Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Supreme Court rules against student who displayed "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner   (news.yahoo.com ) divider line 682
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

19272 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jun 2007 at 11:22 AM (8 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



682 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-06-25 11:35:25 AM  
A tiny:

*FOR TOBACCO USE ONLY

at the bottom would've saved a whole lot of people a whole lot of money and would've been a helluva lot funnier.
 
2007-06-25 11:35:33 AM  
Let he who is without a bong pack the first bowl.
 
2007-06-25 11:35:43 AM  
img131.imageshack.us
 
2007-06-25 11:35:43 AM  
Three legged dog
the whole point is protesting to become legal...you don't wake up one morning and have alcohol legal. Sometimes one must work for it.

Everyone Else
Don't jobs already do this? With searching myspace and whatnot? How long will any of you stand for this?

/and so the frog stays in the water.
//it's ok, it's nice and toasty.
 
2007-06-25 11:36:00 AM  
homosexual man: Maybe I'm missing part of the story, but this seems terrible! He wasn't on school property, but the teacher had the right to leave school property and restrict what he said?

Essentially correct.

Ain't the war on drugs just great? Wait'll we start doing crap like this for the 'war on terror'.
 
2007-06-25 11:36:04 AM  
Schools may prohibit student expression that can be interpreted as advocating drug use, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court in a 5-4 ruling.

I don't think the Supreme Court "got" the case. This wasn't about student expression in school. The guy was not IN school nor was he ON school property. Get a brain SCOTUS morans.
 
2007-06-25 11:36:20 AM  
I think this is excellent.

"Free speech" does not mean saying whatever you want, whenever you want.

Remember a few years back when nearly every single media outlet refused to print a picture of mohammed?? Where was the free speech there?

You can't speak out against gays, its considered "hate speech."
You can't speak out against illegals, its considered "racist."

What makes it perfectly fine to be so blatently disrespectful to the Christian religion?
 
2007-06-25 11:36:24 AM  
So, according to the logic of the decision, ANYTHING that a student says, does, demonstrates for or against, or thinks CAN BE BANNED. Oh, get this, here's the test: It has to, in the opinion of a school adminstrator, disrupt good order and discipline in a school.
Who decides what is "good order" and "discipline" is? The school administrator!

I am afraid this is the first salvo in the significant erosion, if not total loss, of our right to dissent.
 
2007-06-25 11:36:45 AM  
Hate to agree with the SCOTUS on this one, but the kid's defense was pretty weak. You can't say, "Bong hits 4 Jesus" is nonsense when everyone knows it is a drug reference. And since schools are allowed to regulate speech that is detrimental to the school's educational mission(part of that mission being promoting good, lawful citizenship), they are allowed to limit speech that encourages unlawful behavior, including drug use. Not that hard to follow. Also doesn't help he had been busted for selling pot. That is just dumb.
 
2007-06-25 11:36:58 AM  
homepage.ntlworld.com

/soon to edited out, and for government goons to visit me
//farking ridiculous and a sad day
///give me "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" or give me Fark!
 
2007-06-25 11:36:58 AM  
I didn't get to do insect f*ck projects...

My public school made me learn stuff....weird
 
2007-06-25 11:37:15 AM  
Mordant [TotalFark]
Let the actual Jesus fans be the worst advertisement for their savior, it's working already and there's no reason to change things.


From the article:

Conservative groups that often are allied with the administration are backing Frederick out of concern that a ruling for Morse would let schools clamp down on religious expression, including speech that might oppose homosexuality or abortion.

Religous groups oppose this ruling. Learn to read.
 
2007-06-25 11:37:35 AM  
The damage has been done, before we could change congress. SCOTUS also ruled against people suing the government for those idiotic "faith based initiatives." Wonderful. They sanctioned my tax money going to assholish shiat like abstinence only education, and other shiat run by churches.

We are likely stuck with liberty losing decisions coming down from this court for a LONG time now. We may even end up kissing abortion rights goodbye.
 
2007-06-25 11:37:40 AM  
MisterRPG I work across the street from a headshop and down the street from a second headshop, so I got a kick out of your reply.

I'm happy for you.

/what business/area do you work for??
 
2007-06-25 11:38:00 AM  
Now Principals will ban any mention of "4:20" and also ban all sorts of other things like "All your base are belong to us" thinking that must be a druggy thing.
 
2007-06-25 11:38:14 AM  
I wish the judge would rule against this site (nsfw)


/
 
2007-06-25 11:38:33 AM  
I am afraid this is the first salvo in the significant erosion, if not total loss, of our right to dissent.

Where have you been for the past 20 years? we started losing the 1st amendment the day the first 'hate speech' law was passed.
 
2007-06-25 11:38:45 AM  
*FOR TOBACCO USE ONLY

That would have been hilarious.
 
2007-06-25 11:38:49 AM  
Thank God the Supreme Court is protecting the Jesus' good name.
 
2007-06-25 11:38:50 AM  
Walker

The guy was not IN school nor was he ON school property.

He was under school supervision and the school was still responsible for him, therefore he was still under school policy and had to adhere to school rules. Had he been there on his own, this case would have been different. His team could not prove he was (because he wasn't). The ruling is correct for this particular case.
 
2007-06-25 11:38:51 AM  
For anyone who'll find this interesting: the Constitution doesn't give the SCOTUS the power to determine constitutionality of laws. The court essentially decided to give itself that power in 1803 with Marbury vs. Madison (though, as the Wiki article says, the idea of judicial review was far from unheard of at the time).

/Dumb court decision
//"Advocating drug use" -- not matter how stupid or how much you disagree with it -- is speech, too
 
2007-06-25 11:39:17 AM  
japlemon no, if it was a Government-Sanctioned-Gay-Buttsecks 4 Jesus banner, then you would have your parade

Woo hoo!! :)
 
2007-06-25 11:39:59 AM  
Speaker for the Dead

Good point.

I guess since I have not been around drugs since early highschool I don't understand what the big deal is.

/Loves me some alcohol though...
 
2007-06-25 11:40:39 AM  
He was under school supervision and the school was still responsible for him, therefore he was still under school policy and had to adhere to school rules.

And the fact that those 'rules' were arbitrary, asinine and anal retentive are entirely besides the fact?
 
2007-06-25 11:40:46 AM  
You guys didn't really read this case, did you?

He was let out of class..

Under the supervision of teachers..

With the permission of parents as a school "field trip"..

En Loco Parientes, folks. The school rules still apply when you are out of class and being supervised by school officials.

The question in this case is not a matter of free speech, but instead a matter of "who was in charge of the child at that time." The answer was, "The school." Therefore, the school has a right to discipline the child for violating rules.

It has nothing to do with Free Speech. If the kid was with his parents and displayed a sign like that, it'd be a different story, but he was not. He was under the supervision of teachers.
 
2007-06-25 11:40:49 AM  
3ld Much as you stoners don't like it drugs are still illegal.

Since the drugs are illegal, talking about it is illegal? It was illegal to suggest ending slavery or to encourage miscegenation? How are laws ever supposed to be changed if we can't say "I disagree with the law". One reading of "Bong Hits for Jesus" is a call to political action... legalize bong hits to get closer to Christ.

//have never used
//won't be using
//pro legalization anyway
 
2007-06-25 11:41:12 AM  
AllYourBase
I wish the judge would rule against this site (nsfw)

Oh, ewww...

Give a gal some warning!
The NSFW warning is for weeners and boobies, not for poo-on-a-stick!
 
2007-06-25 11:41:31 AM  
What is it going to take to make cannabis legal? So many people engage in the substance...

I just wish more people would protest the current marijuana laws!
 
2007-06-25 11:41:49 AM  
Smellvin: "Advocating drug use" -- not matter how stupid or how much you disagree with it -- is speech, too

Well yelling fire in a movie theater is also speech... but is not protected speech.
 
2007-06-25 11:42:10 AM  
homosexual man:

japlemon: no, if it was a Government-Sanctioned-Gay-Buttsecks 4 Jesus banner, then you would have your parade

Woo hoo!! :)


The troll got owned.
 
2007-06-25 11:42:21 AM  
Romeo_Santana: "Free speech" does not mean saying whatever you want, whenever you want.

So.... Speech with restrictions is what the "Free Speech" slogan really means?

/confused...
 
2007-06-25 11:42:22 AM  
redcard

Bingo. But who wants to read when instead we can make sweeping assumptions and tout our own opinions as fact?!
 
2007-06-25 11:42:44 AM  
from the MSNBC main page...

img78.imageshack.us

/poor Jesus... denied!
 
2007-06-25 11:43:04 AM  
Romeo_Santana

Remember a few years back when nearly every single media outlet refused to print a picture of mohammed?? Where was the free speech there?

The free speech was that they had a choice about what to do. You're free to say whatever you want - and people are free to think what they like in reaction. Believe it or not, in some cases people find it more beneficial to not exercise their right to free speech all the time.

What makes it perfectly fine to be so blatently disrespectful to the Christian religion?

Because it's a bunch of bullshiat. No, wait, because we have freedom of speech, you bible thumping asshat. See? I've exercised my freedom of speech, and now you are free to think of me as an intolerant heathen. Win-win. Ain't America great?
 
2007-06-25 11:43:13 AM  
Three legged dog-"Much as you stoners don't like it drugs are still illegal. The whole Jesus thing was simply that kid using poor taste."

Actually, I've found that people think they can do anything as long as it's in the name of Jesus.
 
2007-06-25 11:43:23 AM  
I just wish more people would protest the current marijuana laws!

I just wish more people knew the history behind how marijuana was made illegal in the first place.

Anslinger. Harry J. Do some reading on the guy, then tell me if you think the reasoning behind the ban on marijuana is logical and well reasoned.
 
2007-06-25 11:45:16 AM  
And the fact that those 'rules' were arbitrary, asinine and anal retentive are entirely besides the fact?


In a legal issue, yes. The court doesn't make the laws, it makes sure they were applied correctly and not in a way that conflicts with previous laws/decisions. If the rule is arbitraty(like all laws) or anal, it is up to the legislature to change the law. So I see the court interpreting the law and making the decision on this specific case. Could have far reaching consequences but it might not.
 
2007-06-25 11:45:21 AM  
Weaver95: The anti-discrimination laws have been used to limit freedom of speech for some time

Yeah, I'm sorry, but I disagree with you there. Do you have any cases where someone was arrested and jailed for simply saying something offensive racially, sexually or sexual-persuasion-y.

Difficulty: Firings by governments and businesses do not count, only jailings.
 
2007-06-25 11:45:25 AM  
our right to dissent?

How is BONG HITS 4 JESUS furthuring any type of USEFUL agenda?

The idiot smoked AND SOLD an illegal narcotic...and he's just trying to stir the pot, not encourage healthy political debate

Don't overestimate this zero....

"(puff)...hey Carl...wouldn't it be hilarrrrrrious if I put a big 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' sign up?"

"(puff...cough)...yeah, man, that'd be funny, but someone might get pissed..."

"yeah, but wouldn't it be funny?"

"yeah..."

"cool..."

It's not like the guy wrote Common Sense or something
(learned about that in school....you can Google it, if you want)

It's funny, I learned about civil disobedience in school..
revolution
civil rights movement

I learned that there is a place for it, but encouraging the mass public to smoke weed, unfortunately, is not it, IMO, and apparently the school administrator and supreme court agree

Freedom of Speech was not meant for every asshat in the world to promote illegal and potentially dangerous activities...that's what Fark is for
 
2007-06-25 11:45:39 AM  
www.avalon5.com
It should have read Coke Spoons for Jesus
 
2007-06-25 11:45:45 AM  
One more for the RATS -

Roberts
Alito
Thomas
Scalia

Let's all hope the rest of the judges stay healthy for another 1 year, 6 months, and 26 days.
 
2007-06-25 11:45:47 AM  
DownTheRabbitHole: What is it going to take to make cannabis legal? So many people engage in the substance...

I just wish more people would protest the current marijuana laws!


Cause that would entail getting off the couch.

/I keed I keed!
 
2007-06-25 11:45:49 AM  
Three Legged Dog: Much as you stoners don't like it drugs are still illegal. The whole Jesus thing was simply that kid using poor taste.

This.

Schools see it as their responsibility to prevent their students from freely and brazenly advocating drug use. The article doesn't say specifically how old this kid was, but if he was a high-school student I'm assuming he was probably 16 or 17. Newsflash: Minors often have their rights curtailed, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Kids are stupid, generally speaking. Hell, I'm 23, and I'm still stupid, albeit not as stupid as I was when I was 17. The cut-off of 18 years old is arbitrary, but there has to be a line, and 18 is where we decided to stick it.

Besides, when you're in high school, your school can sort of be seen as your employer. I hate to break it to you, but things you do outside of work can affect your employment status. If I held up a sign that said "Bong hits for Jesus" on national television and my employer caught wind of it, I'm pretty sure I'd be disciplined somehow if I wasn't fired altogether. That's not surprising to me; I don't think the office I work at would like to keep paying an employee who exercises such poor judgment. It's good to get kids used to the idea.

I also don't buy the idea that "He intended the banner to proclaim his right to say anything at all." (FTFA). Yeah, right, this kid's a real pioneer of free speech; a regular Tom Paine. I think it's far more likely that he and his stoner buddies probably thought it would be super funny to make a banner that says "Bong hits for Jesus" and get it on television. That's exceptionally poor judgment, and his "employer" punished him for it with a suspension. That seems reasonable to me; he wasn't arrested and thrown in the stockade.

/Now if this kid was 18 at the time of the incident, then I may have a slight problem with that.
//Not too much of a problem though, because of the high school as an employer argument.
 
2007-06-25 11:46:15 AM  
Sir Charles: Well yelling fire in a movie theater is also speech... but is not protected speech.

Read more about the ruling in which the "fire in a crowded theater" was invoked - I don't like it very much.
 
2007-06-25 11:46:33 AM  
Somewhere in New Jersey, these two men weep.

static.flickr.com
 
2007-06-25 11:46:46 AM  
redcard: He was let out of class..

No, he never went in the first place.
 
2007-06-25 11:47:04 AM  
Sir Charles: Free speech was meant to force people to listen to ideas other than their own so that opinions wouldn't stay stuck in cement or suppressed. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater leads to people getting hurt. Advocating drug use or a change in policy should never ever -- no matter how utterly stupid the idea is -- be stifled.

Ideas are protected speech.
 
2007-06-25 11:47:12 AM  
skabbo: The decision sounded more like they based it on their definition of what constitutes "political speech",

sigh... when will people realize that all speech is "political speech".

/everything is political, for better or worse
 
2007-06-25 11:47:15 AM  
Weaver95,

Oh I have. I have also seen that movie Weed, which is great (Woody Harolson narrated it). There is also a good series called Hooked: Illegal drugs and how they got that way. Both ade me absolutely livid when I first informed myself how cannabis became illegal. There is NO logic or reasoning behind it, and it just pisses me off.
 
2007-06-25 11:47:28 AM  
bglove25
Hate to agree with the SCOTUS on this one, but the kid's defense was pretty weak. You can't say, "Bong hits 4 Jesus" is nonsense when everyone knows it is a drug reference. And since schools are allowed to regulate speech that is detrimental to the school's educational mission(part of that mission being promoting good, lawful citizenship), they are allowed to limit speech that encourages unlawful behavior, including drug use. Not that hard to follow. Also doesn't help he had been busted for selling pot. That is just dumb.

You are not getting it either. It doesn't matter what the banner said or if it was an obscure reference or not. The banner could have said "F*CK THIS SCHOOL IN THE ASS, F*CK IT HARD!". He was not on school grounds and he was not in school. The school has no rights to regulate his speech when he is not in school. Those of you who are not getting it keep repeating this in your head until you get it:

HE WAS NOT ON SCHOOL GROUNDS AND HE WAS NOT IN SCHOOL

And to those saying "Well it was a school sponsored event" it doesn't matter. See above: he was not on school grounds and he was not in school. With your logic you could say if the school sponsored an event at a local car wash to raise money and the guy stood across the street holding a banner than the school has authority over him. It doesn't. The decision was wrong and has frightening implications.
 
Displayed 50 of 682 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report