Steve9347 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 (edited) link 5th Grader Suspended for Anti-Obama Shirt AURORA (MyFOXColorado.com) - An 11-year-old in Aurora says his first amendment rights are being trampled after he was suspended for wearing a homemade shirt that reads "Obama is a terrorist's best friend." The fifth grader at Aurora Frontier K-8 School wore it on a day when students were asked to wear red, white and blue to show their patriotism. The boy's father Dann Dalton describes himself as a "proud conservative" who has taken part in some controversial anti-abortion protests. Dalton says the school made a major mistake by suspending his son for wearing the shirt. Aurora fifth-grader suspended for home madetshirt reading "Obama is a terrorist's best friend." 9/22/08 "It's the public school system," Dalton says. "Let's be honest, it's full of liberal loons." According the the boy's father, the school district told the student, Daxx Dalton, that he had the choice of changing his shirt, turning his shirt inside out or being suspended. Daxx chose suspension. "They're taking away my right of freedom of speech," he says. "If I have the right to wear this shirt I'm going to use it. And if the only way to use it is get suspended, then I'm going to get suspended." Daxx's dad agrees with him and is encouraging his son to stand his ground. "The facts are his rights were violated. Period." Aurora Public Schools would not talk about the case but said the district "Respects a student's right to free speech, such as the right to wear specific clothing," but administrators say they review any situation that interrupts the learning environment. Paperwork submitted by the school district says Daxx Dalton was not suspended for wearing the shirt, but for willful disobedience and defiance. The boy's father says he intends to pursue a lawsuit against the district. Edited September 23, 2008 by Steve9347 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almagest Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Yeah, I'm sure this 10 year old kid cares about first amendment rights. I'm sure he even knows what they are. I love when parents use their children as outlets for wacko ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Basically it boils down to that kids have no rights in a public school setting. They have very little freedom of speech in a school setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&T Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 The school gave him the options and he took the wrong one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Great to see a father using his young child as a tool for his political agenda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted September 23, 2008 Author Share Posted September 23, 2008 Couldn't agree more... his dad cared more about his agenda than his son's attendance at school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Seems like dad wanted attention. I've been solidly in favor of school dress codes. I'd love to see a uniform system adopted in all school districts. And to be fair, the school needs to drop this wear r/w/b, spirit week crazy hat, stuff and all the variations. Either it is important what you wear, or it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 (edited) That shirt is pretty outrageous, and obviously a case of the parents political agenda being pushed since it's homemade, so I can't blame the school for taking action. I mean, the comment that school systems are full of liberal loons isn't far off, and I do believe in freedom of speech, but that shirt is pretty over the top and the Dad is clearly just looking for attention here. Edited September 23, 2008 by whitesoxfan101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juddling Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 looking at the homemade shirt....i can't help but feel that there is a "...you might be a redneck" joke in there somewhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Daxx's dad agrees with him and is encouraging his son to stand his ground. "The facts are his rights were violated. Period." So if another parent's kid had their son wear a shirt of a graphic gang bang to school would Daxx's dad think it was ok? Freedom of speech! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 The sad thing: the dad probably helped him make that shirt! Motor skills people, develop em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 "They're taking away my right of freedom of speech," he says. "If I have the right to wear this shirt I'm going to use it. And if the only way to use it is get suspended, then I'm going to get suspended." Daxx's dad agrees with him and is encouraging his son to stand his ground. "The facts are his rights were violated. Period." The facts are there is no right to wear anything you want in school. Example: A young high school student (myself) gets a rocking t-shirt from Breckenridge Colorado. The shirt is a take off of the Absolut vodka advertisements. It says something about how the Rockies are all natural smooth skiing etc, it never makes on reference to alcohol or anything illegal. My parents let me wear it to school, no big deal we imagine, when I get to school I get sent to the principal and get a detention. Now I only got a detention because I didnt make a huge scene and flipped the t-shirt inside out. Im sure if I would have refused I would have been sent home that day. The father needs to get over himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Well, technically, if the kid wanted to wear an anti-obama ribbon and not make any scene about it, he could do that no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 23, 2008 -> 09:22 AM) Well, technically, if the kid wanted to wear an anti-obama ribbon and not make any scene about it, he could do that no? From a technical standpoint, probably not. Schools can ban all of that stuff as "disruptive". If someone caught him, he would still be in violation of their dress code, if they included ribbons in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 wouldn't that be violating tinker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 23, 2008 -> 09:26 AM) wouldn't that be violating tinker? I'm not understanding what you are asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 tinker v. ohio, wasn't that where the girl wore the black armband protesting the Vietnam war. and so then the school kicked her out, Supreme Court ruled in favor of her. But perhaps, black is less disruptive, than say, an anti obama ribbon if it has writing on it. Not sure what the deal is here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 23, 2008 -> 10:35 AM) tinker v. ohio, wasn't that where the girl wore the black armband protesting the Vietnam war. and so then the school kicked her out, Supreme Court ruled in favor of her. But perhaps, black is less disruptive, than say, an anti obama ribbon if it has writing on it. Not sure what the deal is here. I think the court would argue that a black armband is considerably less incendiary than a homemade t-shirt claiming someone is a "terrorist's best friend." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 23, 2008 -> 09:35 AM) tinker v. ohio, wasn't that where the girl wore the black armband protesting the Vietnam war. and so then the school kicked her out, Supreme Court ruled in favor of her. But perhaps, black is less disruptive, than say, an anti obama ribbon if it has writing on it. Not sure what the deal is here. I'll be honest, I am not familiar with the case. I am going more off of what I know from my local school system, and how the rules are introduced and inforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 Tinker v. Des Moines http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free...ech/tinker.html In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained. Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749 I would say that an anti-obama ribbon would probably be okay. The reality is that you could argue any "anti" slogan should be disallowed in school and replaced by a "pro" slogan. It is also relevant that the school authorities did not purport to prohibit the wearing of all symbols of political or controversial significance. The record shows that students in some of the schools wore buttons relating to national political campaigns, and some even wore the Iron Cross, traditionally a symbol of Nazism. The order prohibiting the wearing of armbands did not extend to these. Instead, a particular symbol--black armbands worn to exhibit opposition to this Nation's involvement [511] in Vietnam--was singled out for prohibition. Clearly, the prohibition of expression of one particular opinion, at least without evidence that it is necessary to avoid material and substantial interference with schoolwork or discipline, is not constitutionally permissible. Another fact would be were students allowed to wear "McCain is a terrorist" t-shirts. If they were allowed to wear the McCain shirt, but not the Obama shirt, then perhaps there is something here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 If it had been more tasteful and it wasn't so obvious that the father was trying to get attention there probably wouldn't have been an issue. I imagine a kid coming to school with a shirt that says "Bush murders Iraqi babies" with a picture of dead bodies on it they probably would've been chastized too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 hopefully, what resulted in the school was an opportunity to talk about first amendment rights, tinker v des moines, and the ongoing political process. teachable moments, people, that's what it's all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts