E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAn openly gay high school student, who is prohibited from wearing a shirt that states "Jesus is not a homophobe," is suing the school. Karin Johnson reports.
An Ohio high school student says school officials are violating his freedom of expression because they won’t let him wear a T-shirt bearing the slogan “Jesus Is Not a Homophobe.”
The shirt, high school student Maverick Couch told the Cincinnati Enquirer, is designed to show support for the "Day of Silence," on April 20, a national event that puts a spotlight on how bullying keeps gay and lesbian students from speaking out.
Couch’s mother filed a lawsuit against the Wayne Local Schools District in federal court on behalf of her 16-year-old son on Tuesday, the Associated Press reported.
The lawsuit says Couch was threatened with suspension if he wears the shirt, which is emblazoned with a colorful logo of a fish traditionally used as a Christian symbol, as well as the slogan in large bold text. The suit asks that Couch be allowed to wear the shirt and receive unspecified damages.
Maverick Couch told the Enquirer that school officials said the shirt was “indecent and sexual in nature.”
Christopher Clark, Couch’s attorney, said the family for months tried to settle the dispute but school officials would not change their minds.
"I do think what the school is doing is bullying," Clark told the Enquirer. "They’re trying to shame him into not wearing this shirt.”
Wayne Local Schools Superintendent Patrick Dubbs told msnbc.com that the district has not yet reviewed the contents of the federal lawsuit and thus cannot comment at this time.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
Leave a Comment:
If that's sexual, then we need to start charging people that have the fish symbol on their cars with indecent exposure or contributing to the delinquency of a minor, whatever you want to call it. Also, we're gonna need to remove all heart symbols, anything that says the word love, all lipstick prints from shirts, pants, backpacks, shoes... No XOXO, can't celebrate valentine's day in schools...
It's a freaking fish with rainbow print and the word homophobe on it. Stop acting butthurt.
If the school is going to enforce this policy then no t-shirt with a political or social issue bent should be worn, otherwise its hypocrisy.
For the record, Jesus is NOT a homophobe. And, the shirt is not sexual or indecent.
Yep, that's indecent sexual messaging, but plastering the word 'juicy' across your ass is just fine. Not to mention hyper sexualized, school endorsed cheer-leading outfits.
Jesus may very well not be a homophobe, but it appears the folks on the school board are.
Even if they would like to, the school district cannot enforce a no social or political t-shirt policy.
That sort of policy would be a violation of the students civil rights. See: Tinker v. Des Moines School District.
Sooooo...let's get this straight (no pun)
jesus - not sexual (as a matter of fact, he's blocked me a few times)
is not a - not sexual
homophobe - is not sexual (It's about non-sexual as can be) I agree it can be indecent though...
Put them all together - jesus is not a homophobes. Where is the sexual?!? Don't see it as indecent, but you can never tell what "christians" think...most don't think. (No, I don't have an issue with christianity, it's the followers I have issues with)
do this then...where a different shirt everyday with the individual words on them. If they don't b1tch, you can wear the t-shirt.
good luck in your lawsuit. Go get these backward people out. In this country we teach our kids that speaking up for yourself is what you do to be heard.
Make them print the apology on the front page of the local paper too.
Schools had dress codes even back with I was in high school almost 30 years ago. Certain T-shirts were not allowed, ie, anything with a skull, smoking, curse words, etc. The policies have changed over the years to include many other "types" of language/images. IF THIS IS BEING APPLIED EQUALLY!! across any topic or subject that someone in the school is "offended" by, then I believe it is allowed by law and not a problem.
However, I wonder what someone wearing a "Jesus is Love" shirt would be told? Same thing?
So, a Christian promoting Jesus & truth with a Jesus fish on it is now considered “indecent and sexual in nature.”?
I wonder what would have happened if the shirt had read "Flying Spaghetti Monster is Not a Homophobe!"
(Plus, our Heaven has a beer volcano!)
yeah, what century are the school officials living in?
I guess not many of you have kids in school. But it is a wide spread rule at most schools that "Any Clothing Stating Any Kind Of Political, Religious Or Other Wise Distracting Message Can Not Be Worn To School". I remember in the news that a student was sent home for wearing an American Flag Shirt & another for wearing a shirt with a Confederate Flag shirt. It has been this way for years and rightly so. It prevents distractions in the class room & hall ways. Teachers have enough to deal with, with out adding more to it. School is a place to learn not to preach your political or religious views. As it should be.
Please someone tell me what the definition of homophobe is. It seems to me that these days you are called a homophobe if you do not agree with homosexuality. Jesus does not agree with homosexuality but does he hate homosexuals...NO. He hates the sin not the sinner just as christians are called to do. As for the shirt...let's not be putting the name of Jesus on a shirt with the word homophobe.
@EngEsq
I like when they have 'juicy' plastered on their asses....esp if it's a nice young un'....and before everyone starts to freak out, have to be 18, which is a young un' to me....lol
It seems to me, and I could be mistaken, but I think the school board is non-secular and is upset that the student is trying to call attention to the fact that even though Jesus/Christianity teaches that homosexuality is wrong/sin, that does not make Jesus/Christians homophobes. I think in particular Adam-2011718 thinks the young man is trying to promote the Gay agenda, when I read the shirt slogan, I get the impression the young man is trying to make a counterpoint to the claims that Christianity is backwards for opposing homosexuality. Maybe he is intentionally trying to be ambiguous and stir argument on both sides. When I read the shirt my first thought (AS A CHRISTIAN) is - right He is not a homophobe, but He still says it is immoral. And I say Amen.
An why not put Jesus on a shirt with the word homophobe? Are you the "only" one Jesus talks to? I am continuously amazed by religious people who think their god only talks to them. I mean, really, Jesus forgives me - and I'm supposed to take your word because...........
And if christians are called to only hate the sin and not the sinner, you christians have a lot of explaining to do.
At first I read it assuming the kid was a Christian and was trying to stand against the bullying tactics of the GLBSA mentality that anyone not approving of homosexuality was a homophobe. I like his shirt- Jesus loves everyone, gays included, despite our sin. But he never meant for us to stay that way.
Well that's cute I guess the schools should let all the students wear what ever they want, because if one is allowed then everyone has to be allowed, its called freedom of expression even though you may find it offensive and also a law needs to be passed in the effect that no one can sue a school for a silly thing like this, I'm all for it how about all of you .....
Well if they uphold the ban, they should move against all other signs, crosses, stars of david, american flags, and also switch to uniforms and same hair cuts. Freedom of expression does have a limit, but our shcools should not be north korean states either, but it had better be equal treatment.
How can anyone think this is okay? It's just to political. The statement itself is meant to bully people of faith. If this family wins their lawsuit, tomorrow you'll have another kid wearing a shirt that says, "Homosexuality IS a sin". Is that okay... where do you draw the line?
Imagine no religion,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky.......
John Lennon
watajoke, If that shirt existed, I would support your right to wear it. There's nothing explicit or obscene about it, so I guess that falls under freedom of speech. I would say that it is in poor taste, though. This kid's shirt has a message of acceptance, and yours is intolerance.
If someone wore a t-shirt that said "I'm straight and Proud of IT!" The homosexuals would say he was a homophobe and sue... but they say that defaming the name of Christ is great and dandy..
The homosexual mafia is a bunch of demons foaming at the mouth trying to get to our babies... They want to homosexualize everything... Everything is already heterosexualized, and thats bad too.. Lord please cover and protect this generation.. The devil is out to destroy them like a ravenous lion.
Ok looks like the gay thing is on the rise again teaching kids things they don't need. Please support the ban. This stuff has no place in a learning institution.
Saying that Jesus DIDN'T hate someone is defaming him? I feel like your version of Jesus isn't as likeable as mine.
va-indy - suggest an ultrasound of the skull to see if what's in there is currently known to science. If not, you might get rich....
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, you thought I meant "Jesus Christ." Actually, my shirt is referring to my friend Jesus from over on Oak Street. Sorry for the confusion.
Idiot smart azzed kids. These little mommy soaked twerps are supposed to be going to school nota " sit in". I don't blame the school at all. I'm a Christian. But I too am sick and tired of reading about some toad kid and his parents sueing someone. The religious nuts want it all their way and the homosexuals want all their way. Enough! Both are are absurd.
Hmm, let's see - unless sexual orientation suddenly isn't about sex, the shirt doesn't belong and shouldn't be tolerated in K-12 (apart from educational discussion/material for class). Wear it at a more appropriate time. Have fun with that lawsuit, you're going to lose it.
I for one stand by this school's decision. Clearly this high school kid has never read the bible and never went to church and comes from an angry family. People seem to use Jesus' name any way they see fit. If I was there at that school, I would beat the kid up for taking my Lord and savior's name and using it to fit his twisted beliefs. And THAT, my friends is why the school has a policy... to 'keep the peace'. School is a place to learn, not a place to express your sexual preferences or twisted religious beliefs. Perhaps if people spent less time trying to 'express themselves' and more time trying to 'express Jesus', we'd live in a better world.
Sooo, saying that Christians are homophobic is okay, but a Christian saying that they ARE NOT homophobes is not okay. I get it! You cannot allow a Christian to prove a stereotype about them is wrong!
As I see it the worst bullies in this country work for school districts. Can't wear this, Can't write this, Can't say that what country is this anyway? !st amendment rights for everyone. The problem with the PC rules isn't the rules it is the people who enforce them. They park their commonsense in the car when they come to work.
I agree, and I'm not religious.
@Son-Of-Anubis: Google Joy from My Name is Earl if you haven't seen the show. First thing to come to mind while reading your post. Haha!
The t-shirt is a seperation of church and state issue. Or rather, it is when it's convenient for certain groups.
To (the fab five),
Homophobe:
intense hatred or fear of homosexuals or homosexuality.
And another thing, Jesus never spoke of homosexuality. There was no such word as Homosexual. Gay always meant happy.
One more reason for school uniforms.
@MovingOut,
I enjoy a good argument and I'm always the cynic, but this time I have no disagreement at all.
SCHOOL UNIFORMS, 100%!
In short, this kid makes me miss the days of corporal punishment.
At length:
The problem is the same: idiot parents breed idiot kids, but these days they have hungry lawyers and a loose legal system to support their pet rant. This kid is an idiot. Who is he to express ANYTHING? Seriously? Where's his life experience? Where's his research? Where's his thesis? His t-shirt is just some knee-jerk, unqualified, poorly thought out reaction and it IS distracting. It's MEANT to distract by definition. Is he trying to ATTRACT attention to something other than school with the shirt? YES. THUS he is DISTRACTING other kids from whatever lame-a$$ education they're trying to focus on. Dumb public school brat thinking he' s making a difference by wearing a t-shirt. HELL, ANYONE can wear a t-shirt. THAT'S nothing!
The PATHETIC thing about it is WHAT is the T-Shirt actually supposed to do OTHER than distract? Help straights suddenly accept and approve of 'alternative' sexual lifestyles? A T-Shirt is supposed to do this?
Oh wait, perhaps I'm wrong. Perhaps this is just supposed to help people DISCUSS the issue. Yeah, homophobia is just such a totally new issue, no one has ever talked about it before. Glad the kid wore the shirt to help the rest of the world see a brand new topic.
I'd be embarrassed if that kid were my son. Seriously. His cheap, cliche'd approach, his assumptive reaction and his failure to recognize the interruption his stupid shirt caused- any respectable parent would be embarrassed. I guess his parents have no concept of respectability, hence their pride and (geez!) lawsuit supporting their idiotic son. What geniuses! How slighted they must feel! I'm sure they only feel equal when standing next to statues of other slighted people like MLK and Ghandi. Mucking morons.
Neale, I agree, "Jesus is not a homophobe" is a good message. Maybe the schools point is the separation from religion? You can't pray in school unless it's a parochial school so maybe the reference to the Lord is offensive? The liberals caused this under separation from church and state. Now you can't have it both ways. Michelle Obama worked at the University of Chicago Hospitals up until '08. During the election all or most of the employees were decked out in Obama campaign gear. The hospital realized that it wasn't permitted that staff wear on their uniform anything that would be deemed political in nature. They forced everyone to stop wearing their buttons and banners. Pretty sad but it happened, rules are rules,and this one is unfortunate.
Only if you think not being a homophobe is a bad thing. How's this any different from saying "Jesus is not a racist"? I mean if you were in the KKK you might take offense to that right? In any case if they want to start banning shirts with such mundane slogans on them they should just go ahead and ban any shirts with words or symbols on them and be done with it.
@ Crystye. You are kidding right! Do you hear yourself! Your ignorance is equally, if not worse, than that school district board!
@MovingOut,
Don't sugar coat it, what do you really mean?
Children, now more than ever, need and deserve a quality education with the least amount of distractions in school as possible. There learning environment should be filled with solid examples of respectful citizenship and a moral caliber that would hopefully, shame some parents. You build leaders from the ground up.
Again, your preaching to the choir here.
Just go to uniforms and end it!
Oh ... that's a nice Christian attitude. I'm sure Jesus would approve (note: sarcasm button clicked).
Judging by your other sentence, I think YOUR beliefs might be a little twisted. I too have read the Bible and most of what it says is about love ... not about beating up someone because you don't agree with them.
I'll go with that one ... and leave you with two quotes to consider:
I''m sure that could also be applied to fists!
Beth ... stop expecting people who spout religion to actually understand the Bible. Anyone who has spent more than 35 minutes reading the New Testament understands that Jesus could not have been a homophobe. Quite the opposite. And Jesus would have reminded the self-righteous bigots that God is the only judge who matters. But shirts that point out such obvious facts clearly make the religious lunatics uncomfortable. "Jesus is not a homophobe" very neatly clips off any possiblity of religious justification for sexual-orientation based bigotry. One "judge not lest ye be judged" and the whole religious right comes tumbling down.
Who cares WHAT the shirt means? If it's causing this much of an uproar, then it's OBVIOUSLY a distraction in school. It seems like every time I turn around, parents are using their children to "make a statement".
I work in a professional office. There are certain things I can wear and certain things I cannot wear. When I leave work, I can do whatever I want with my clothing. School is supposed to prepare these children for their careers and life as an adult. How will this child have any sense to know what is appropriate in the workplace if he is not held to the guidelines / rules now?
Digitalis: Actually a lot of gay people misinterpret the bible to suit their cause. Jesus did confirm the creation of men and women the way it was intended by God as given in Mathew 19:4-6
You see, even Christ knew the scriptures. And in this case, he was confirming what God had told the people. I think most gay people want to believe that their lifestyle is approved by God so they try to use every possible means to say Jesus endorsed it. Which he clearly didn't.
If the school board is only trying to ban this T-shirt, then that is not right. They would need to ban all clothing items with messages on them. I think the student should be able to wear the t-shirt if he wants to. Just because it is on a t-shirt does not make it gospel.... there are no passages in the bible where Jesus condones or condemns homosexuality, but Jesus never condoned violence.
The shirt needs to be banned... not due to a sexual nature, but due to separation of church and state. If you can't pray in school, you shouldn't be able to wear a 'Jesus...." shirt. End of story.
When I was in school, our district had a strict slogan ban on tee-shirts, backpacks, etc. This came after one of our neighboring towns had a school shooting that killed 1 teacher and 2 students. They wanted to make sure that outwardly, there was no form of bullying, condemnation, etc. I'm not really sure what his true intention is with this message, but I think that if the school district is banning all slogans on tee shirts, then that is fair. If they are only banning his shirt, then they need to take a broader stance.
The school that I worked at for 5 years ended up banning all wristbands with slogans because some boys were wearing the ones that were "supporting" breast cancer that said "I love boobies" The theme behind them is such a good one, supporting cancer research, etc, but these boys were walking around telling girls that they loved boobies and getting to the point where they were harrassing them. When the administration tried to ban them, they were threatened with a law suit, so they banned all wristbands with slogans. Because it was equal and fair across the board as part of a new dress code at the beginning of a new school year, it was easily held up.
Until Jesus proves his existence like always he will only exists in the minds of men who believe in him. So whatever someone who believes in Jesus says about him is 100% true.
MovingOut,
Please, dear God, tell me that you're sterile. Otherwise you will be left to breed even more little anti-Christs.
Years ago I learned that the most rabid antagonists were reformed addicts. To be so rabid, what was your sin?
Unhappy,
Yet he says nothing about the corruption of male/female relations so common in Roman, his, society. Do you forget, that even as a Jew, Jesus lived neck deep in a Roman society that accepted homsexuality, lesbianism (although less so), prostitution and even institutional prostitution? And you don't find it strange that he didn't comment on this? But did comment on the sins of the Jewish money-changers.
I worked with four guys named Jesus and none of them were homophobes either...
Who cares? jesus what????
I supported the kid and his mom up until the point where the suit also wanted "unspecified damages".
What f*cking damage was done??! So he was told he can't wear the shirt. Till then he had a legit complaint, till his mom turned it into a money whore opportunity.
good on Mom and her son not letting others trounce on their beliefs and bullying them.
I don't understand the definition of homophobia. Why is the word 'hate' used in the definition of a phobia? Agoraphobia or arachnophobia or claustrophobia don't have the word 'hate' in their definitions. They all use the phrase "Extreme or irrational fear of (something)." These are all specific and serious mental conditions, but the word homophobia or homophobe is loosely applied to anyone who thinks homosexuality is wrong. Does anyone know why this is?
buying or wearing the shirt is a personal choice, putting words in the mouth of or speaking for Jesus is the only issue here. if i support your choice not to believe, can you then support my choice to believe?
Gone4Now: Homophobia isn't about sex. It's about an irrational fear of something (or, in this case, more likely intolerance). It is no more sexual than a tee shirt that would say "Jesus does NOT hate arachnaphobes!" "Jesus" is a name which is almost asexual in nature, as I don't recall one time ever reading through the bible of his exploits.
Do I believe too many people are seeking loopholes to prove their points? Yep. I agree with the uniform concept, but even those uniforms don't work for everybody. I'm built like an orangatang. We have a rule that shorts must be two inches longer than the lowest part of your arm. In my daughter's case, you'd nearly see the lace on her drawers. In my case, my arms almost reach my knees.
@Chris from Yucaipa: The damages she seeks likely result from her legal action, her time off work, etc. If they have a school policy with a specific dress code that identifies inappropriate attire and SPECIFICALLY prohibits attire such as this tee shirt, they will receive nothing. If the policy does not address political, religious or social rhetoric on clothing, they are in violation of their own book. They should change it and enforce it evenly.
I would wear a tee shirt with a fish on it. In my case, I'd just stick to "Jesus doesn't hate." Anybody. I don't even think he hates the devil.
@ Unhappy: you've quoted the scripture pertaining to a vow of marriage, not an act of sex. It's been translated over a thousand times into "modern" language by a group of humble men. Take what you read with a grain of salt, because it may likely have been modified over the years. That very same scripture allows men to have many wives, but our culture does not allow it. There are many inconsistencies in that book. Read it with your heart and mind open, and if it feels like it's good, it is.
It's interesting the number of people who supported "Jesusluv's" violent statements yet his "handle" is the antithesis of his entire comment!
Jesus did NOT espouse violence, in fact, just the opposite.
I think Gandhi's quote is most apt for this situation ...
Perhaps those of you who pushed that button might want to take a closer look within yourselves.
Homophobe is a misnomer. If you dissect the word it would seem it means, afraid of man. The word is way over used and misused. Many people are not afraid of man they just don't agree with homosexuality.
There's absolutely no good reason to not allow this kid to wear that shirt, and the only reason anyone who calls themself a Christian would have a problem with it, is because it points out the glaring hypocrasy between what Jesus actually taught and how some of you treat your fellow men.
Sarah, I think the only reason NOT to allow it would be if school policy forbade ANY type of T-Shirts with messages or slogans (many do). Then, it's appropriate.
I wish the article had been clearer on what the school's published dress code was.
Beth,
Here is the legal standard for dress codes vs. 1st Amendment...
This t-shirt does not meet the criteria needed to overrule the kids 1st Amendment rights.
really??????? obviously the shirt is invading the rights of the school board, its obviously causing a disruption and most kids are afraid of homosexuals, so tell us how this does not meet any of the criteria
Dave,
A little Civics 101. You're the one trying to limit the freedom, you have to make the case. So, you tell me...
1. How does wearing this shirt invade the rights of the school board?
2. How does this shirt cause a disruption? Is that disruption justified? Why should the shirt be punished for the bad behavior of those causing the disruption?
3. Your source of credible, non-partisan data that shows kids are afraid of homosexuals and that the fear is justifiable?
As a child, I can say I was afraid of homosexuals. I was afraid because I was too small to kick their asses.
@sarah, really? are you that dense? how about you give us a credible source of what you are saying? you cant because it doesnt exist
the school board took action because their rights were invaded, isnt this what the article is about??????
ummm as for the disruption, again what the article is about
go call an 8th grader gay or a fag, what are they going to do? that is the biggest insult to a kid
now had the shirt been anything religious the aclu would be all over it
Dave,
My source is the 1st Amendment, and I already posted the standard for dress codes in regards to it. Furthermore, I'm not making sweeping generalizations about data regarding children's fears, to make my case.
Nope, nothing about their "rights". So that was all you. Please answer, how were their rights violated?
Disruption? Well, disruptions in class are caused over all sorts of things, many times they're based on issues that have no effect on those doing the disrupting. Is this t-shirt harming anyone? Why not discipline those in violation of the class rules, or those doing the disrupting?
So the response of an 8th grader who gets called a name is enough reasoning to infringe on the 1st Amendment? I don't think so. Our society protects speech over sensitivity.
@Dave, really? Are YOU that dense?
Why don't you give me a credible source that indicates "most kids are afraid of homosexuals." And also, explain how the shirt is offensive? You'd prefer one that says, "Jesus IS a homophobe"? Furthermore, how do you know the shirt was disruptive--the only reason everyone here is even talking about it is because the school board banned it. Perhaps if he were wearing it right now, no one would be in a tizzy at all--yourself included.
where are your credible sources backing up any of your gibberish? they were offended by the shirt, were they not? nothing religious is allowed in school, period, the aclu made that clear. but here we have a shirt that offends religion in their view and is also quasi religious. so tell me how does that not violate their rights????
so we have a guy that looks and acts like a girl, tell me, how comfortable are you showering with lesbians? and if you are one, how comfortable are you showering with men? dont you think a gay teenager in a high school would cause a disruption in the locker room? now we have a shirt on it expressing his gay views, to an age bracket that is not accepting of homosexuals and you dont think that is a disruption?
you entirely missed the third point, then again you are doing good, you actually got two this time. what did i say? kids are afraid of homosexuals, you turn it into free speech?????????
@r2121
http://www.edutopia.org/LGBT-antibullying
http://forums.govteen.com/gay-lesbian-bisexual-transgender-questioning-community/343363-you-have-gay-child-who-afraid-make-friends-out-fear-rejection-bullying.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgt9AGz4oiU
as for the others, i think i proved my point.
Being afraid of being "called" a homosexual is completely different than being afraid of homosexuals themselves. Not that I'd expect a bigot like you to make the distinction.
And, no, you didn't prove your point. You clarified your opinion, as I have mine, and I think that's as far as we're going to get.
Dave,
I already answered...
My source is the 1st Amendment, and I already posted the standard for dress codes in regards to it (taken from Lexis Nexis). Furthermore, I'm not making sweeping generalizations about data regarding children's fears, to make my case. Nor am I limiting freedom, so I don't have to make a case at all.
I hate to break this to you, you've been showering with gay men, as I have with lesbians, since you began showering in public locker rooms. This will be a shocker for you, not everyone wants you. Gay men no more want to hit on an unwilling straight man, than you want to sleep with an unwilling lesbian.
Because it is about free speech. Your fears or kids fears don't constitute a reason to narrow the 1st Amendment. I'm afraid of flying, as are thousands of other people, should we outlaw t-shirts with air planes on them?
@2121 to a kid gay is gay, to them its wrong, no matter what. they need to grow up first. i am not condoning their actions, but i understand why they are that way
not a bigot at all, more of mad at the whole issue created by the aclu. they fight to keep religion out of schools then someone sues over this shirt. this is nothing more than their 15 minutes of fame. this is not about anything else. i can guarantee the aclu will not be backing her. i respect peoples opinions and choices, regardless if they match mine or not
@sarah, really? hate to break this one to you, never showered with another man, but i have been hit on by many (to which i respectfully refused), so again you are way off. and i didnt know the first amendment had anything to do with kids being afraid of homosexuals
Dave,
Really? You've never changed, showered, or used a public locker room??? Sure. Furthermore, I also don't believe you've ever been hit on by anyone, let alone another man, but if you have, what's the big deal??? You turned him down, end of story. You wouldn't last a day as a woman.
Finally, YOU presented as evidence why this shirt should be banned, children's fears...
Wearing the t-shirt is a matter of free speech. Ergo, if you say "kids are afraid of homosexuals" as a reason for not allowing the kid to wear the t-shirt, YOU are using kid's fears to infringe upon or narrow free speech.
Moving Out (1.38 above) ... we don't have to worry about whether or not your kid would wear a shirt like this because one thing you said is very true ... "idiot parents breed idiot kids".
Dave - you claimed
Nah. They fight to preserve the Constitution. You sound like you hate them for it.
Sarah,
I'm sorry, you are incorrect.
According to the First Amendment Center ...
By this, you can see that a school MAY establish a dress code that would prohibit any T-shirts with messages and, as long as it was applied across the board, it is legitimate. However, if the school did NOT have such a dress code in place, then prohibiting the shirt was not acceptable (which is what I stated before).
BTW: Here is the link to my source:
http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/faq.aspx?id=13001
Dave,
It's obviously you don't understand the role of the ACLU. It's NOT to keep religion out of school. It's to make sure that religion is observed in such a way as to not trample the Constitution or the rights of others.
That is from the ACLU website and you can look there at all the cases they have fought that relate to this issue.
http://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/religion-and-schools
What the ACLU DOES do, is make sure that ONE RELIGION is not imposed upon everyone (read up on the Establishment Clause).
There is a HUGE difference between SCHOOL SPONSORED religion and FREELY EXPRESSED religion.
Beth is totally correct.
The term Homophobia escapes homosexual activist's mouths like water off a ducks back, and the word makes them sound stupid! Homophobia isn't a medical or psychological condition, it's a coined phrase to belittle those opposed to homosexuality. Heterophobia is a medical condition and so is paranoia. It's ignorant and stupid to think that dislike equals fear or a secret desire for something. The school district should curtail any behavior it deems as inappropriate. Only children are foolish enough to think that freedom of expression means the unabridged liberty to do anything you want without any kind restrictions. Suppose it had been a KKK T-Shirt or racially derogatory. How about a pornographic picture? The homosexual ego truly knows no bounds. I think it's time gays get their own claim to fame and left Jesus, the African American community, and everyone else alone.
They don't have one except for more space in the closet. Jesus Christ was the sinless Son of God, who came into the world for one purpose: The souls of men. He wasn't interested in overthrowing the Roman Empire, His purpose was to die on a rugged cross to purchase redemption for all mankind. Jesus never speaks in favor of gays, and preached repentance. Homosexuality is a sin. Get over it. If lying and adultery is a sin, I fail to see why homosexuality escapes that criteria. Jesus wasn't afraid to die, and could have ended His suffering at any moment, but His desire to see man restored to God compelled Him to remain on the cross. What separates Man from God? Sin. Was Jesus for the sin of homosexuality? No, He was not!
OK, Christians, pick ONE:
So, pick one... and quit being homophobic! Jesus forgave them and so should you.
I just love how atheist they try and tell Christians what they should believe about their faith all the while denying, ridiculing and bashing those beliefs, too funny, even funnier is when they quoting Jesus and try and say want he did or didn't endorse, all the while denying his existence , just outrageously funny.
For those who say that they can't find 1 reason why he shouldn't be allowed to wear his T-shirt, I think you can if you try hard enough.
There are other reasons, but this reason alone should be sufficient to establish the justification of the schools decision. While I totally agree that this student should not be discriminated against, it will have to be established that he has been single out while his peers have been allowed to wear similar apparel. The school may have made this decision in the best interest of all the students in the school. I'm sure this same parent would be suing the school district because her son was severely beaten by a classmate because of a misunderstanding concerning his shirt.
Look out the vitoral on this thread regarding this kid and his shirt. These responses alone should serve as an indication of the ambiguous nature of the meaning of this kids shirt.
I am a Christian and I am appalled at the lack of understanding that people show regarding my Lord. I am certain and without doubt that Jesus would never under any circumstance sanction his disciples to bring physical harm to others. Furthermore, Jesus loves all sinners, but he never condoned the sins of anyone under any circumstance.
This adulterous woman was not told to continue to live in her sin, but was told to "go, and sin no more." I will not apologize for Jesus' stance against sin, but when people speak on His behalf, they can only speak as far as the Bible speaks.
I will however, suggest that people must understand that not everyone who claims to be a Christian should become the poster child for the Christian religion. People can prejudice themselves against Christians just as much as they can and do prejudice themselves against people of other races. Not all black people are the same, and not all Hispanic people are the same, not all Asian people are the same, not all Arabians are the same, not all Democrats are the same, not all Republicans are the same, and not all Christians are the same. People are to be judged on their own failures and accomplishments, and not by the misgivings of those in which they have no control.
Yes, Jesus loves sinners of all shapes, colors, and sizes, but He hates sin. Please refrain from speaking about things of which you may have limited knowledge and understanding. There are a lot of good people who have been driven away from Christianity by people who have painted them a distorted picture about Jesus. If you can't verify your faith with scriptural support, then maybe you should be asking yourself why it is that you believe what you say you believe?
Beth,
I never said they couldn't. That balance your quote talks about, is what's laid out in my post from Lexis Nexis. If they're going to write a dress code, they have to work with the 1st Amendment. If it conflicts, or doesn't meet that criteria I posted, than the school is wrong. Please explain what they're basis is for banning this t-shirt? How does this t-shirt meet the districts standards, that are in conjunction with free speech? That's the kids case. Not whether it's being applied equally. What is the districts compelling interest in not allowing it, that fits into the legal framework?
You are wrong. Sorry.
Sarah,
What I have said is that ONLY if there is a dress code in place that disallows clothing with "messages" and ONLY if it was applied equally, would it had been approporate to not allow THIS PARTICULAR SHIRT. I also stated that I wished the school's dress code information had been in the article (it was not).
My quote, about dress codes in general, shows that the courts (who decide which laws are constitutional and which are not) have sided with school districts over parents and students when it comes to dress codes.
In other words, dress codes that elimiate ALL messages are legal. Go to my link and you will show where the school in (i believe Kentucky) had a dress code only allowing school logos. It was upheld.
I think some people are confused about the rules. Dave, you said that the ACLU made it illegal to have anything religious in school, but I think you have been misinformed. It's against the rules for public schools to teach religion or lead religious activities. If kids want to pray in school, that's fine, as long as a teacher isn't making them do so. Kids are also free to wear religious jewelry or apparel, as long as there is no uniform or dress code policies that conflict with that. My high school had a Christian club, which would have prayer meetings in the quad at lunch. Nobody really minded.
Oh for the good ole days when kids went to school for an education, not to make political statements.
As for the lawsuit, another opportunistic effort to extort money from the public. Bah!
Disagree. The day of silence is making a political and religious statement, why can't he make a counter statement?
Teens often start to learn about their beliefs and make decisions, even political ones, for themselves. They want to express them.
So, the school can allow expression, of squelch all expression. They can't do both.
If you disallow this shirt but allow Romney/Gingrich or Obama/Biden shirts then you're a hypocrite.
And, that would be when? We castigate teens for paying no attention to what is going on in the world around them and then do the crabby snarl when they take a position on something that involves people around the world. He obviously IS learning something and doing something there of.
The teen still is attending school for an education. The only one stopping the education is the school administration which suspended him.
reason:
"As for the lawsuit, another opportunistic effort to extort money from the public. Bah!"
Did you believe this about the lawsuit in the story regarding the furor over the t-shirt that said "All the cool girls are lesbians" that was roundly supported on these pages a few weeks ago? Would you brand all those who are against this shirt saying while they supported the other shirt saying as hypocrites? If you did, would that then label you as homophobic?
This whole t-shirt saying flap makes me re-think my opposition to school uniforms.
Tex: This student did not wear a "pro fag" T-shirt. He wore a "pro tolerance" T-shirt. There is nothing bullying about wearing the shirt. I agree with the Jesus Loves shirt entirely. I think it's about as pro-tolerance as one can get. That "queers" tee shirt would go over about as well as "N---ers", "Sp--ks", "H--keys", etc. Choosing a derogatory term for anybody in our wonderful melting pot of a world is looking for a black eye and a lawsuit. And IF it applies, "I'm normal, THANK GOD!!!" would be just fine. But again, "normal" in our present day is selective.
leave god out of schools, keep it at home ONLY, its all crap
How about homophobes do we leave them in or out? How about bullies?
Yeah, kick the crap out of the bullies and educate the homophobes... all can be done with religion safely at home.
WOW We really need to pray for those who don't beleive in Jesus Christ. That is what has happened to this country.
Let's see, there is a zero policy for drugs but kids can still wear a marijuana leaf on a t-shirt, girls can have juicy on their shorts. Larry the cable guy's git er done hats and t-shirts can be worn (sexual if you think about it). But Lord, help us for thinking about Jesus. Maybe we ought to bring jesus back to the schools. Seems we were more tolerant when he was.
Simple one where do you live? Get er done means exactly what it says and can refer to a freaking football game.Just because your mind is in the gutter doesn't mean ours is. As in the coach sending the team out and telling them get er done. Or to translate for you east coast liberals Do the job.
if he had the verse John 3:16 printed out on his shirt and got thrown out no one would blink. He'll win this one though only because of the homophobe part
simpleone-
It's a hemp leaf. Male part of a cannabis plant. Not the pot you actually smoke. Hemp is a natural fiber.
ckon: Exactly. Like what if he had the ten commandments written across his chest. Do you think everyone on this site would be so accepting then? Why the double standard?
Let him where the shirt as long as he will change the text to read
"Jesus is not a Homophobe but HOMOSEXUALITY IS A SIN"
Very few people are actually afraid of Homosexuals, most just think they're annoying.
@leave afghans to the taliban
I'm sorry. Are you offended when someone mentions God? You come across as an intolerant bully, but I guess that's easier when God isn't in your life. I'm not saying it applies to everyone who doesn't have faith, but you are a good example. Those that don't like religion love to flaunt the "freedom from religon" statement, but that doesn't mean we can't express our religion. Perhaps turning to God will help you learn some of the tolerance and love you seem to be seriously missing. I know you won't though, because you've already made up you mind and embraced the hate and greed of the world.
@Leave
Since when is God in schools -- they've removed prayer and the bible.
NOw if had a T-Shirt that says Jesus is against Homosexuality the liberals would be having a cow.
With good cause, Jesus never once spoke out against homosexuality. Read the Bible.
True, Jesus is not a homophobe.
Does it intimidate the other students? Is their a showing that it disrupts the classroom by making a student fearful? That is the big difference between the scenario you propose and what is happening here.
And all the conservatives would be shouting about the constitutional right of that bigot to wear the shirt with the statement of his choice. Your point is... what exactly? If you support the right of the bigot, then you need to support the rights of this kid, whether you agree with the statement or not, or else you are a hypocrite. You are the only one whose actions you can control, so you decide. Are you a hypocrite or not? Don't use the excuse of what you would imagine others would do (but haven't actually) to justify your own hypocrisy.
And there is one serious difference between the two, not that I expect you to see it. One shirt (the one in reality) is meant to be inclusive of all individuals, the other (in your fantasy) is aggressive and exclusionary. One is meant to hurt others, one is not. Surely you can figure out which is which. And maybe if you think real hard, you might come to understand why the difference matters -- if not legally, then at least morally.
Actually, for your information, a student in a public school sued successfuly for the right to wear a shirt with an anti-gay message.
I think you need to do research and stop the kneejerk reactions
Please!!! you cannot be bigoted against someones chosen lifestyle. If it is o.k. to say Jesus is not a homophobe then it is equally valid to say Jesus judges sinners and then equally valid to say Jesus judges homosexuality. Homosexuals are so intolerant it makes me sick. I wish we would just pick a gay state, round up all the homosexuals and then put them there.
I don't see a single logical thought in there.
Tell me Disgusted, when did you choose to be heterosexual?
School uniforms should be mandatory apparel for all schools. Personal message broadcasting should be for off school grounds. Schools should always be a safe zone and neutral ground.
You want to display your message, do it elsewhere !!
@Ruken and Eric
For the record, I am not against homosexuality but I find it humorous that you think Jesus wasn't against homosexuals. I am also not religious in any way since I choose freedom of thought and independant thinking but it was pretty easy finding a passage contradicting your statement.
If I misinterpreted the passage, then I apologize.
You missed spelled "Christians" as "homosexuals".
I wish we could pick some deserted island, round up all the homophobes and other religionist nutwads, and put them there. I wouldn't waste even one of the United States of putting them there. America is for Americans, not homophobes or other religious bigots.
Conservatives are against homosexuality and liberals do have a cow. what is your point? Its been Said, ITs Been Done.
YOur point is Dumb
If Jesus is the Son of God and God opposes homosexuality (read in in the Bible ppl) then Jesus opposes God?
I meant Jesus. There's no place in any of the 4 Gospels where Jesus himself speaks out against homosexuality.
Ruken - you need to read your bible a little more completely.
Jesus did speak out against fornication. The word used is Porneia, from which we get our word pornography. It includes all sexual sin including hetersexual sex outside of marriage and homosexual sex.
Jesus was not a homophobe, that is he was not concerned about homosexuality more than he was about heterosexual sin, but saying that he never spoke out against homosexuality is simply not correct.
Also, Paul who claimed to receive his "gospel" directly from Jesus Christ, and who also said, ""It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me" - did speak out specifically against homosexuality. Since "All scripture is inspired by God", we must take his writings into account on the subject also.
Nice try, but you speak in error.
I love how the right paints sexual orientation as a choice. As if at some point they looked at a cheerleader and a footbal quarterback and weighed their options, and chose to be straight.
If only life were that easy!
You're splitting hairs. There's no place in which Jesus calls out homosexuality in specific language as immoral.
Also, Paul is a fruitcake. Claiming that Jesus lives on through him? Give me a break.
P.S. Jesus did say in the Gospels that "any man who divorces and remarries hath committed adultery". So where's the Christians moral outrage on the divorce rate and the rampant epidemic of adultery in this country?
I must have the wrong bible! Some one please guide me in the right direction to where is says that Jesus and God are in opposition?
Because ->
If Jesus is the Son of God and God does not condone homosexuality then Jesus opposes God?
Or are we rewriting the book?
-AbleKane
Leviticus would be Old Testament. Pre-Jesus.
@AbleKane Leviticus is part of the old testament, before Jesus's time.
Yup, thats me, guess I go to hell. No saving my poor soul now. I ve been divorced and remarried.
Ruken - we choose to be heterosexual every day we choose to have sex with someone of the opposite sex. DUH. You are also right about divorce, it is also a blight on our society and causes severe difficulties for children that is far too ignored in this country and around the world. Simple one - there is a remedy and that is repentance and forgiveness.
Awww, SHucks, I was just warming up to the fact that I was going south for eternity.
Airdog... which book/chapter/verse is that specifically? I was under the impression that homosexuality was never mentioned by Jesus (or at least I never noticed it during one of the five times I read the NT as a kid). The bible has about as much significance to me as Jack & the Beanstock or the Bros. Grimm, but I'd like to know where that is if you can set me straight...
@Disgusted
Really? It's impossible to be bigoted against a "chosen lifestyle"? I'll make sure to tell Rick Santorum and the Catholic Bishops next time they start whining about how women who want prescription birth control treated like every other prescription medication (including Viagra) are just bigoted against Catholics. Oh, and every Evangelical Christian ever who is convinced that store clerks who wish them "Happy Holidays" in December are bigoted against Christians. Or is being a Christian something you're born with? And I feel obligated to point out to you that being gay is not a choice, but, honestly, it doesn't matter, and you're not going to listen anyway.
Also, it's funny you should mention sending all gays to their own state. During the Civil Rights Protests of the 60s, my very racist, 8th grade educated, mentally ill grandmother suggested we do the same thing with black people. Looks like you're in good company.
Jerry, people migrated to this land so they could practice religion freely, so if you have problem with it leave.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
If religion is to stay at home, like so many want to say, then your speech should stay at home. That includes the internet posts that go outside the home. That would be a sad day, when we don't get to call each other names and let the stupid out.
Airdog - Paul includes fornicators, idolators, adulters, thieves, covetous persons, drunkards, gossips, revilers, and extortioners in that list as well. I would say that pretty much covers 95% of the Christian US population. But the beauty of being a Christian is that our Lord Savior gave us an opportunity for redemption when judgement day comes. 1 Corinthians 6:11
Hoosier: I couldn't possibly agree more. But. That would be more reminiscent of a time when things made sense. So that does not fit into today's society. But don't worry, we're still here despite all the terrible things our parents and grandparents said our generation was going to do (well, they were right about some of it).
Wait is this the same Jesus character that walked around with 12 dudes, didn't have a job, a home of his own, didn't pay taxes, went against the government, never married or even dated any females, took a liking to prostitutes and thieves, and wore a dress with crude 'Birkenstock' sandals? This Jesus against homosexuals?
Cause that Jesus most certainly was not against most average people. However, I do remember stories about his contempt for tax collecting uptight judgmental fascist fools who pretended to know more than they did, but just went around raising false charges against their fellow men. Those people were to be damned for all eternity.
I'm surprised Conservative Christians even align themselves with this free loving Jesus cat...he is nothing like them, nor would they have cared about him back in the day, heck they would have cheered at his hanging. To them he would have been *gasp*...dare I say it? Yes, I dare...A no good free loading hippie! Plus, an unmarried Jew in his early 30's was a major no-no!
Happy just ruffling false Christian feathers, I am.
Saddened since I support the first amendment as written I do support both opinions being expressed freely. I do not believe in gag orders for any citizens. I support expressing faith in God,Mother Earth, The flying spaghetti man, nobody at all. I do not fear the opinion of others> I fear what happens when people do not feel free to express themselves verbally. And so should you.
Porniea is a Greek word. Jesus spoke Aramaic or Hebrew.
You Christians throw away so much of the bible where it doesn't suit you anyway. The Bible condones slavery in places too. You think slaver is OK? I hear Catholics accept an old earth now. Let me guess you think the earth is about 6000 years old right? LOL. In any case I'm still waiting for a definitive set of Christian beliefs. I think I'll be waiting a long time.
Neither Jesus nor Paul (Saul) spoke against homosexuality. The one verse where people claim Paul speaks against homosexuality does not do so, it speaks against temple prostitutes in a fertility cult temple. See any temple prostitutes or fertility cult temples around anywhere?
As far as the Old Testiment is concerned, the Council of Jeruselem, composed of the original disciples who were most familiar with the teachings of Jesus, declared that the ritual and purification parts of the Old Testiment, of which Leviticus is a major part, did not apply to Christians.
Ruken, Swan: Actually a lot of gay people misinterpret the bible to suit their cause. Jesus did confirm the creation of men and women the way it was intended by God as given in Mathew 19:4-6
You see, even Christ knew the scriptures. And in this case, he was confirming what God had told the people. I think most gay people want to believe that their lifestyle is approved by God so they try to use every possible means to say Jesus endorsed it. Which he clearly didn't.
I'm not choosing a side, I'm just asking a question.
If it is okay for people to choose to like homosexuality, can't it be just as okay for people to choose to not like homosexuality? If it's a choice, then it should go both ways. You can choose to be straight, or you can choose to be gay. From a lot of the posts I'm reading, it is only okay to choose to be gay, but it is not okay for people to choose to not like that life style. Then on the other hand, we have people who are saying it is only okay to choose to be straight. If you really believe that God will judge people according to what they are doing, shouldn't the final judgement really be up to Him?
I don't think most gay people really care if god approves their lifestyle, since they really don't believe in one [at least not the christian one]. I think it is so funny listening to christians speak so forcefully about their religion. I happen to worship Santa Claus and his magical unicorn...really, they are all just beliefs anyway, so what's the difference?
Whether or not Jesus spoke about being gay doesn't matter, seeing as it is mentioned several other times in the Bible. Assuming the Bible was inspired by God, that would mean God is against homosexual acts. If you have homosexual impulses, but don't give into them, you are doing good in God's eyes. Also, a reason that Jesus may not have spoken against homosexuality is because it would have been a totally radical idea at that time. Nobody would have even though of gay marriage. There is a reason that a baby can only come from a man and a woman. It is because that is the way God intended it to be.
Just to take a preventative measure, I don't speak directly to God. I read His Word. If someone can find me a passage that specifically endorses homosexuality, then I'll be willing to listen.
Well great, but the bible clearly has no problem with slavery. What the a pity that the US government doesn't embrace that Christian value.
Really? Can you choose to be gay? Can you choose to be attracted to men? I can't.
Jesus said in Matthew 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill." He fulfilled the law by meeting its just demands with a perfect life, and satisfying its curse by dying on the Cross. That should shed any doubt about what Jesus said or didn't say. Afterall, those of you who say you read your Bible should know that Jesus is God. They, are one in the same. And for those of you who call us intollerant and bigoted, you need to wake up, your Godless society is nearly complete and trust me when i say this. Once we're gone, you all will have the time of your lives. Your fight is not with us Christians alone, it's with Christ also. Not all who call themselves Christians are true to Gods word so tread carefully lest you be found a liar.
Were just splitting hairs when one says that Jesus never said it was a sin to be homosexual. If I am correct, the bible is God's word and thus, everything stated in the bible is God's word. If one part says that it is a sin, wouldnt that mean that it is a sin...period. Its no wonder there are so many branches of religion. People just take the parts that suit them and interpret it the way they want. Another reason I choose to think on my own.
ready2change,
So what you are saying is that you are attracted to both men and women, but you choose to only have sex with the opposite sex?
I believe they have a name for that.
AbleKane
@Ruken and Eric
For the record, I am not against homosexuality but I find it humorous that you think Jesus wasn't against homosexuals. I am also not religious in any way since I choose freedom of thought and independant thinking but it was pretty easy finding a passage contradicting your statement.
If I misinterpreted the passage, then I apologize.
You might not have misinterpreted the passage, but you certainly are wrong that it is something that Jesus said. It's as Old Testament as you can get, understandably accepted if you are Jewish, but certainly not Christian.
I personally don't believe in any of the god myths, but received 12 years of religious education in school and am fluent in Christian speak. The truest thing I ever heard from a priest was that the two greatest philosophies never practiced were Christianity and Communism. You can all have some fun with that.
It's intellectually dishonest to argue that because a person didn't choose heterosexuality, a homosexual is without choice in their behavior. You're arguing for lack of control.People aren't without the ability to control themselves, they simply refuse to excercise that control. It's also intellectually dishonest to argue that predisposition voids a person's ability to make decisions for themselves. Sure, you may have diabetes in your family, but that doesn't mean you have to consume the entire dessert menu from Mcdonalds. Sexual orientation is basically a perception. Regardless of how you self Identify yourself,regardless of your wants, you're in full control of your behavior.
How many of you atheists are Bible students?
How many of you who claim to be Christians are actually students of the Bible?
Here are some scriptures for everyone to contemplate, however, I doubt that any are truly interested enough to want to search for the truth.
The Apostle Paul acknowledged that his writings were the commandments of the Lord.
Man is never at liberty to substitute his own words and make them equal to God's.
Every scripture from God is the Word of Jesus.
The Bible condemns Homosexuality as a sin along with a lot of heinous and despicable acts.
I used the New Kings James version here for those who might have difficulty understanding the words used in the King James version for Homosexuality.
Jesus gave His words to his Apostles, and Paul wrote them down under the inspiration of God. Those words being proclaimed as the words of Jesus.
Jesus therefore without dispute condemned the unnatural acts of homosexuality.
Whine, cry, and deny all you want, but the Bible proclaims homosexuality as a sin.
However, one must understand that it isn't the ONLY sin the Bible condemns. God hates sin of all types.
People must speak where the Bible speaks, and remain silent where it is silent.
The bible also teaches that people who work on the sabbath must be put to death.
Why does it matter what Jesus taught? I mean, this issue can't be made into a religious one. It's about what kids can wear in school. I've seen kids with shirts that have cavemen hanging out with dinosaurs, so if historical inaccuracy is the issue, then those shirts shouldn't be allowed. You don't have to like the message of the shirt. I didn't like the "Darwin was Wrong" shirts that kids wore at my school. I don't listen to ICP, but I don't complain when kids wear ICP shirts. You can't outlaw controversy in school, or we will be back to burning books in no time.
Yes. Jesus does love ALL his children.
Yes he does.
Jesus had no children
That you know of...
He was married to May Magdelene and did indeed have children. Or maybe not. It all depends on which legends and myths you wish to believe.
removed as inappropiate
In the New testament Jesus gives us His Father Pray thus Our Father and His mother Behold your mother. So if you believe the New testament even that guy you hate is your brother cause Jesus said so.
Actually it meant that Jesus left one of his disciples to care for his mother in her old age, since there was no SS payments back then.
It seems like the best thing to do is to disallow all shirts, etc., with slogans on them. Once you start picking and choosing which slogans are OK and which are not, you are asking for lawsuits. So either allow them all or prohibit them all -- then there won't be a question about who is trying to make a statement or censor free speech.
Sad, but true.
You can't. Not allowing t-shirts with slogans on them would be a violation of the students civil rights.
Schools can ban t-shirts if they want--and they can ban all t-shirts with slogans. The quickest way is to have a "uniform" that all students must wear (unless their parents opt them out--I think that opted out students can have a dress code which prohibits all writing). The point can be that the slogan--no matter what the message--distracts from the educational goals of the school.
What they are trying to do here is classify the slogans they don't like as "disruptive" because they are "sexual." If that doesn't work, they might try "encourages drug abuse" (this will work for conservatives because they think that typically homosexuals are drug abusers as well as pedophiles).
While it is true that "disruptive" speech is a problem in schools--the bigger problem is when politically slanted school boards start using "disruptive" to endorse their own views and prohibit those of people they don't like. That's really what's going on here.
It amuses me that people think that educators are "liberal"--they aren't. And, the schools are not brainwashing your children into liberalism--typically, schools squash students who are GLBT and also any that are "liberal." There are some exceptions--but this is the general rule.
This needs to be a sea change in thought all sides Raligious/non-religious, LGBT/straight either we all stop proclaiming what we believe or we let everybody proclaim it. The dangerous ones are the ones you never hear. When you make a rule the problem is the idiots who enforce it. As in zero weapons means no green army men. Changing the names of holidays so they have no reference to saints as in O'Green day Lord save me from that lady ever getting a job with the mapping section of my state government we will all be lost.
Eric ###### -
For the record, Jesus is NOT a homophobe. And, the shirt is not sexual or indecent.
- Eric just wondering....have you met Jesus and spoke to him personally about his/hers/its feelings and position on this matter? Or are you just assuming, speaking from blind faith, or making "for the record" statements on his behalf......when people state their opinions as fact for the record ....they are easily dismissed.
I don't in anyway indorse this statement, but I have to wonder if a student showed up in a Jesus hates Homosexuals T-shirt what would happen and how much outrage there would be.
Well, wherever the Westboro church protesters show up there's always outrage.
You don't need to "wonder." The shirt said "Gay is not Okay." The boy was prohibited from wearing it--but won a court battle. Other anti-homosexual shirts have all been cleared. There was plenty of outrage on the part of conservatives when the shirts were initially prohibited because they encouraged violence against GLBT students and made them feel excluded (which is a heck of a lot more plausible than that this shirt is "sexual"). Have a great day.
Sodomy between two homosexuals is not normal and never will be, that is not how you make babies.
The desire occurs regularly and naturally John, that makes it a normal variation. Sorry if you don't like that it contradicts your book of fairy tales, but you can't just make up definitions of words.
Or how about if the T-shirt said
I am the way, the truth, and the life:
no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. John 14:6
Jesus
Would that be allowed????
John, if that is true, then I guess that sucks for gay people. ...But you know what? Now you've warned them. I guarantee you that almost every gay person out there knows by now that Leviticus says it is wrong, and that they can't make babies that way.
They also know that that is a lifestyle which works for them, and makes them happy. They now have all the information they need to choose to either keep on keeping on, or try to supress the feelings they were born with.
Eating bacon is bad for you, but many people, try as they might, will never stop eating bacon, because they can't be "cured" of their love of bacon. We don't harangue them outside of IHOP. We don't protest the funerals of people who die of heart failure. If gay people are going to go to hell for being gay, how does that affect you? Why can't we just let them live their lives? Why do people get so angry about it?
i think he has every right to wear that shirt. i proudly wear my "Jesus Freak" bracelet, and my cross necklace everyday, i dont see why he cant wear a shirt that says what he believes and wear it proudly. it is no different than wearing a shirt with John 3:16 on it or any other Bible verse. you go Maverick!
You know, reading this article reminded me of a verse in the bible which states that people will love what is wrong and hate what is right ... hmmmmm. :-|
Blonde... what is right is to treat people the way you want to be treated. I don't see a lot of that from the Christians these days... I hear more hateful rhetoric from those thumping their bibles than from my fellow secular/anti-theists. I also recall the bible telling its followers that it is not their place to judge... There's also another verse in there where it mentions having unruly children stoned to death and another verse indicating that slavery is ok as long as you don't kill the slave when you beat them...
Krystanjo: Really? I see the opposite. Where do you live? Why is it that you atheists keep quoting from the old testament but then uses it to address Christians? It is the same tired rhetoric.
@Krystanjo
I'll admit that many people take it too far and make themselves the judge. However, I recall a passage where Jesus said that if we see one of our brothers or sisters doing wrong, and not telling them, then we will be held responsible for their sin as well. It is wrong to hate and judge. However, we must tell people what is wrong and why.
HAH.If a kids' shirt said my two dads are like the wind to each other and it's normal,he could've worn that.
How very juvenile.
As the gays came out of the closet to show a public face, the startling aspects of gay perversion and pathology would be left in the closet — concealed from the public eye. The goal of desensitization is public indifference. Which is apparent on Maverick Couch's T-Shirt.
Please illuminate these "startling aspects" that you speak of.
Are you really that ignorant, or are you just trying to impress us?
...yes, please do......
....we're WAITING.......
and WAITING......
Raymond--yes, some people who are gay are also perverts. But, then again, many people who are straight are also perverts. Perversion is not a gay/straight thing--it's an equal opportunity pathology.
On the other hand, once gay people were able to stop suppressing their feelings, it is true that many started to feel a lot better--their level of depression and other pathologies caused by repressed feelings decreased--and these pathologies were "left in the closet."
Something tells me you don't mean the latter, though.
I believe he's referring to the fact that some homosexuals do have sex. With each other. And not always in the missionary position .
And us heteros never experiment. We're boring.
Except you're not hetero
Bill, I know this may make your head explode, but over 52% of the population agrees with gay marriage. Say 10% of people are gay. That means a randomly selected individual who is pro gay-rights is 4 to 1 chance of being straight.
I hope you didn't get these poll results from MSNBC. I wonder what would really be the case, if MSNBC didn't keep putting this constantly in the media?
Actually it's true, many people that I know are not gay but the issue doesn't mean anything to them like it does the paranoid Bible thumpers. I've been married for 33 years, the idea of equality for gay people doesn't threaten my marriage. Now those who say that homosexuality is not preordained but a choice, well, no wonder they feel threatened, they could simply choose to be gay all of a sudden. Wow, what a fear. No wonder the Thumpers are always angry. Hahahahahahahahaha.....
@billthepill
You can choose not to follow God's Word. You would then fall under...
a. atheism
b.agnosticism
c.non-christianity
d. I believe in God but don't care about Him.
Any of these, I can see your point of view (although the last one kind of pisses me off)
Or you could listen to God's Word and see that homosexuality actually is wrong and you shouldn't just go with what culture tells you.
If you don't believe in the Bible, it would make sense you don't agree with it (although you are in no position to chastize it).
If you do believe in the Bible, then you would see that it says homosexuality is wrong, and you are putting yourself up against God, which isn't a good idea.
And given that it is a natural variation, what exactly makes it wrong, CCM? Besides your fairy tale book. I mean, we live in the real world, and so we need real reasons to make laws.
If I didn't believe in God, I'd agree with you. However, since I believe in a higher power, my point still stands. My posts are more or less targeted at those who believe in God, but feel that He is fine with homosexuality. To a non-believer, what I said doesn't mean anything. To a person who does believe though, I'm trying to put across what the Bible says and what I believe God wants.
That's all well and good, but we live in a nation founded as a secular democracy whose laws and government are in no way based on any religion. You have to have a secular justification to argue this.
But then I've already lost. I can't argue with a secular state using religious doctrine. I'm not saying gays are an abomination to society. If homosexuals don't obviously hurt society or the country, and my grounds are on morality and religion, it would make sense that I'd lose, because I don't make the rules. My earlier point, however, was to show people of religion why deliberate homosexual acts are wrong, and do it on a personal level. I can't change laws, but I can try to change people. If they don't believe in God, to them I probably sound like a ranting lunatic. If they do...well you can look at my above posts.
Then I fail to see the point of your initial post.
Either I'm very confused or you're very confused. I guess either way, it's partially my fault.
If you don't believe in or care about the Bible, you fall into categories a-d (reference from my original post) and the message doesn't apply to you. If you do believe in the Bible, and wish to follow it, it states that homosexual acts are wrong and should be avoided.
You'd fall into category a. Therefore, my post doesn't apply to you and you have nothing to take from it. However, there are people on here who believe in the Bible, but claim homosexuality is okay. My post was targeted at them.
And just for clarification, I am in no way referring to laws, gov., etc.
While I agree with the sentiment and think he should be able to wear the shirt, when you start quoting the Enquirer, how far from decent journalism have you strayed?
Are you confusing the newspaper with the NATIONAL Enquirer? There is a big difference! Read all of the article!
Thank you. Yes, I was. My mistake...I was getting a little worried there.
Any more the national INQUIRER is better than then the newspaper and usually not far from the truth. Well, Except the bit about Elvis, He now is to old to swivel his hips but he sure can make that wheel chair rock.
Homosexual acting out is aberrant behavior.
This...boy and his mother have no clue what the Lord Jesus Christ believed. Same-sex relations was regarded as sin not only in the Old Testament but also in the New.
This situation is another HUGE reason we need to go to some sort of school uniform or dress code!
Come out of the closet, you'll feel much better about yourself.
You should read the bible more. JC never spoke against anyone but the change collectors in the church and the jewish establishment at the time. The hypocrit paul, the christian killer, spouted that vitriole. Not your lord and savior.
Assuming such a man actually existed, he hung out with a bunch of guys and associated with prostitutes. I'm sure he was just fine with gay people.
A better suggestion is the churches should get together and make a viable alternative to public schools.
Christian schools that teach Christ, responsibility, morals, honesty and all other values not taught by the public school system in the name of "Political Correctness". Christ himself is not politically correct, he is Holy and unchanging.
Another thing we need to do is remove the hypocrisy, we cannot be law abiding and criminals at the same time. If you speed, you are a criminal; how can we expect our children to respect the law when we break and ignore the law.
There are even courses in college on how to break the law without going to jail, what kind of society are we becoming?
Big John... perhaps you should read the Bible before you comment on it.
Lonesome Rhoades-2738573, school uniforms aren't such a bad idea ... there problem solved :-D
There is no commandment that says, "Thou shalt not have gay sex", just like there is no commandment that says, "Thou shalt not eat lobster".
Where in the New Testament did Jesus ever denounce homosexuality? Don't wait too llong to give your answer. I think the boy and his mother know more about Jesus than you do. Let's not confuse cultural bias with teachings of Jesus. Jesus NEVER had anything to say about homosexuality, pro or con. It was not an issue for him, or he would have denounced it. Roman officials in Jesus' time had their homosexual relationships and those relationships were no secret. Jesus said nothing at all about these relationships.
Remember "Judge not lest ye be judged"? Remember the 'vile' gentiles that Jesus taught? He spoke to them about compassion and tolerance. He preached that the spirit of the law is greater than the words of the law. Something we should all remember, more often.
@EngEsq: Jesus actually existed. I realize you are not a student of history, but there are references to Jesus by historical writers of the period. What one believes about Jesus is another matter. But he was an actual historical man.
BW, for such a historic figure you'd think there would be more than just a passing mentions in works by Pliny and Tacitus.
He may have been real in some fashion; however, like the legends of king Arthur, these historical people tend to be expanded as the myth grows.
djwilson
I fail to see how anything you typed countered my argument. I have read the bible more than most, often against my will in religious classes as a child. There are few actual quotes by jesus and even between his followers the versions differ. But he never spoke against anyone as I stated, except the establishment at the time. In fact he didnt lay out sins like the ten commandments because all you had to do was have faith and ask for forgiveness. Not a lot of hate in that statement. But paul, formerly saul the persecutor of christians, wrote his many letters to various localities spreading his own rules and own form of christianity. Being that these texts were relevant at the time the bible was put together, they were included. You know when they threw together the jewish scriptures the gospels and the letters from paul and called it the christian bible.
djwilson2--there already are "Christian" schools. In fact, the Catholic church used to have a network of . . . oh, that's right. Most shut down because of the problem of the (relatively few, admittedly) priests who were pedophiles who got cycled through them. Still, there are quite a few Catholic schools still in existence--and, yes, they are "church schools" and "Christian" as well (they are also, by and large, homophobic--though it depends on the local bishop).
I don't have a problem with people who want to have their children taught an unusual belief system (such as that of conservative fundamentalist evangelical Christians) choosing to either homeschool or to have their own schools (and the conservative fundamentalist evangelical Christians have such schools--though they are lousy). This is fine. There are plenty of them, though--just in case you haven't looked--and the network exists.
However, the term "politically correct" is an annoying one. What you call "politically correct" is really just conservatives being told they should not use an insulting word. However, when someone calls a conservative an "insulting word," suddenly you are not being "politically correct" when you tell people not to use it or when you mock people for not being "tolerant."
Yes, insisting that people who are conservative fundamentalist evangelical "Christians" are the only "Christians" and the only people who are "religious" is something that has popped up in the very recent past--people point out that such people are not the only Christians, not the only religious people, and don't even abide by Christ's teachings (one of which was not to judge others--and, by the by, at least two of his disciples probably were gay if we read the Bible carefully and note the hints). When people do this, they are suddenly being "incorrect" and "insulting" (despite the fact that they are factually accurate).
Here's some more factual accuracy: not all the "churches" are homophobic, not all Christians are homophobic, and even if you find a school run by a church, it might well endorse this statement that Christ was not a homophobe.
There is "political correctness" on both the left and the right, and your attempt to take the word "church" and turn it into "conservative groups who believe that homosexuals are perverted" is one such attempt at political correctness. Have a great day.
just make all the kids wear flannel pajamas.
OR
tell your kids to make their own conclusions, think for themselves, form their own opinions.
what a concept !
Making school children dress the same generic way destroys individual identity. It's a form of mental abuse and it's a crime. They grow up not knowing how to think for themselves and that leads to mass manipulation, thought control, lives mapped out and predetermined, dehumanization and the death of democracy. LET CHILDREN BE CHILDREN! LET THEM GROW! The Bible slams gay sex because it's another form of adultery but homosexuals themselves are not condemned. Pride and self-righteousness is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Jesus is not a homophobe, but if He ever was anti- anything it was hypocrisy. These stupid school system boards have a lot of problems right now and they shirk their duty and whine for levy money that won't go towards where it ought to, and they claim to promote freedom but they want to get dictatorial on the kids. Jesus Christ is not homophobic but He hates all of this social disease that is double-talk mindcrime HYPOCRISY.
BW: Where did Jesus say he would endorse homosexuality? He didn't. So that being said we now only have to go on what he said about relationships in general. Haven't you read the scriptures? Jesus said to. Observe in Mathew 19:4-6:
Jesus confirmed what God had already wrote. So don't try to say something completely different.
Why do people keep asking where homosexuality is mentioned in the New Testament. Does the OT not have validity any more. Homosexuality is also denounced in the OT. If we can ignore that, then what can't we ignore. Also, you can slam Paul for his deeds prior to converting, but it doesn't mean much. However, he woked closely with the leaders in Jerusalem during his ministries. Why didn't they denounce him if he was so bad? His message was mostly for the Gentiles, which sometimes practiced homosexuality. If we can choose not to listen to these statements, then what can we listen to?
ccmnxc,
That's exactly what skeptics ask those who condemn homosexuality based on the OT. The examples are silly, but, do you ever wear clothing made of mixed materials? Do you eat shellfish? Those are also condemned in the OT. If you can choose not to listen to those statements, what else should you be ignoring?
This continued shoving of homosexuality in the face of America needs to stop!
Come out of the closet, self-loather.
But by your homophobic statements you are trying to shove your heterosexuality on others. Why should that be deemed more acceptable? I'm sorry... I am a heterosexual woman married to a man, so I have no dog in this race, as the old saying goes, but I can completely understand the need of the homosexual community to push back against the hatred and intolerance that has forced them into the shadows and into a category somewhat less than fully human for too long. Such hatred and intolerance has existed long before the gay rights movement. Had it not, there never would have been a movement. They wouldn't have needed one. The "shoving" to which you refer is in self defense against people like you who have for too long cast aspersions and condemned those you do not agree with, even if you have never met. If people could simply live and let live, worry about what went on in their own bedrooms and spare a little scrap of understanding that not everyone feels the way you do, there would be no need for a movement now. As for the Bible... Please! That collection of books is how many hundreds of pages long? If "God" really cared that much, there would certainly be more than a few, mostly vague references. Those verses are cherry picked and blown way out of proportion to suit your personal prejudices. The Bible also condones slavery and the stoning of adulterers, among others, but I don't see you lining up to call for the return of either of those traditions. Folks who call on the passages about homosexuality to justify their homophobic tendencies reveal much more about themselves than what God may or may not want when they do it.
And, yes, school uniforms are a great concept for many, many reasons.
And the continued shoving of heterosexuality...more specifically male heterosexuality in the face of young women shouldn't? Get over yourself!
I am so tired of the images that contribute to the "asking for it" mentality among young men today. The sad reality is you don't realize it is happening because you think it is normal.
How about let's stop shoving CHRISTIANITY in the face of America!
AMEN!!! There are people out there who think just because they are homosexual or accept the lifestyle that we all should. I too am tired of being forcefed that lifestyle. Disagree and we're labled a homophobe (sp). I'm not scared of them, I pray for them and love them as people, I just strongly disagree with the lifestlye.
The t-shirt is correct, that Jesus is not a homophobe,he loved and died for all sinners each and every one of us.
What ever happened to schools focusing on education? At the private high school I attended if there was a shirt worn by a student that was offensive or out of line with the school dress policy they were forced to turn the shirt inside out. Problem solved. Whatever happened to common sense solutions instead of knee jerk reactions? No wonder our kids get dumber and learn nothing in school, because they are focusing on crap like what they are wearing or playing classroom politics.
as soon as the individual inserted the name Jesus into the equation at a school you crossed the leftist church and state line. The fact that this is being done by someone on the liberal left and is using Jesus as his example is even further hypocritical. The school isn't disallowing him to wear the shirt except on school grounds. Most schools dress codes would disallow any article of clothing that could lead to problems on school grounds or are considered by the superintendent as being inappropriate.
Cry me a river, bible banger. Keep your religion OUT of my schools.
People wear religious paraphernalia all the time to schools. The rights of the student to wear these is well established. The issue is certainly not the word jesus, but rather the message.
"leftist church and state line."
Yes, the "leftist church state line" (the famous leftist, Thomas Jefferson had a different name for it) is between the church and the state. The school/state can't promote Jesus or any religious views, but the kid can. That's why you can have "meet me at the flag pole" Christian observances etc, but the school/state can't have sponsor religious displays.
Sorry bob. You are going to have to live with religion existing in society. You can teach your child to hate it, but then if your argument applied, he/she would have to leave their religious intolerance out of my schools.
Bob, how can the bible bangers leave their religion out of your schools, when the t-shirt in question has Jesus and a fish printed on them? We all know that Jesus is a religious figure, and the fish is a Christian symbol?
Unfortunately for the student, the "Tinker" Supreme Court decision gives a lot of latitude for schools to supress free speech of the students, if--in the mind of the administrators--it creates an unacceptable amount of disruption in the classroom.
Students under 18, and in school, have significantly abridged 1st Amendment rights.
Not really, take a look at the majority opinion on the Tinker case. The school district has to demonstrate that there is a material and substantial impact on the classroom. They cannot ban something simply because it is controversial. They also cannot ban something because it has caused disruptions among administrators. Furthermore, if the shirts were never worn there is no grounds on which the district can base their assumption of a substantial and material disruption.
It's just like the Tinker case in a lot of ways...it is a silent protests.
If God was a homophobe, he would have put a "Thou Shalt Not Have Gay Sex" commandment in the 10 commandments.
Gay sex is an "abomination". Eating lobster is an abomination. Growing your sideburns is an abomintion. How many Christians refuse to eat shell fish, or grow sideburns because it's an abomination?
Apparently, "abominations" are minor sins. They're bad, but not as bad as the "sins" in the top 10..........you know.... like "coveting your neighbor's ox"
Hey clyde......yea you sam298381......................
"For man to lay down with man, is an abomination in the eyes of God".
Read the bible. He NEVER said to treat ANYBODY less than human!
"For man to lay down with man, is an abomination in the eyes of God".
Why did you need to repeat what I just told you? Abomination is a minor offense (eating shellfish, growing your sideburns)
Why didn't it make the top 10? So, lesbianism is ok?
Isnt "eating shellfish" an abomination too? Do you confess to the priest when you eat a lobster tail?
Why should I read the bible? I'm not a Christian.
Sam, you should read the Bible so you're aware of the (most of the time) crap they're gonna spit at you to try to force you to believe their way.
Hey Tiff-4831345,
God does NOT FORCE you or anybody to believe in Him.
Look, let them live their lives. Come judgement day, they will have to answer to God, not any of you tongue waggers.
Sam, seeing as you are trying to refence the Bible, it would be a good idea to read it. Second, the Ten Commandments weren't addressing the 10 worst sins, but the 10 most prevalent sins amongst the Israelites. There were other rules he gave them too, including not commiting homosexual acts. Learn what you are talking about before getting into an argument over it.
Yes, put an end to all of this happy sex. God clearly hates homosexuals. That's why he created them in the first place and decided that they would commit acts that would cause them to be shunned and made social outcasts. And then God decided that the "Christians" should harrass and brutally attack the homosexuals for sinning, right?
At least that's the impression I keep getting. Yet I distinctly remember Jesus Christ saying "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Everyone sins and you have no right to judge others for an act that you perceive to be wrong and has no affect on your daily life, regardless of what you think God said about homosexuality.
I think we should establish Jesus was not a Homophobe day. I mean, if the school is having a day about not bullying gays and lesbians what is wrong with the tshirt? This seems to me to be the penultimate expression in support of the schools special day and message. Especially since it carries the message of tolerance that the school is trying to promote into the community at large as the student goes about his business before and after school. If they are afraid of offending someone, surely they left that behind with their day promoting tolerance because someone in the school will no doubt be offended. If not then there is no need for the special day. Or are they saying that sexual orientation is less controversial then one's view that Jesus is not a homophobe. Or do they believe in tolerance for only certain controversial views.
Well the shirt actually is correct. Jesus in not a homophobe. Jesus is a homo - judger. Jesus hates homosexuality, but love the homosexual. However, Jesus is righteous and thus will condem those who insist on living a homosexual lifestyle to eternal seperation (hell). I do not think the shirt is sexual in nature, but I do think it is incendiary and should not be worn. The student does not want to wear it just to have free speach. they want to wear it to impose a strong political message on their classmates. I support the school district on this one.
How come it didn't make the top 10 list of sins? It's not as bad as "coveting your neighbor's ox"?
I don't believe that story. That's the point.
In fact it's much worse according to the scriptures. You will not get punished for "coveting your neighbor's ox" unless you steal it, and even then it would cost you only your right hand. Whereas sodomy would get you stoned to death.
And why do I get the feeling that a kid wearing a "God Hates F#gs" tee-shirt would be just ducky with you, Disgusted?...
Oh, and you're saying Jesus wrote Leviticus too, Anonymous? Talk about your revisionist history!...
@anonymous
What a surprise. The bible is completely silly and illogical. Why is something that you will "not be punished for" like "coveting your neighbor's ox in the 10 commandments along with murdering and stealing? The fact that it's in God's top ten means nothing?
..and gay sex is ok for women? .....because the bible is the "literal" word of God, but there's nothing about "women laying with women".
What's the point of the 10 commandments if only some of them are really bad?
Don't bother trying to explain it. I already know. It's a fairy tale written by medeival goat herders, so how could it possibly make any sense?
Keep your superstitions out of my government and out of my life.
Thanks in advance!
Should it be the 7 commandments, or the 4 commandments? Which ones are really bad? How come he didn't put the "gay" commandment in there and make "coveting" an abomination?
If we are going to pay attention to Leviticus, why not pay attention to ALL of Leviticus?
Sam, you are the only incorporating it into your life. Whether you believe it or not, you sure have been talking about it.
So, any message that you dont agree with or the "majority" doesnt agree with should not be worn.
The sooner kids learn that the world is made up of "all kind" of people, thoughts, ideas, and lifestyles,
the better, well rounded, well prepared they will be for REAL life.
Amen! That's democracy for you. We need to emphasize on respect and tolerance. Otherwise you get dictatorship.
@sam
Why are you trying to argue against a story you don't believe with a...story you don't believe?
Hey, if American kids can't wear T-shirts with the American flag because it may offend Hispanic students, then a queer shirt definitely is offensive to many.
Too bad, and same to the hispanic students offended by the american flag. Freedom for all.
When has this ever happened? Please provide original links from multiple legitimate news sources (not sources siting each other). Thanks.
huh??!
It did happen, and it pissed me off too. It was on cinco de maio (sp?) and was intended to be anti-Hispanic.
Very poor taste, but unless the school was concerned about student safety, inappropriate to ban it.
So, can an atheist student sue that kid for wearing that T-shirt? I mean, the atheist will be looking at that Tshirt whenever the kid wears it. So, isn't it violating the atheist kid's rights?
No,. Exercising my free speech rights does not violate your rights.
lizbennet: No. Otherwise, with that line of thought, if the atheist kid wears a shirt that makes no mention of God would (by this reasoning) then offend believers.
Somewhere along the line, people have lost the definition of the word TOLERANCE.
Tolerance means to disagree peacefully. We do that now. What most ppl really want when they claim intolerance, is acceptance and promotion.
Sam, Free speech applies to those that practice a religion also, but it appears to me that you speak out against them for exercising that free speech.
Schools with dress codes! We do not permit t-shirts of any kind.
Do you have iron slave collars and chains on instead?
Jesus is dead so people should used "was" instead of "is". Nobody knows if Jesus was a homophobe or not.
But if you do want to claim "Jesus is not a homophobe" you believe that Jesus currently exists and you somehow know he isn't a homophobe... which means you talk to Jesus and he answers back. I think you better get your head checked!!!
The bible is not kind to homosexuals.
"The bible is not kind to homosexuals"
homosexuality is not in the 10 commandments, so it's not as bad as "coveting your neighbor's ox".
I SAID: The BIBLE is not kind to homosexuals.
WTF was the point of your response?
Well, the bible is kinder to homosexuals than it is to people who covet their neighbors ox.
If the commandment sins aren't any worse than the "abominations" like eating lobster and growing your sideburns, what the heck was the point of the commandments?
The bible is not kind to a lot of people, like slaves for instance.
... and the first born sons of Egypt. Genocide for revenge. What a loving God.
"Well, the bible is kinder to homosexuals than it is to people who covet their neighbors ox."
You mention the 10 commandments but do not explain the punishment for such an offense.
The old testament has Leviticus 20:13 which says homosexuals should be put to death for their behavior.
So how is this worse?
Your extra ramblings had nothing to do with my god d-mn comment. I said the bible was not kind to homosexuals and Leviticus 20:13 proves this is true. Why argue with me?
You don't think I already know the bible can be used to justify slavery, child abuse, and beating a spouse?
You need to contact a therapist. You've got some issues!
William - Jesus rose from the dead, so using is instead of was would indeed be correct.
I have an idea: quit causing problems by suing the schools. The schools aren't a "freedom of speech" zone where kids can say and do anything they want. Some of the adults on here haven' a clue...
What makes this shirt different from the one that says "God hates fags"?
"fags" is a slur, for one thing.
"God hates fags" is attacking one group of people, while "Jesus is not a homophobe" is not attacking anyone.
I thought God loved everyone. Silly me.
and calling them a homophobe isn't a slur? It's just replacing one name-calling for another.
homophobe is an insult, but not a slur.
God is also just and will punish evil. He loves you, but if you don't love Him, how can you be with Him.
God loves everyone the same way I love burritos.
if they are butt-hurt over this shirt they should see the worse one going around. it has a pic of Jesus rubbing his nipples and has text below reading: me so holy me luv you long time!, now tell me whats worse! although this one is meant to be comical and the former isn't.
What about the picture of Obama bent over goatse style with his O logo prominently displayed in the area you'd expect it to be?
How about a picture of Mittens in his magic underwear?
"Mittens" and Harry Reid in their magic underwear would be better.
So, "my mormon is better than your mormon?"
Did I say anything like that? Mitt Romney is a mormon, Harry Reid is a mormon. You are projecting.
that first one i can visualise(making fun of obummer) but the others are drawing a blank as i don't really know who they are, as for moremans(misspell intentional) i despise most of them, not only are most of their reverends sexist and can't keep their word but they wont help anyone who isn't Mormon or willing to convert and on that note they have no place controlling our politics due to their lack of tolerance or insert proper word here as i can't remember the choice word i was going to use right this second. FYI for any of you thinking of defending them, i have seen plenty of proof first hand as i used to be forced to go to their churches when i was younger by my grandma(glad I'm much older and wiser now).