center, regarding how the first amendment is employed within public schools. The first topic in the article is titled speaking out in school. Here I learned that the school cannot limit the student’s freedom of speech, unless it is hindering the environment to learn, and even then, there is a lot of grey area. Here the school must be able to provide substantial evidence that the student’s writing, speech, or expression would cause great disruption. This also ties directly into school dress code and uniforms required by the school corporation. Students, in many