From Gary GaryK57647@...
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=22218&printer-friendly=y


Check out "firstamendmentcenter.org: analysis"  THANK GOD that Liberty Counsel
(may Jerry Falwell rest in peace) has  filed for cert on PALMER---ACLU at this
point refuses to get involved; the Az CLU State President says their lawyers
regard it  "as a likely loser." Well, if so, then TINKER is dead; any school bd
with an IQ above room temp will follow Clark County, NV  (the Jacobs case) &
this stupid TX district and eliminate all these "pesky" armband and  tee-shirt
cases by adopting  the so-called "neutral" dress code  that prohibits ALL
speech.  The ACLU Natl Legal Director should be fired for stupidity &
cowardice!!!
        As I read the  5 opinions in MORSE, the 2007  Sup Ct. Bong 4 Jesus speech
case, ALL but Justice Thomas still believe in Tinker and thus should STRONGLY
reverse Palmer and keep Tinker alive.  If not, Tinker may remain on the
books---but in NAME  only.
       Again hopefully all our conservative friends who put in amicus briefs  in
MORSE and  at the 5th Cir in Palmer will help here again---plus hopefully CATO
and Thomas More Society and other libertarian groups.  This is the MOST
IMPORTANT student speech case since TINKER---and indeed will determine if Tinker
survives at all in practical effect.

      Note MY comment (name mis-spelled) in David Hudson's story on the Palmer
cert filing!!!

Hi there, next time you seek to "reach consensus", tell the respective
school committee that Sam Carana is present, in spirit, with the
following position:

In research on school uniforms, time and again, one thing is
unequivocably clear, uniforms do NOT contribute to better education,
unless - as said - education is being confused with bootcamp drill
sergeant bullshit. The best education is often given by homeschooling,
not by sending children to school, whether public or private school.
Such homeschooling can take place in many settings other than school
and is typically assisted by parents without formal schoolteacher
training or qualifications. The evidence of the success of
homeschooling has been found in research dating back many years. Yet,
there are public school teachers who demand high salaries from society
for giving a second-rate education and - to throw salt into the wounds
- they seek to deny these obvious facts in their teachings, thus
engaging in indoctrination with falsifications of the truth.

If in education it was a matter of choice between discipline and
rights, then it should be obvious that educating people (students,
parents and school staff) about our rights is vastly more important
than enforcing disciplinary rules and regulations, the more so when
such disciplinary rules are imposed unnecessarily or - as happens all
too often - for the sake of invoking protests and subsequent
stigmatisation of specific students into scapegoats in an effort to
hide the failure of school management to properly educate students.
When school becomes a selection mechanism to expel the disobedient and
to mould the other (more gullible) students at impressionable age into
robots while nurturing a "befehl ist befehl" mentality, then school
has failed to educate. School should not pretend to educate, unless
the basis of school is to teach something good.

The overriding essence of rights is that they are not subject to
balancing or negotiation. Teachers who believes there is balance
between discipline and rights are not fit to educate, because there is
no such choice. By wearing normal clothes, one does not violate the
rights of others. On the other hand, imposing uniforms does violate
the rights of those who want to wear normal clothes and who want to
decide on a daily basis what to wear. That is the essence of the
matter! To suggest that people's rights could be taken away by
"consensus" decisions of public school committees is sickening. It is
our duty - students, parents, staff and all other people alike - to
stand up against such a perversion of our rights and of education by
implication. When the rights of one are taken, we are all violated!

School should resist being turned into an instrument of indoctrination
of dictatorial values. Rejecting uniforms in principle is a good way
to maintain good educational values. For what have we taught, if
students fail to respect even their own rights and if they parot a
denial of their own identity? The prior right to choose what education
their children should get is with their families, not with teachers
who fail to educate and instead bully everyone around them in their
lust to trample what is rightfully a decision for families to take.
Education should not take a student's identity away, but should
nurture students to develop their talents and their personality. If
students object against suppression of their identity, then expelling
a student for such an objection is nothing less than criminal when the
student have nowhere else to go. A school that does not embrace and
embed respect for our rights gives no education, since our rights
constitute the profound quintessence of education itself.

Given these obvious truths, parents who have children at schools with
optional uniforms should reconsider dressing their children in
uniform. They should stand up against the intrinsic suppression of
identity and the violation of rights that is so inherent in uniforms.
They should rise against this kind of bullying and ban uniforms from
school altogether. They should object against school turning into an
institute of evil that teaches the very opposite of what constitutes
education.

Cheers!
Sam Carana



On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Name Suppressed
<namesuppressed@...> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply.  I did take the time to look at the available research
on this subject and as I observed in my blog post, this is not a clearcut issue
based on available statistics, no matter how strongly one has an opinion about
it one way or another. I was also careful to point out that my observations
about the parents who oppose uniforms are mine alone in one school - and
certainly do not reflect all parents in the U.S. of the same mind.
>
> It is an emotional issue for some parents and when we discuss it in our PTO
meetings our goal is to try to come at the subject from an educated, open-minded
point of view and try to find win/win solutions.  This is incumbent on us as our
school district has made this policy voluntary so we must reach a consensus.
Whether or not you agree (studies and stats aside) there is a clearcut division
among parents about the value of uniforms and this discussion cannot be swept
away simply because someone feels its wrong.
>
> You've given me your opinion, thanks again.
>
> All the best,
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 1/20/09, Sam Carana <> wrote:
>
>> From: Sam Carana <sam.carana@...>
>> Subject: Re: [SchoolUniformsDebate] When uniforms are 'voluntary'
>> To: SchoolUniformsDebate@yahoogroups.com
>> Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2009, 11:00 PM
>>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> You definitively need to study this topic more closely.
>> To get a better understanding of the issues, I suggest that
>> you
>> 1. stop confusing bootcamp drill sergeant bullshit with
>> education;
>> 2. read about rights; and
>> 3. read the many earlier studies and conclusions on this
>> topic.
>>
>> Cheers!
>> Sam Carana
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:42 AM, namesuppressed
>> <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>> > My (name suppressed) school
>> district has a
>> > voluntary uniform
>> > policy. Charter, private, and some magnet schools have
>> mandatory policies.
>> >
>> > It appears the arguments put forth in the opening
>> statement of this
>> > discussion group are
>> > opposed to uniforms but I'd like to make a few
>> observations.
>> >
>> > Optional enrollment in charter and magnet schools in
>> our school district are
>> > indicative of
>> > higher parent involvement in their child's
>> education and represent higher
>> > score on
>> > standardized tests (generally, not 100%). The uniform
>> policy is not
>> > contested as it is in
>> > the mainstream school track.
>> >
>> > In our school I see the children who
>> score well in tests and
>> > receive recognition
>> > at monthly assemblies are more likely (about 82%) to
>> be the few who do wear
>> > uniforms as
>> > opposed to the majority, who do not.
>> >
>> > I have read as much of the available research on this
>> subject as I can find
>> > and while there
>> > is little evidence to support the contention that
>> uniforms solve behavioral
>> > problems or
>> > boost academic scores, when I read the objections,
>> both from parents and
>> > teenagers, they
>> > seem the same to me: adolescent backlash against a
>> supposition of conformity
>> > that a
>> > uniform represents to them. As a parent of a
>> five-year-old I find this quite
>> > sad coming
>> > from an adult.
>> >
>> > [namesuppressed] wears a uniform and is a thoughtful,
>> individualistic child who
>> > spends the
>> > majority of her free time in creative, expressive
>> activities and social
>> > free-play rather than
>> > in front of a television set. S/he doesn't need to
>> wear a Hanna Montana shirt
>> > or X-treme
>> > sports T-shirt in school to express her individuality.
>> As parents we provide
>> > ample
>> > opportunities for this outside school and as a result
>> the uniform has no
>> > power during
>> > school hours to dictate her sense of individuality.
>> >
>> > I've heard the all the anti-uniform arguments
>> (mostly emotional rather than
>> > researched)
>> > and here's another observation - the parents in
>> our school who are
>> > pro-uniform and
>> > those that are anti-uniform are so stereotypical as to
>> make it impossible
>> > not to negatively
>> > judge the anti-group, starting with the lineup before
>> the bell. The
>> > anti-uniform group is
>> > much more likely not to have a parent waiting with
>> their children, and
>> > overall spend less
>> > time with their kids; they don't volunteer in
>> school activities (before,
>> > during, or after
>> > hours), their daughters in particular are wearing
>> inappropriately mature
>> > clothing for their
>> > age group (Kinder), and they have no basis for their
>> uniform opinion other
>> > than they don't
>> > want to be told what to do - and their kids have the
>> same attitude.
>> >
>> > Whether or not the uniforms are going to become
>> standard in our schools is
>> > less the issue
>> > but how we can identify those children who are less
>> engaged in the
>> > educational process
>> > because of attitudes that confuse individual freedoms
>> with focus on the
>> > business and
>> > value of learning. Our school scores reflect a major
>> problem in how they are
>> > run and how
>> > parents view their role in the process.
>> >
>> > That's what makes this discussion so interesting
>> because the uniform as a
>> > concept has
>> > become in many ways a metaphor for the educational
>> culture in general. The
>> > uniform
>> > policy has simply illuminated the schism.
>> >
>> > I wish I heard more positive focus from those parents
>> who get caught up in
>> > denegrating
>> > the uniform policy on how they take responsibility for
>> shepherding,
>> > supporting, and
>> > inspiring their children to become responsible,
>> thoughtful, energetic,
>> > focused, and
>> > aspirational adults.

An airline passenger forced to cover his T-shirt because it displayed
Arabic script has been awarded 240,000 dollars in compensation,
campaigners said Monday.
Raed Jarrar received the pay out on Friday from two US Transportation
Security Authority officials and from JetBlue Airways following the
August 2006 incident at New York's JFK Airport, the American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU) announced.

"The outcome of this case is a victory for free speech and a blow to
the discriminatory practice of racial profiling," said Aden Fine, a
lawyer with ACLU.

Jarrar, a US resident, was apprehended as he waited to board a JetBlue
flight from New York to Oakland, California, and told to remove his
shirt, which had written on it in Arabic: "We will not be silent."

He was told other passengers felt uncomfortable because an
Arabic-inscribed T-shirt in an airport was like "wearing a T-shirt at
a bank stating, I am a robber,'" the ACLU said.

Jarrar eventually agreed to cover his shirt with another provided by
JetBlue. He was allowed aboard but his seat was changed from the front
to the back of the aircraft.

Last week, nine Muslims, including three children, were ordered off a
domestic US flight after passengers heard what they believed were
suspicious remarks about security.

Although the passengers, eight of them US citizens, were cleared by
the FBI, they were reportedly still barred from the AirTran flight.

Security has been at a high level in US airports since the September
11, 2001 hijacked airliner attacks against the World Trade Center in
New York and the Pentagon in Washington.

However, rights groups and representatives of the Muslim community say
the security measures have led to frequent discrimination and harassment.


Copyright AFP 2008, AFP stories and photos shall not be published,
broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed
directly or indirectly in any medium

NOVEMBER 21--A 12-year-old Florida student was arrested earlier this
month after he "deliberately passed gas to disrupt the class,"
according to police. The child, who was also accused of shutting off
the computers of classmates at Stuart's Spectrum Jr./Sr. High School,
was busted November 4 for disruption of a school function. A Martin
County Sheriff's Office report, a copy of which you'll find below,
notes that the 4' 11" offender admitted that he "continually disrupted
his classroom environment by breaking wind and shutting off several
computers." The boy, whose name was redacted from the police report
released today, was turned over to his mother following the arrest.
The young perp turned 13 on November 15. (2 pages)

arrest report can be found at
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/1121083gas1.html

I doubt the parents put him up to it.
It is probably more to the fact this is what the child hears when at
home or friends house.  This is how discrimination continues!  When a
child hears family or friends of the family carry on and no one says
it is wrong.  They begin to believe it is ok.  Just like poorly
educated people believe that it is ok to tell me what color my cloths
should be or what team I should cheer for when I was in High School.



--- In School-uniforms@yahoogroups.com, "remoteunitone"
<remoteunitone@...> wrote:
>
> This particular incident is less a commentary on the merit-or lack
> thereof-of school uniforms, than it is an illustration of misguided
> parenting.
>
> While the majority of adults I know wouldn't dream of exploiting their
> offspring so shamefully, Mr. Dalton has used his young son to showcase
> his own dubious judgment-as well as his lack of political
> sophistication-in a public forum. An 11 year old boy obviously did not
> arrive at this conclusion on his own. It took considerable coaching to
> contrive such ignorant and vitriolic propaganda.
>
> Children have the right NOT to be used as billboards. Mr. Dalton may
> emerge victorous in his lawsuit, but that doesn't change the fact that
> what this opportunistic grandstanding really represents is a tragic and
> indefensible betrayal of trust.
>

This particular incident is less a commentary on the merit-or lack
thereof-of school uniforms, than it is an illustration of misguided
parenting.

While the majority of adults I know wouldn't dream of exploiting their
offspring so shamefully, Mr. Dalton has used his young son to showcase
his own dubious judgment-as well as his lack of political
sophistication-in a public forum. An 11 year old boy obviously did not
arrive at this conclusion on his own. It took considerable coaching to
contrive such ignorant and vitriolic propaganda.

Children have the right NOT to be used as billboards. Mr. Dalton may
emerge victorous in his lawsuit, but that doesn't change the fact that
what this opportunistic grandstanding really represents is a tragic and
indefensible betrayal of trust.

--- In School-uniforms@yahoogroups.com, "wqert89" <wqert89@...> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
> "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.
>


This particular incident is less a commentary on the merit-or lack
thereof-of school uniforms, than it is an illustration of misguided
parenting. While the majority of adults wouldn't dream of exploiting
their offspring so shamefully, Mr. Dalton has used his young son to
showcase his own dubious judgment-as well as his lack of political
sophistication-in a public forum. An 11 year old boy obviously did
not arrive at this conclusion about Barrack Obama on his own. It took
considerable coaching to contrive such ignorant and vitriolic
propaganda.

Children have the right NOT to be used as billboards. Mr. Dalton may
well emerge victorious from his legal battle, but that doesn't change
the fact that what this opportunistic grandstanding really represents
is a tragic and indefensible betrayal of trust.

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.

"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.

Might work for the U.K., but U.S. youth are uncommonly spirited and
independent and place great value on individual expression. The fact
that dress code restrictions-especially uniforms-so often have a
negative impact in this country has a great deal to do with our
culture. We routinely question the necessity of limitations that seem
frivolous and arbitrary, and put up a good fight when our freedoms
are in jeopardy. Opportunistic applications of authority are always
met with a healthy dose of resistance here, as well they should be,
and those in positions of authority would do well to spend more time
focusing on the real issues and less time concocting strategies to
eliminate fashion trends they just don't like.

Now YOU get real.

--- In School-uniforms@yahoogroups.com, Stephen Maclarence
<stephenmaclarence@...> wrote:
>
> Tests in the U.K. have proved the opposite, many schools in the
wake of it have brought in more formal uniforms.
>
> It is a known fact pupils from well uniformed school have a higher
standard of behaviour!!
> So get real
>
> --- On Sat, 20/9/08, wqert89 <wqert89@...> wrote:
> From: wqert89 <wqert89@...>
> Subject: [School-uniforms] Uniform schools rank at the bottom for
over 10 years
> To: School-uniforms@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, 20 September, 2008, 3:31 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.guampdn. com/apps/ pbcs.dll/ article?AID= /20080403/
OPINION02/ 804030317/ 1014/OPINION
>
>
>
> VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
>
>
>
> School uniforms don't improve test scores
>
> It has been almost 10 years since the idea of forcing students to
wear
>
> uniforms in public schools came into vogue. Results can be judged by
>
> nationwide studies on school performance. States that require
uniforms
>
> rank at the bottom. States without school uniforms rank at the top.
>
>
>
> According to 21 factors chosen from Morgan Quitno's annual reference
>
> book "Education State Rankings 2006-07," Vermont is number one and
>
> Massachusetts is number two for the best public schools. These
states
>
> do not require uniforms in public schools.
>
>
>
>
>
> Since Vermont is rural with a lot of retirees, it may not be a
typical
>
> state with policies applicable to Guam. Massachusetts certainly is
>
> typical. It is urban and largely immigrant. It shares social and
>
> economic problems found in most states, including violence, drugs
and
>
> gangs.
>
>
>
> Yet, Massachusetts has an exemplary public school system where, by
>
> law, school officials may not "abridge the rights of students as to
>
> personal dress and appearance" by imposing dress codes unless
personal
>
> dress "violates reasonable standards of health, safety and
cleanliness. "
>
>
>
> This contrasts sharply with states that allow schools to impose
>
> mandatory uniforms on students. For example, Arizona ranks as having
>
> the worst public school system (ranked No. 50). California ranks at
>
> fourth from the bottom. Oregon is in the bottom 10 and Utah is 12th
>
> from the bottom.
>
>
>
> In Guam, we can see no positive results since the imposition of
>
> mandatory uniforms. In all categories -- violence, vandalism, test
>
> scores, drop-out rates -- Guam public schools are as bad or worse
off
>
> than ever.
>
>
>
> Throughout the world, school uniforms are the hallmark of Third
World
>
> countries. They are the product of a philosophy that society in
>
> general -- and schools in particular -- can be run like clockwork.
>
> This philosophy is rooted in an intolerance of ambiguity, and hence,
>
> is incompatible with democratic society. It is the philosophy of
>
> totalitarianism.
>
>
>
> Oddly enough this philosophy of social-engineering correlates with
an
>
> inability to engineer the things that actually should be engineered.
>
> As can be seen in Guam, this means broken air conditioners,
unsanitary
>
> bathrooms and school budgets that can't be balanced.
>
>
>
> Isn't it time (as a first step in emulating Massachusetts' proven
>
> educational success) we drop the school uniform superstition and
once
>
> again run our schools in the traditional American way?
>
>
>
> PAUL ZERZAN
>
>
>
> Barrigada
>

http://www.guampdn.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080403/OPINION02/804030317/1\
014/OPINION

VOICE OF THE PEOPLE

School uniforms don't improve test scores
It has been almost 10 years since the idea of forcing students to wear
uniforms in public schools came into vogue. Results can be judged by
nationwide studies on school performance. States that require uniforms
rank at the bottom. States without school uniforms rank at the top.

According to 21 factors chosen from Morgan Quitno's annual reference
book "Education State Rankings 2006-07," Vermont is number one and
Massachusetts is number two for the best public schools. These states
do not require uniforms in public schools.


Since Vermont is rural with a lot of retirees, it may not be a typical
state with policies applicable to Guam. Massachusetts certainly is
typical. It is urban and largely immigrant. It shares social and
economic problems found in most states, including violence, drugs and
gangs.

Yet, Massachusetts has an exemplary public school system where, by
law, school officials may not "abridge the rights of students as to
personal dress and appearance" by imposing dress codes unless personal
dress "violates reasonable standards of health, safety and cleanliness."

This contrasts sharply with states that allow schools to impose
mandatory uniforms on students. For example, Arizona ranks as having
the worst public school system (ranked No. 50). California ranks at
fourth from the bottom. Oregon is in the bottom 10 and Utah is 12th
from the bottom.

In Guam, we can see no positive results since the imposition of
mandatory uniforms. In all categories -- violence, vandalism, test
scores, drop-out rates -- Guam public schools are as bad or worse off
than ever.

Throughout the world, school uniforms are the hallmark of Third World
countries. They are the product of a philosophy that society in
general -- and schools in particular -- can be run like clockwork.
This philosophy is rooted in an intolerance of ambiguity, and hence,
is incompatible with democratic society. It is the philosophy of
totalitarianism.

Oddly enough this philosophy of social-engineering correlates with an
inability to engineer the things that actually should be engineered.
As can be seen in Guam, this means broken air conditioners, unsanitary
bathrooms and school budgets that can't be balanced.

Isn't it time (as a first step in emulating Massachusetts' proven
educational success) we drop the school uniform superstition and once
again run our schools in the traditional American way?

PAUL ZERZAN

Barrigada

By ELIOT KLEINBERG
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 15, 2008
RIVIERA BEACH — A judge says Riviera Beach's "saggy pants" law is
unconstitutional in the case of a 17-year-old who spent a night in
jail for having his underwear showing.
And a public defender said her office wants to get the law tossed
altogether.
Julius Hart was charged Wednesday when an officer spotted him riding
his bicycle in the 2800 block of Lakeshore Drive with 4 to 5 inches of
blue and black boxer shorts sticking out of his black pants.
A first offense carries a $150 fine or a requirement of community
service; only habitual offenders face the possibility of jail time.
But, a report said, the charge against Hart meant a violation of his
probation on a marijuana possession charge, so he went to jail.
"Somebody help me," Palm Beach Circuit Judge Paul Moyle said.
"We're not talking about exposure of buttocks. No! We're talking about
someone who has on pants whose underwear are apparently visible to a
police officer who then makes an arrest and the basis is he's then
held overnight, no bond. No bond!" the judge exclaimed.
"Your honor, we now have the fashion police," public defender Carol
Bickerstaff said. "Our office really does intend to appeal this
ordinance, which we believe is totally unconstitutional."
Moyle ruled the law unconstitutional "based on the limited facts of
this case." Instead of issuing bail, the judge released Hart on his
own recognizance.
Asked how this will affect the law overall, Riviera Beach's city
attorney deferred to the police legal counsel and the mayor, Bishop
Thomas Masters. Masters referred calls to city spokeswoman Rose Anne
Brown, who said the city hadn't yet seen the ruling and couldn't comment.
Technically, the charge is not yet dropped; a new arraignment is set
for Oct. 5.
"The first time I saw this particular fashion, I disliked it, and then
I realized I'm getting old," Bickerstaff told the judge.
"You can have Speedo underwear, which is way less than boxer shorts,
and that is perfectly legal, but boxer shorts, with pants over them,
is not?" Moyle asked.
Bickerstaff quipped, "It's like a Monty Python skit."
City voters had approved the law in March by a 72 percent tally, after
Masters lobbied heavily for it, helping collect 4,769 signatures to
put the measure on the ballot.
The saggy pants fad surfaced in jail, when juvenile offenders wore
overly large prison garb that sagged, exposing their underwear. It
later became a fashion statement among rappers and remains popular in
urban communities across the country.

Bum Rap
The latest and perhaps most disturbing evolution of clothing with
suggestive phrases on the backside, and what schools are doing about it.



Remember a few years ago, when everyone got upset because teens were
sporting shorts and sweatpants with the word JUICY (or worse) across
their backsides? And remember how when you were a kid, you could get a
necklace or a tiny license plate with your name on it at the mall?
Well, those two fabulous ideas have converged to become the
oh-so-highbrow Boyfriend Bum Lettered Shorts (not the official name).
This fashion breakthrough allows young women to walk around with
phrases like MIKE'S ASS or TIM'S ASS written on their bums. Classy, no?

A conscientious parent might worry that young girls will think it's OK
for some guy named Tim to own a part of their bodies and to refer to
it with a word usually preceded by the phrase "a piece of." It's not
likely that the folks who make clothing with words on the bum consider
such issues, of course, but if you're über-optimistic, you might give
them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're making a kind of
postfeminist effort to turn sexism on its, uh, rear.

The strip of seat-of-the-pants real estate turns out to be pretty
valuable. In April, Juicy Couture, the Liz Claiborne-owned company
that first put the word JUICY on the posterior, filed suit in a
Manhattan court against Victoria's Secret, claiming the lingerie
purveyor had stolen their packaging strategies and their classic
butt-writing idea and used it in their PINK line of clothing. Juicy
has asked that all the offending clothes be destroyed and wants triple
damages—three times the profits Victoria's Secret made through its
alleged idea-pilfering. In a statement, Juicy called its velour sweats
with Victorian lettering on the backside a "collegiate preppy look."
(Are you listening, Yale?)

Collegiate or not, the concept of bum lettering has spread across
university campuses. Even at Smith College, the alma mater of feminist
icon Betty Friedan, SMITH adorns the backsides of some of the
brightest women in America. Of course, for those who attend a school
with a two-word name, there's a shallower concern than abandoning the
principles of feminism. After all, nothing is more upsetting than
finding that after a few months of dorm food, your BRYN is now a foot
away from your MAWR.

Mothers of college girls may have already given up the fight against
the branding of their daughters' bottoms (that is, if they're not
branded themselves), but there's hope for concerned parents of middle-
and high-school kids. Fall is here, and schools across the country
have been rolling out an increasingly strict array of dress codes.
Districts are adopting bans on shorts and sweatpants with phrases on
the bum, as well as a whole range of other fashion statements.

Much of what's forbidden is old hat: no droopy pants, no visible
thongs, no obscenity. But this year, schools in South Carolina's
Catawba County are banning anything with a logo or lettering, even if
doesn't sound dirty. Yes, that includes (gasp!) Abercrombie and Fitch.
Other schools found it easier to list what is allowed than what isn't.
The Detroit school system's dress code forbids shirts in anything but
five colors … if you count white and black as colors: "All students
shall wear white, blue, black, yellow or pink."

Specially groomed eyebrows a headache at Oregon high school


PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - A Portland high school is raising eyebrows with
its brow grooming policy: shave 'em or go home.

Some students at Centennial High School have shaved vertical lines
into their eyebrows in a trend recently made popular by hip-hop star
Soulja Boy. School officials say the mark looks like a gang symbol.

Centennial administrators are telling students with the lines that
they can't return to school until they shave their eyebrows off.
Assistant Principal Mark Porterfield said the students are not
suspended, but they are not allowed in school until they cooperate.

Four students have been sent home. One returned with a bandage
covering the shaved brow.

Police say gangs have co-opted the trend for their own use, with one
gang's members marking themselves by shaving one line into an eyebrow
and three lines in the other to symbolize 13.

"We don't dictate policy for any schools," Officer David Schmidt of
the East Multnomah County Gang Enforcement Team said. "We just tell
them what we see the latest trends are. This is a way for them to
identify each other. In a school setting, it intimidates other kids."

Andy Gonzalez, a junior at Centennial with one vertical line shaved
down his brow, was studying for a test when a security guard
approached him and said, "If you're going to come to school like that,
don't come at all."

Gonzalez, 17, says he isn't in a gang and shaved the lines to look
cool and impress girls. But he says he'd be humiliated if he had to
shave his brows off.

Centennial implemented the rules about the eyebrows after other area
high schools did, but other schools say they only look for the
markings of the 13 style.

Tony -

You've kind of caught me at a bad time - we're still doing some damage
control from Tuesday's vote to implement uniforms in our county.  I
don't have much time to reply to your question, but in a nutshell, the
reasons I'm opposed to uniforms are:

1) There are no benefits to uniforms.  All of the empirical studies
show that they improve neither discipline nor academic achievement.

2) They are unconstitutional.  I don't believe that the school board
has the right to tell my kids how to dress, other than the usual dress
code standards required to avoid classroom disruption.

3) They are a distraction to our school board.  Our county is facing
some serious issues educationally this year, and all the debate on
uniforms is distracting them from solving the real problems.

4) They take time away from teaching as students are disciplined for
minor (and sometimes unintentional) infractions.

5) There is a cost associated with them as, by law, the school
district must provide uniforms to those who cannot afford them.  There
is also the cost of potential litigation.

There are other, more minor reason, but these are the top 5.

So much for uniforms making a School Safer!

Students hurt as gang attacks Australian school: police

Students and a teacher were treated for minor injuries Monday after
five young men armed with baseball bats and a machete invaded a high
school in Sydney, police said.
Merrylands High School in west Sydney's went into "lock down" with
pupils confined to their classes as the intruders assaulted students,
smashed windows and damaged rooms before police arrived and arrested
them.
"Police were called to the high school on Sherwood Road following
reports a number of males had entered the school grounds," a police
spokeswoman said.
"They allegedly damaged a number of classrooms (and) a number of
students received minor injuries.
"Some were assaulted by the group and others received injuries from
the flying glass."
The spokeswoman said she could not comment on whether the five males
were students, former students, or unrelated to the school.
There was no immediate word on their motives.
One student was admitted to hospital for treatment of a minor facial
injury and a teacher was taken to hospital with bruising to the back
of the head, an ambulance service spokesman said.
"We've assessed 18 school-aged children ... all having minor injuries,
some lacerations, some bruising and they're obviously quite anxious
about what has happened," the spokesman said.
The regional director of the New South Wales education department, Tom
Murie, said he did not believe those arrested were students at
Merrylands High School.
"At this stage we don't believe they're school students," Murie told a
radio interviewer, adding there was no information about the alleged
offenders' ages.

But remember none of the schools in Texas are calling theirs a uniform policy anymore -- they all just require solid color tees as does this one.  But it is a perfect example of them picking and choosing what they are going to allow.

 

Vickie

---

From: GaryK57647@aol.com [mailto:GaryK57647@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 8:44 AM
To: vickiecrager@charter.net; mpassnashville@yahoogroups.com; SchoolUniformsDebate@yahoogroups.com; theschooluniformdebateclub@yahoogroups.com; School-Uniform@yahoogroups.com; School_Uniform-Benefits@yahoogroups.com; School-uniforms@yahoogroups.com; Texas_parents_as_partners@yahoogroups.com; UniformResisters@yahoogroups.com; fedupcampaign@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [UniformResisters] FW: Lawsuit challenges school's punishment of student who wore Edwards T-shirt

This suit is great--- BUT they should have asked for heavy DAMAGES---since (a) under Frederick and similar cases, IF the  pre-existing constitutional  law is clear, the school district IS liable for damages and (b ) ONLY when you hit these districts in the  wallet will they stop this kind of nonsense!@!!!  Elrod v. Burns, an old SCOTUS case, said that every day free speech is denied is a compensatory day for damages.  Since the school DID allow SOME logo tees, this is NOT a uniform case, but a CLEAR free-speech case of the kind that we DO win  in most situations---like GUILES v. MARINEAU. At least the attys should get heavy atty fees here which will hopefully help teach the  school bd a lesson  as in Guiles and  the California "Tigger-socks" case in Napa Valley.  Maybe Liberty Counsel, who filed this suit, can help Bryan or some of our other members. It is a rt-wing pro-religious group that   WAS one of the groups filing an amicus brief last year in favor of Joe Frederick in FREDERICK v. MORSE!!!


**************
Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.
(http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)

 

 

Lawsuit challenges school's punishment of student who wore Edwards T-shirt

© 2008 Student Press Law Center

April 3, 2008

TEXAS — A Waxahachie High School sophomore filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the school district over a September 2007 incident in which he was sent home from school for wearing a John Edwards 2008 T-shirt.

Hiram Sasser, a Liberty Legal Institute attorney for Pete Palmer, said the complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, seeks to prohibit the Waxahachie Independent School District from enforcing "this unlawful policy." It also asks for nominal damages of $1 and an injunction allowing Palmer to wear his shirt as the trial proceeds.

The district dress code policy states that, "T-shirts, other than WISD clubs, organizations, sports, or spirit T-shirts, college or university T-shirts, or solid-colored T-shirts are prohibited."

"So if you want to support your football team you can, but if you want to support your Lord and Savior and your choice for presidential candidate, you can't do that," Sasser said, adding that many gangs use university sports logos as their insignia.

According to the complaint, Palmer wore black jeans, a black jacket and a black T-shirt to school on Sept. 21, 2007, but was asked by Assistant Principal Brenda Johnson to change his clothing because his all "black gothic attire" was prohibited by the dress code.

His father, Paul Palmer, brought him the Edwards T-shirt to change into, knowing that it was prohibited. Johnson told Pete his shirt "promoted a political candidate" and was therefore unacceptable. Pete was told he could have an in-school suspension, leave school for the day or change into acceptable clothing. He chose to put on an acceptable shirt and return to school. Pete and his father, also an attorney, unsuccessfully appealed to the administration and school board before filing their lawsuit.

Nicole Mansell, public relations director for the district, said school officials cannot comment because of student privacy. But a press release posted by the school district Monday stated that the dress code prohibits clothing that contains writing of any kind, except for school or education-related clothing.

"Our district has found that a student dress code requiring solid colored T-shirts and collared shirts enhances discipline and reduces distractions to the learning environment," the press release states.

In May 2007 the WISD School Board approved dress code changes for secondary-school students to provide a safer learning environment, decrease student dress code infractions and encourage responsible dress, according to the press release. The statement also pointed out that students can wear buttons and symbols, form clubs and speak at limited public forum opportunities.

"Our schools, however, are not unbounded forums for practicing student speech," the press release stated.

The complaint quotes the 1969 Supreme Court decision Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, which said students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

In Tinker, the court ruled that school officials may not punish or prohibit students' speech unless they can clearly demonstrate that it will result in a material disruption of normal school activities or invade the rights of others.

Adam Goldstein, attorney advocate for the Student Press Law Center, said in dress code cases, courts have typically drawn a line between students who have a particularized message to express that other students will understand, and those students who simply don't want to follow the dress code.

"If a student isn't trying to express something specific, the dress code wins," Goldstein said. "If the student has a message, then Tinker controls, and we look at whether the expression is legal and non-disruptive."

By Kathleen Fitzgerald, SPLC staff writer

On April 15, the Osceola County, FL, School Board is holding a public
meeting to discuss requiring mandatory uniforms for all public schools
in the county. So far, four out of five board members appear to be
leaning toward requiring uniforms. A growing number of parents and
students are strongly opposed to this idea. We are hoping to stop
this idea BEFORE it is put into place.

If you would like to help stop the spread of mandatory uniform policy
throughout our public schools, I could really use your help:

1) If you have successfully opposed a uniform policy in your district,
could you provide me with some ideas of tactics that worked well for
you. Even if you were not successful, could you let me know the
things that worked and didn't work for you.

2) If you have time, leave a message for our school board to let them
know there is a national movement to stop the spread of uniform
policies. You can call them at 407-870-1234 and leave a voice mail
for the school board, or you can fill out their webform at:

http://www.osceola.k12.fl.us/Resources/WereListening.htm

If you have a personal experience you would like to share, that would
be great. If not, just leave your name and tell them that you oppose
mandatory uniform policies for public schools.

3) If you are local, please come to the public hearing. It is on
April 15 at 7:00pm in the Administrative Center Board Room, 817 Bill
Beck Blvd., Kissimmee. The more people we have speaking out against
this policy, the better our chance of putting an end to it.

To keep up with our efforts, please check our website at:

http://stoposceolauniforms.blogspot.com/


Thanks in advance for your support.

Steve Olson
StopOsceolaUniforms@...

Hi,

Although this is not directly concerning the wearing of school uniform,
what do members think about parents or schools having a say about what
their children wear at weekends?

My mum always made me wear a suit for `Sunday best', which I wore to
church and usually for lunch as well. She'd also often make me put on a
jacket and tie if we were going out for dinner at a restaurant or round
to relatives.

I resented it at the time as often I'd be far smarter than nearly
everyone else, but my protests would usually fall on deaf ears. I
rebelled against this aged 15 or so but a little later I came round to
their way of thinking and actually started to dress smartly out of
choice.

What do others do? Totally casual out of school or do you make your
sons (and daughters) dress up a bit?

School rethinks discipline on candy suspension

WHDH-TV
updated 12:08 p.m. ET, Thurs., March. 13, 2008

NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- A New Haven middle school honors student,
suspended for buying candy from a classmate, will have the discipline
expunged from his record, the superintendent of schools said Wednesday
night.

Michael Sheridan also was stripped of his title as class vice
president, barred from attending an honors student dinner and
suspended for a day after buying a bag of Skittles last month from a
classmate.

The New Haven school system banned candy sales in 2003 as part of a
districtwide school wellness policy, school spokeswoman Catherine
Sullivan-DeCarlo said.

But Superintendent Reginald Mayo said in a statement Wednesday evening
that he and principal Eleanor Turner met with Sheridan's parents and
Turner decided to clear the boy's record and restore him to his post
as student council vice president.

"I am sorry this has happened," Turner said in a statement. "My hope
is that we can get back to the normal school routine, especially since
we are in the middle of taking the Connecticut mastery test."

Turner said she should have reinforced in writing the verbal warnings
against candy transactions.

Shelli Sheridan, Michael's mother, told the New Haven Register that
her son had no previous disciplinary problems.

"It's too much. It's too unfair," she said. "He's never even had a
detention."

Michael Sheridan said he didn't realize his candy purchase was against
the rules, but he noticed the student selling the Skittles on Feb. 26
was being secretive.

An administrator busted Michael with the candy in his pocket. His
mother says the student who sold him the Skittles out of a lunch box
also was suspended. School officials say his suspension also will be
expunged.

A copy of the district's policy states that "no candy or junk food
fundraisers will be allowed on school grounds" and that only healthy
snacks will be sold in vending machines.

The policy also prohibits bake sales and other food sales during
school hours. The policy does not say anything about students sharing
snacks when no money is exchanged.

(Copyright 2008 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)