NAACP wants students expelled
Find a Conversation
NAACP wants students expelled
| Wed, 11-12-2008 - 5:19pm |
Is this something you agree with or disagree with?
| Wed, 11-12-2008 - 5:19pm |
Is this something you agree with or disagree with?
Pages
The students didn't send anything threatening to the President nor the President elect.
<>
I weighed in on the Palin doll and I found it a disgusting display as well. SOME people might argue that it's "art" but I certainly wouldn't. The difference here is that the man did it on his own property (did he not)? Therefore firing or expelling him would not have been an option in any case.
In the case of the school, they do have a policy in place regarding racism....but to me, it isn't so much the racism that takes it so far over the line and might merit expulsion, but the call for murder/death threat aspect of it. It also did not happen on private property, so the school should have the authority to deal with it as they see fit. I'd have an issue if McCain had won and there were calls to kill him as well.
We can only be said to be alive in those moments when our hearts are conscious of our treasures.
<>
I understand.
<>
I draw the line at death threats "free" space or not....Just because one might not have been taken seriously (even though the situation differs as it was on private property) does mean that it shouldn't have or it should let the other off the hook. The main difference about these incidences is that whether this was deemed legal or illegal (and I do think there is a law regarding death threats towards the president/pres-elect)....is that this was not done on private property and the school has policies in place that it is allowed to enforce apart from what is deemed technically legal.
In Canada we do have laws against hate speech and uttering death threats....It's problematic in some instances, but I support having such laws, so I'm probably not the best one for this debate.
Edited 11/13/2008 12:10 pm ET by suemox
Actually, statements like "Kill Bill" when they refer to a real person are not considered protected speech under the 1st Amendment. It's like that old "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" and expect to be protected from prosecution. Such statements have the potential for real danger to the public or to an individual and are thus not considered protected speech.
If we treat all speech as protected, there are lots of things to which you object which would be permitted.
>But that group really promotes hate and anger towards people that aren't black.
When I was in high school in the 1980s, my school had a spirit rock where they encouraged students to paint whatever they wanted.
That is until we all arrived one day to the rock painted completely black, with a noose and KKK printed
Pages