Comments on: Supreme Court Debates ‘Bong Hits 4 Jesus’

By: floyd

floyd — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:06:46 +0000

Free speech has never been "free". Words can harm or heal.They bear consequences.

By: The Sarcasticynic

The Sarcasticynic — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 23:35:10 +0000

Maybe the kid should claim he left off part of the sign. It should have said, "Bong Hits 4, Jesus 9."

By: just me

just me — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 20:07:47 +0000

I don't think a school should be able to punish a child for acts outside of the school's control.

And even it for some reason the schoo could do this, I am appalled that a student was given a suspension for it-this was a practical joke that harmed no one, at most it warranted a detention. The truancy may have deserved some punishment, but even then 10 days for truancy is excessive as well.

By: Tlaloc

Tlaloc — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:24:24 +0000

We’ve come a long way since “Fuck the Draft.” The history of free speech in America features a long proud march of embattled speakers pushing back against government authority. Whereas today’s free-speech heroes pretty much just want to be zany enough for YouTube.

Horsepuckey. This is just another round of "in my day we stood for something, but kids these days..." It's utter crap. The phrase "bong hits 4 jesus" has a perfectly understandable meaning- it's satire. It invokes the image of the hippy-esque Jesus smoking ganja with his 12 freinds, talking about how to solve all the world's problems. This is in stark contrast to the corporate preened jesus that is presented buy the religious right, in which Jesus's prime concern is the capital gains tax and how it hurts wealthy white people.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:28:12 +0000

Seems to me, a “no free speech zone” around schools could very well fall into the same catagory. Congress passed the Gun Free School Zones Act in 1990. The Supreme Court struck it down in U.S. v. Lopez (1995).

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:12:28 +0000

Haven't we already drawn a zone around schools preventing firearms inside that zone. Last I checked, the right to carry a firearm is a constitutional right. Seems to me, a "no free speech zone" around schools could very well fall into the same catagory.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:20:45 +0000

At some point, financial liability for either the district or the official makes sense.

Suppose the principal had suspended the kid b/c he saw the kid *in the mall* with a "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" T-shirt on.

At some point, the conduct becomes arbitary and unjust, and damages are proper. It would be nice if the Court would draw a line so we know where that point is.

As it stands, I am a little suspicious that they're keeping the line vague SO THAT officials will never be held personally accountable.

By: Anderson

Anderson — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:43:19 +0000

Not being up on this area of the law, I am COMPLETELY mystified why school authorities have any right to punish a student for off-campus conduct, let alone off-campus *speech*.

By: » OTB News

» OTB News — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 18:00:00 +0000

Archives December 2006 August 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 [IMG Outside The Beltway | OTB] Supreme Court Debates ‘Bong Hits 4 Jesus’ Obama More Liberal Than Kucinich (UPDATE: Maybe Not) OTB Needs YOU to Comb Through Thousands of Pages White House Seeking Gonzales Replacements Caption Contest Winners D.C. One-Third Illiterate Beltway Traffic Jam