PDA

View Full Version : 6th Grader warned: Stop wearing Pro-life T-shirts


Pages : [1] 2 3

New_Begining
June 4th, 2008, 03:51 AM
As a Christian, I'm very proud of the guts this young man has shown us all. How many times in the last month have we allowed an attack on our religious and moral convitions to go unchallenged. I for one vow to step up to the standard young K.B. has set!


Posted: June 03, 2008
11:15 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily

A 12-year-old 6th-grader in Hutchinson, Minn., committed to an unusually brave mission for the month of April: he intended to wear T-shirts with a pro-life message to his middle school every day for a month.

His courage, however, was met with resistance. According to the boy's attorney, his principal and teachers told him "not to wear the T-shirts, publicly singled him out for ridicule in front of his classmates, removed him from class, sent him to the principal's office, forced him to turn his pro-life T-shirt inside out, and threatened him with suspension if he did not stop wearing the offending pro-life T-shirts."

Over the course of his one-month quest, the boy, identified only as K.B., was reprimanded by the school a dozen times.

"We're a Christian family," his mother told the St. Paul Pioneer Press. "He knows (abortion) is the termination of life. He knows that it's wrong. He should have the right to wear the shirt to express that. Even if he's the only person at the school who believes that, he should still be able to wear that shirt under the Constitution, and they've taken that away from him."

K.B. began his T-shirt mission in honor of April 29th being designated "National Pro-Life T-shirt Day" by the American Life League, a group that calls itself the "largest grassroots Catholic pro-life organization in the United States."

K.B. took it a step farther in opting to wear his T-shirts – sometime inside-out as demanded – for a month.

The shirts themselves, all produced by the American Life League, displayed photos of unborn babies and pro-life messages. One shirt read, "Abortion: Growing, Growing, Gone," a second read, "What part of abortion don't you understand?" and the third read, "Never Known – Not Forgotten" on the front with "47,000,000 babies aborted 1973-2008" printed on the back.


One of the T-shirts from the American Life League

K.B. reported that he was first confronted on April 2nd by a teacher saying that the shirt "could be offensive." On April 4th he was sent to the principal's office because, his teacher said, the shirt was "inappropriate for class." In mid-April, K.B.'s mother reports, the school principal told her in a phone conversation that the shirts were forbidden because they had become a distraction and "some of the kids were starting to ask questions." On April 25th K.B. was threatened with in-school suspension.

When April 29th arrived, the day designated as "National Pro-Life T-shirt Day," the school principal called K.B.'s homeroom and ordered the boy to his office. "Why do you keep wearing those shirts when you know that they annoy me?" the principal allegedly asked.

Throughout that day, K.B. was singled out by his teachers, their displeasure with him and with his shirts made publicly clear.

Hutchinson school district policy specifically states that schools are not to "abridge the rights of students to express political, religious, philosophical, or similar opinions by wearing apparel on which messages are stated." The policy does prohibit lewd, vulgar, obscene or profane messages.

"We allow (a slogan on a T-shirt) as long as it doesn't interrupt or disrupt the educational process," the school's superintendent told the Student Press Law Center. "It's not necessarily the message, but if it's offensive or if it disrupts the (educational) process."

K.B. and his mother, Jeanne Ibbitson, claim that the shirts contain no offensive material and if there's been any disruption in the educational process, it's come from teachers objecting to the message.

Lawyers from the Thomas More Law Center, a non-profit law firm whose purpose is to provide "legal representation without charge to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square," has now filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court to defend K.B.'s Constitutional rights.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, "This courageous young Christian was ridiculed and threatened by teachers for expressing his deeply held beliefs. These school officials clearly violated the U.S. Constitution and the school's own written dress policy, which specifically states it is not intended to abridge the rights of students to express political or religious messages."

Specifically, the lawsuit charges that the school's actions run counter to the 1969 U.S. Supreme Court ruling of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, which clarified that schools cannot censor student speech without a reasonable expectations of "material and substantial disruption" or invasion of other's rights.

"They allow students to practice their First Amendment rights as long as it's not disruptive to the learning process and as long as it's not lewd, vulgar, obscene or profane," said a spokesman for the Law Center. "According to the Supreme Court and many circuit courts, you can't bootstrap that into (banning) unpopular or unpleasant viewpoints."

The lawsuit seeks recognition that the school has violated K.B.'s rights and that it applied its dress code in an unconstitutional manner. It asks that the court instruct the school to no longer reprimand or discipline K.B. for exercising his rights, and it seeks a jury trial to determine damages. Ibbitson explained to the Pioneer Press how, in part, her son has suffered from the school's reaction. "He shouldn't have lost his reputation as a good kid," she said. "He shouldn't be known as the kid who is constantly going to the office. They look at him as defiant now."

She nonetheless praised her son for standing for his convictions. "I applaud him. He is really shy. And it's scary to stand up to people in authority," she said. "It was hard for him to get up every day and put the T-shirt on and go to school to try and carry on his mission for the month."

Deputyez
June 4th, 2008, 10:40 AM
Uhhhhh, Does the first ammendment exclude Christians and pro.lifers???????:thinking

Final Trumpet
June 4th, 2008, 10:41 AM
If he had a pro-murder...er...abortion t-shirt, they would have probably had a pep rally with him as the featured attraction...

lyngraphics
June 4th, 2008, 10:52 AM
In mid-April, K.B.'s mother reports, the school principal told her in a phone conversation that the shirts were forbidden because they had become a distraction and "some of the kids were starting to ask questions."

They were asking questions??? In school???

Bravo for this brave boy!

cryo
June 4th, 2008, 11:58 AM
As long as the shirt did not cause a substantial disruption, he is protected by the 1st amendment (Tinker v. DesMoines). Students asking questions doesn't appear to be a substantial disruption to the school day, but that would be the legal precedent the courts would base their decision on. He should file a lawsuit, because I believe he would win in court. The threat of a disruption is not sufficient to remove a student's 1st amendment right to free expression, based on legal precedent.

Petezzzz
June 4th, 2008, 01:12 PM
Where's the ACLJ when you need them?

tfcrew
June 4th, 2008, 01:45 PM
As long as the shirt did not cause a substantial disruption, he is protected by the 1st amendment (Tinker v. Des Moines).
That decision ....
Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam.
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html
In this case, black armbands were worn and no written statement was visible.
I believe abortion is wrong. I also believe that there should be school uniforms [or uniform wear] with no slogan t-shirts at all.
ACLU can stickit.

dreadreadrea
June 4th, 2008, 03:09 PM
:thumb good for K.B. i hope he wins in court.

cryo
June 4th, 2008, 10:38 PM
That decision ....

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html
In this case, black armbands were worn and no written statement was visible.
I believe abortion is wrong. I also believe that there should be school uniforms [or uniform wear] with no slogan t-shirts at all.
ACLU can stickit.

Even though no written statement was visible in the Tinker case, the Tinker case set an early legal precedent that students have a right to free expression in schools as long as it does not cause a substantial disruption to the school environment, written message or not. The type of expression does not mean Tinker does not apply in this case (because it does), as it had widespread precedent on 1st amendment rights in schools regarding free expression of any kind by students, not just silent protests with black armbands. That said, schools also have the power to set dress codes for what is appropriate and inappropriate clothing and behavior, and possibly punish students for violating that code (as was seen in the later Bethel v. Fraser decision). However, I doubt the school has anything specifically regarding messages about abortion in its dress code, though a more vague tenet of said code may be this student's undoing.

Tinker is one of three major cases that set legal precedent for the federal courts involving students and 1st amendment rights that set important legal precedent in this country (Bethel v. Fraser and Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier being the other two).

I am a high school teacher and journalism teacher who teaches my students about student press law and 1st amendment rights for students in detail, so I can recite the case law that would apply in this student's case in my sleep!

BlessedinHim
June 4th, 2008, 10:45 PM
Go KB. :thumb