Seventh Grader Sues School Over Right to Wear Pro-Life T-Shirt

[George Gervin's Afro]

Seventh Grader Sues School Over Right to Wear Pro-Life T-Shirt
Monday, July 06, 2009
By Maxim Lott

Print
American Life League




A California mom says her public school administrators violated her daughter's First Amendment rights when they ordered the seventh-grader to take off her pro-life T-shirt.

Anna Amador has gone to court on behalf of her daughter, who she says was ordered by her principal to change her shirt on "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day." The shirt the girl was wearing displays two graphic pictures of a fetus growing in the womb.

The incident occurred in April 2008 at McSwain Elementary School, a K-8 school in Merced, Calif. Amador alleges in her legal complaint that school Principal Terrie Rohrer, Assistant Principal C.W. Smith and office clerk Martha Hernandez mistreated her daughter and denied the girl her First Amendment rights when they ordered her to leave the cafeteria and change her shirt.

"Before Plaintiff could eat [breakfast] she was ordered by a school staff member to throw her food out and report immediately to Defendant Smith's office, located in the main office of McSwain Elementary School," the complaint reads.

"Upon arriving at the main office, Defendant Hernandez, intentionally and without Plaintiff's consent, grabbed Plaintiff's arm and forcibly escorted her toward Smith's office, at all times maintaining a vice-like grip on Plaintiff's arm. Hernandez only released Plaintiff's arm after physically locating her in front of Smith and Defendant Rohrer...

"Smith and Rohrer ordered Plaintiff to remove her pro-life T-shirt and instructed Plaintiff to never wear her pro-life T-shirt at McSwain Elementary School ever again...

"Completely humiliated and held out for ridicule, Plaintiff complied with Defendants' directives and removed her pro-life T-shirt, whereupon, Defendants seized and confiscated it. Defendants did not return Plaintiff's property until the end of the school day."

The school administrators dispute some of the allegations, said Anthony N. DeMaria, attorney for the McSwain Union Elementary School District.

"I think the school district has a very strong defense," DeMaria said. "The complaint does not properly characterize the events that happened. Certainly we dispute some of the events."

He said he was unable to reach the administrators to determine which parts they say are incorrect, because school is out for the summer. Rohrer, the principal, told FOXNews.com on Monday that she could not issue a statement without consulting with the school superintendent and their attorney. The other defendants and school district employees did not respond to calls and e-mails from FOXNews.com.

The school district sought to get the case thrown out due to "failure to state a cognizable claim," but a U.S. Eastern District Court judge ruled last month that all but one of Amador's claims could go forward.

The complaint quotes school district officials saying that they ordered Amador's daughter to remove the shirt because it constituted "inappropriate subject matter" in violation of the school's dress code, which bans clothing with "suggestion of tobacco, drug or alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, profanity, vulgarity, or other inappropriate subject matter."

Amador claims in the legal complaint that other students at the school have been allowed to wear expressive shirts, and she blames the school for “inconsistently applying their Dress Code based upon subjective determinations as to which messages are acceptable and which messages are not.”

One of the girl's lawyers, Mark A. Thiel, said that the images on her shirt of a fetus in the womb were same as those in her science textbooks. He said no student had complained about the shirt, and he said the girl's parents were not called when the incident took place.

"This was a young girl, not even in high school. But they didn't call," he said.

A spokeswoman for the local Planned Parenthood chapter declined to take sides in the case.

"Even offensive speech is protected as long as it doesn’t impinge upon the rights of others," said Deborah Ortiz, vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte.

"School administrators have a mission to educate, and the student’s right to political speech should be protected in balance with this education mission."

UCLA law professor and First Amendment expert Eugene Volokh said Supreme Court precedent appears to support the girl's case.

"During the Vietnam War, the Supreme Court ruled that wearing black arm bands [at school, to protest the war] was OK,” Volokh said. “If students can wear armbands in protest, why can't they wear a pro-life shirt?"

He said the case would be different if there was evidence that the shirt could have led to disruption or fighting.

"Schools have a lot more authority than the government does in regulating speech,” he said. “If someone is speaking on a street corner and it looks like other people are going to start a fight over it, the government's job is to protect the speaker. That is not the case in schools. We need to make sure students learn. So if speech is highly disruptive, well … in that case we can suppress it.

"But the school's position that they can restrict speech just because they find it inappropriate is not correct."

But the fact that it's a K-8 school with very young children could change things, said Brooklyn Law School professor William Araiza. He pointed to the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Morse v. Frederick, where the court allowed a high school to suspend students in Juneau, Alaska, who waved a banner that read “Bong hits 4 Jesus” from across the street during an Olympic torch relay, because it was seen as promoting illegal drug use.

“[The school] could almost use a “bong hits” kind of rationale about protecting students from inappropriate messages,” Araiza said. “For instance, would you allow a 4th grader to wear a gruesome picture of a bomb scene? You probably wouldn't.”

First Amendment attorney William Becker, who represents Amador, disagreed that the shirt could be seen as containing inappropriate messages.

"The message of the T-shirt is that life is sacred," he said. "One would be very hard pressed to find anything wrong with that particular idea, except that some people do object to the political message.”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530284,00.html?mrp


You right wingers are such a hoot.

[Ignignokt]

The first ammendment is reserved only for democrats.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Schools tend to frown on bringing things that will cause a distraction...like a pro life t shirt with a fetus on it...

Do you approve of allowing some students to distract others from learning?

[DarkReign]

Schools tend to frown on bringing things that will cause a distraction...like a pro life t shirt with a fetus on it...

Do you approve of allowing some students to distract others from learning?

If what our public school system churns out constitutes "learning", our problem lies not in the content which a student wears on school grounds, but in the irrelevant minutia the system pays most attention to.

[Marcus Bryant]

If what our public school system churns out constitutes "learning", our problem lies not in the content which a student wears on school grounds, but in the irrelevant minutia the system pays most attention to.

Indeed.

[Cry Havoc]

Good for this girl. I find it amsuing that the shirt had the potential to spark actual debate (which could promote learning) about a particular subject, and it's now being taken down.

Junior high and high schools are quickly becoming one of the worst places to go for actual knowledge in the country.

[101A]

If what our public school system churns out constitutes "learning", our problem lies not in the content which a student wears on school grounds, but in the irrelevant minutia the system pays most attention to.


Two of my children can identify the states.....


BY SHAPE!

[DarkReign]

Two of my children can identify the states.....


BY SHAPE!

You, my friend, win at life. Your children are now properly prepared to fully engage life's challenges. As a parent, does it get better? I am not a parent, but I would think not.

Some day, I hope my aborted children can identify the US states by shape. Think of the opportunities this would open up for them.

[DarkReign]

Good for this girl. I find it amsuing that the shirt had the potential to spark actual debate (which could promote learning) about a particular subject, and it's now being taken down.

God forbid children/young adults have a discussion about something outside a textbook. Could you imagine what some of the parents would do?

Shit, that might be the first time some of these parents ever step foot on school grounds. Not demanding a better education or, *gasp*, meeting the teachers tasked with educating their children...

No, no, no...more important stuff like what not to have discourse on. Wouldnt want to expose little Mary to the realities of life and the people in it. No, she's fine with us...and television...and the internet...and her friends...and....well, shit.


Junior high and high schools are quickly becoming one of the worst places to go for actual knowledge in the country.

I had an intense interest in school and learning from a young age. Right up until high school, I was a good student (im not bragging, shit is easy as you all know). 99% of my disinterest can be attributed to me and me alone. But that 1% can be attributed to the school, the system, the beauracracy, the totally irrelevant rules and the boredom of having to watch a teacher struggle to get 10 kids caught up and in sync with the 30 other kids who were now bored and "turned off" attention-wise.

[Marcus Bryant]

so people don't have a problem with schools strip searching kids (for drugs) and making them piss in front of adults (to test for drugs) but they care when schools won't let stupid little girls wear certain (perhaps disgusting-looking) shirts

Indeed.

[DarkReign]

so people don't have a problem with schools strip searching kids (for drugs) and making them piss in front of adults (to test for drugs) but they care when schools won't let stupid little girls wear certain (perhaps disgusting-looking) shirts

This is important, 4cc. Think of the children.

[Marcus Bryant]

I had an intense interest in school and learning from a young age. Right up until high school, I was a good student (im not bragging, shit is easy as you all know). 99% of my disinterest can be attributed to me and me alone. But that 1% can be attributed to the school, the system, the beauracracy, the totally irrelevant rules and the boredom of having to watch a teacher struggle to get 10 kids caught up and in sync with the 30 other kids who were now bored and "turned off" attention-wise.

Why do you think the system continues, despite the miserable performance?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530284,00.html?mrp


You right wingers are such a hoot.

so you are for censorship? figures.

[Marcus Bryant]

Public schools prepare children to accept the warfare-welfare-corporatist state.

[LnGrrrR]

I think that child is well within her right to sue, and I don't see how she couldn't win.

[101A]

Public schools prepare children to accept the warfare-welfare-corporatist state.

Thanks for that.

With three children in the system, I couldn't tell WHAT they were being trained for! Seems to me they are learning, as DR suggested, a bunch of irrelevant garbage - and being graded on their ability to stay organized, write in COMPLETE sentences, and follow directions to the tiniest minutia.

I was afraid there was no point, and that the former education majors (not the brightest lot on college campuses), who are now teachers, were simply out-classed in their ability to teach my children anything at all. Now I know I was wrong - that there is a plan. I'll sleep better.

Thanks again.

[DarkReign]

Why do you think the system continues, despite the miserable performance?

Excellent question. One I dont think I'll answer properly or with decent perspective as I have been out of the education system for quite some time (high school, college or otherwise) and I dont have children.

My take; Laziness and Indoctrinated Parents

American parents, in general, are lazy. So am I, admittedly. Having a system of education that is commonly known to be inferior allows blame to be layed elsewhere besides upon themselves. A scapegoat, if you will. A very convenient, government sponsored (therefore universally despised) scapegoat.

"Ive got to pay taxes for this?! This is such bullshit..."

Yet, pay taxes you do without fail.

I am constantly asked "Why dont you two have children yet?"

To which I reply "Because children cost a lot of time and a lot of money. I enjoy both immensely, selfishly."

Having children and raising children as easy as anyone can tell, requires FAR more than the old tagline roof over their head and food in the fridge.

If that is the extent to which our national obligation to children reaches (by and large, mind you), then the system didnt fail us, we failed the system.

Most American families have two parents who work...hard. A majority never went to college or graduated (Im included in that category), yet in their minds, they turned out just fine. Whats good for the goose must be good for the gander, so to speak.

They couldnt imagine that they are the unwitting benefactors of an economically American-dominated world. They actually believe they earned their lot in life alone and without help from anyone.

They dont know why American business needs to import Far East talent at all-time-high levels, or that this even happens (en masse). They care not for comparisons to other countries, 3rd world or not, as this isnt a concern here in the States.

IMO, American parents believe that education stops at some elastic point. They know their kids should go to college because theyve been told by a big, rich corporate stick that this will separate their offspring from the rest. When in actuality, it doesnt per say. Research into subject of interest, even rudimentary interest, I dont think happens to most American adults. I can name TWO adults in my family that read for enjoyment, much less actually try and actively learn about a subject you had no prior education on. I have a big family.

To me, it comes down to this.

Blaming the system is easy. The system does in fact, suck, of this there is no doubt. The system doesnt help itself with its standoff-ish relationship with most parents. Educators dont want the parents in school regularly for the same reason parents do not go in the first place. Its depressing to see just what a complete waste of fucking time it actually is and that you have to somehow lie through your teeth to your children about how incredibly important this is when in reality, you know 90% of the crap theyve been forced to memorize will never apply to their lives or livelihood.

Sad truth is, not every citizen can be a professional. Not logistically, not economically. If we were all lawyers and accountants, who would work the roads with an actual shovel? Who digs the ditches so that water runs off the road at certain pitches? Builds the buildings, not just design them (as admirable and difficult as that is).

The public school system is flawed, it should be more career focused or done away with entirely to let the local municipalities be responsible for the education of their own children. Standardized testing is the equivalent of lowering the bar. Many things are wrong with the system, little is right.

All of this can be resolved with the quickest of ease. Parental involvement at schools around the country on a regular basis (like, weekly). But this is discouraged by the schools (they dont want transparency for the most part) and loathed by parents (both working 10 hours for shit pay then have to go to the boys school to discuss his edu-fucking-cation?!). Its a mutually assured destruction.

We Americans are far too slovenly addicted to our chosen entertainments. We expect to come home from work and watch tv, play video games, whatever. Something that fucks with that routine, no matter how important, is considered a chore, a drag. Because after busting my ass at work all day, the last thing I want to do is go over the work of my son and his teachers about subjects I have loooong forgotten about that have never applied to my ass-busting at work and in life. The cycle continues and besides, American Idol is on next!

Side note: I believe blaming the education system is lazy thinking. I am not the sort to think our education system is the enemy, but that our media addiction and entertainment-centric lifestyle is. The system didnt fail us, we failed the system by not maintaining it ourselves at the lowest of levels, inside the family. We did what we as a People are supremely best at...we bequeathed a familial responsibility to a social someone/something else in the name of expedience and conformity for ease of use and access. If anything, we betrayed ourselves, we were not betrayed, or at least, we shouldnt be surprised when we feel betrayed.

There are going to be exceptions abound to this post. I realize most of you (if not all of you) probably do not apply to any of the stereotypes. I know that there are good people with their priorities straight who see the decay as I do. But this is an over-arching opinion...maybe not a favorable one and maybe not even true at all except in my own head. I can live with that.

I have no children, I dont want any. Im a pessimist and think this world is a shithole full of shitheads. Being born today is not a blessing, its a fucking curse, IMO. I would feel quite guilty having children about now. Their lives are going to be worse, FAR worse than yours or your parents. If theyre not prepared for that experience, which requires oodles of time and love, then theyre going to struggle or even perish. No thanks...too much responsibility for me. Im a coward like that for now, but now is not forever.

[LnGrrrR]

The problem with school systems nowadays is that it seems to want to teach easily gradable FACTS, and nothing else besides.

The problem is, that most learning is done when the facts aren't clear, and we are challenged with out beliefs and forced to define them.

The best teachers find a way to take those facts, and teach them, but couch them in ways that get students to think about more than facts.

I will have a few years after my kid is born to decide about homeschooling, but I believe I will send him to public. I plan on supplementing his learning though, with geeky stuff about politics, science, and reading (which I enjoy.)

[DarkReign]

I am dead serious when I say this...

You want to fix America? I mean, really fix it? Education, politics, war, the works?

Shut the fucking power off nationwide for 2 months to a year.

[George Gervin's Afro]

so you are for censorship? figures.

I'm for sending my kids to school without unecessary distractions. Why are you for distracting kids at school?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I'm for sending my kids to school without unecessary distractions. Why are you for distracting kids at school?
it's only distracting if you pay attention to it. i'd send mykids to school. not to sightsee.

[DarkReign]

I'm for sending my kids to school without unecessary distractions.

...distractions that dont align with your political/social view.

Admit it, a homogenous school setting is a pipedream. To even pretend the possibility exists is preposterous.

This young student obviously has an opinion. That she chose to share it isnt a bad thing, even when that opinion contradicts your own.

Half the problem with school is the sanitation of its atmosphere from the real world. Children should not be shielded from reality, in actuality, they should be shown every horror of this world at a young age, IMO.

[101A]

I have no children, I dont want any. Im a pessimist and think this world is a shithole full of shitheads. Being born today is not a blessing, its a fucking curse, IMO. I would feel quite guilty having children about now. Their lives are going to be worse, FAR worse than yours or your parents. If theyre not prepared for that experience, which requires oodles of time and love, then theyre going to struggle or even perish. No thanks...too much responsibility for me. Im a coward like that for now, but now is not forever.

Problem is, DR, all the idiots are reproducing like bunnies.

Devolution.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

...distractions that dont align with your political/social view..

http://www.bribiersl.com.au/images/club%20pictures/bingo_card.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

All I can say is I am really pissed about the governmental indoctrination centers that our children are forced to participate in. Sure, if you have enough money, you can go to private schools, or home school. Conservatives want to make it easier to get vouchers for choice of school and liberals always fight it. Interesting how most the kids graduation are registering democrat, and how they are trained in the socialist ways.

[Marcus Bryant]

All I can say is I am really pissed about the governmental indoctrination centers that our children are forced to participate in. Sure, if you have enough money, you can go to private schools, or home school. Conservatives want to make it easier to get vouchers for choice of school and liberals always fight it. Interesting how most the kids graduation are registering democrat, and how they are trained in the socialist ways.

Do you believe it is solely "governmental indoctrination"?

[Wild Cobra]

Do you believe it is solely "governmental indoctrination"?
Of course not. Anyone who has enough money can influence the school boards as well. They actually go teach our High School graduates to about the equivalent of a 7th grade education of the 50's.

[Marcus Bryant]

Of course not. Anyone who has enough money can influence the school boards as well. They actually go teach our High School graduates to about the equivalent of a 7th grade education of the 50's.

So you think those aims other than the provision of a quality education are a (relatively) new phenomenon?

[Ignignokt]

Good for this girl. I find it amsuing that the shirt had the potential to spark actual debate (which could promote learning) about a particular subject, and it's now being taken down.

Junior high and high schools are quickly becoming one of the worst places to go for actual knowledge in the country.

Shouldn't you be condemning this girl for sparking hate crimes against abortion clinics and blacks?

[George Gervin's Afro]

...distractions that dont align with your political/social view.

Admit it, a homogenous school setting is a pipedream. To even pretend the possibility exists is preposterous.

This young student obviously has an opinion. That she chose to share it isnt a bad thing, even when that opinion contradicts your own.

Half the problem with school is the sanitation of its atmosphere from the real world. Children should not be shielded from reality, in actuality, they should be shown every horror of this world at a young age, IMO.

I don't want any distractions at school period. Pro choice/pro life t shirts doesn't matter. They don't belong on school campuses..Geez how many of the righties on this board had their panties in a wad when someone had a hate bush t shirts in school.. what about messages that weren't in support of the unecessary war... none of them belong on a public school campus

[Marcus Bryant]

I don't want any distractions at school period. Pro choice/pro life t shirts doesn't matter. They don't belong on school campuses..Geez how many of the righties on this board had their panties in a wad when someone had a hate bush t shirts in school.. what about messages that weren't in support of the unecessary war... none of them belong on a public school campus

Right. 'tis better for students to learn about their constitutional rights as historical subjects instead of actually exercising them. More accurate too, IMO.

:hat

[ElNono]

All I can say is I am really pissed about the governmental indoctrination centers that our children are forced to participate in. Sure, if you have enough money, you can go to private schools, or home school. Conservatives want to make it easier to get vouchers for choice of school and liberals always fight it. Interesting how most the kids graduation are registering democrat, and how they are trained in the socialist ways.

Considering:

"I think the school district has a very strong defense," DeMaria said. "The complaint does not properly characterize the events that happened. Certainly we dispute some of the events."

I thought you were going to ask for more facts before forming your opinion. I thought that was your modus operandi these days...

I guess that only applies to things you disagree with...

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I don't want any distractions at school period. Pro choice/pro life t shirts doesn't matter. They don't belong on school campuses..Geez how many of the righties on this board had their panties in a wad when someone had a hate bush t shirts in school.. what about messages that weren't in support of the unecessary war... none of them belong on a public school campus
you are for censorship......and you get distracted way to easy. up your medication, and yes the world isn't as perfect as you'd like it. i could care less if people wore "F#*$ Jesus" t shirts. i'd look at it and carry on.

[baseline bum]

I'm all for upholding the First Amendment and therefore obviously believe the school is in the wrong trying to censor her, but I wonder if we'd hear the same from this board if she wore a t-shirt showing the carnage in Iraq and speaking out against the war or if she wore something calling Jesus a fraud.

[Wild Cobra]

So you think those aims other than the provision of a quality education are a (relatively) new phenomenon?
I'm not going to say that without doing some research. I'm sure agenda driven teaching has always been present to some degree. Today's schools focus too much on subjects not related to preparing the students for the world. I am most pissed at the parts that teach socialism student against their parents wishes.

[baseline bum]

Of course not. Anyone who has enough money can influence the school boards as well. They actually go teach our High School graduates to about the equivalent of a 7th grade education of the 50's.

So you were learning calculus in the 7th grade? Hyperbole much?

[SonOfAGun]

Do you approve of allowing some students to distract others from learning?

lol, last time I checked schools don't try that hard to prevent students from distracting others; i.e. weak discipline

[Marcus Bryant]

I'm not going to say that without doing some research. I'm sure agenda driven teaching has always been present to some degree. Today's schools focus too much on subjects not related to preparing the students for the world. I am most pissed at the parts that teach socialism student against their parents wishes.

When did mandatory school attendance come into existence and who was pushing that at the state level? Start there.

[angel_luv]

I think it would have been better had the girl worn a shirt with just the pro-life caption and not the picture.

I can understand the school objecting to a graphic picture. But, if they had made her take off a shirt that simply promoted the "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day.", I feel that would have been unjust.

[Wild Cobra]

So you were learning calculus in the 7th grade? Hyperbole much?
No, but my cousin's step-brother was.

[baseline bum]

No, but my cousin's step-brother was.

Sure

[Oh, Gee!!]

from what I can remember the courts give more leeway to schools to determine how to deal with "offensive" speech than they give to other governmental instutions, because the schools are like quasi-parents when the kids are on campus during school hours.

[Wild Cobra]

When did mandatory school attendance come into existence and who was pushing that at the state level? Start there.No, I am not going to focus that hard on this subject. I prefer other topics and to add this one to real research would take to much more time than I already want to spend indoors.

Do you agree the quality of education has decreased?

Do you agree that too many social agenda's are taught in schools?

I'm willing to read the stuff you said to start at, but I'm not going to look for it. Post any relevant information if you have the time please.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

lol, last time I checked schools don't try that hard to prevent students from distracting others; i.e. weak disciplinewhat's funny is he is all bent out of shape over this 'cause of the "distraction", but he's probably all for condoms being passed out at school......

so, GGA?


let me build up my laughter first........

[Spurminator]

It would be different if there was a dead, bloody fetus on the shirt but I don't really see the big deal with this one.

http://www.foxnews.com/images/543335/0_21_070609_abortion2.jpg

[Marcus Bryant]

No, I am not going to focus that hard on this subject. I prefer other topics and to add this one to real research would take to much more time than I already want to spend indoors.

Do you agree the quality of education has decreased?

Sure.



Do you agree that too many social agenda's are taught in schools?


Sure. Though what would you classify as the "social agendas"?



I'm willing to read the stuff you said to start at, but I'm not going to look for it. Post any relevant information if you have the time please.

Well, I think it's central to understanding our society and way of life today.

[DarkReign]

So you were learning calculus in the 7th grade? Hyperbole much?

You were/are an AP student, lets not pretend otherwise, especially when it comes to mathematics, youre the "go-to guy".

Outside of AP courses, no, your average student does not learn anything nearing Newton's shared magnum opus. I dropped math as soon as I finished the required two years in HS. I took Trig then changed my mind mid-semester.

[ploto]

Everyone knows that kids at a school do not possess the same rights of expression as adults in the general society.

I wonder how that same parent would feel about a student wearing a shirt supporting gay marriage with a picture of two homosexual men on it.

Most people who intentionally push an issue like this through a kid at a school only care about the free expression of their ideas.

[Wild Cobra]

Everyone knows that kids at a school do not possess the same rights of expression as adults in the general society.

I wonder how that same parent would feel about a student wearing a shirt supporting gay marriage with a picture of two homosexual men on it.

Most people who intentionally push an issue like this through a kid at a school only care about the free expression of their ideas.
One can assume what they like, but I would say the school way really wrong. Being a seventh grader, she may have had those views herself. We don't know if the parents objected, but are standing up for her rights. The action was no more offensive to some that goes on day to day at schools. I think the school should have limited their actions to asking the parents to refrain from such clothing at school, and looked up if they had a clear case if the parents didn't comply with a reasonable request. The child should not have necessarily been taken to task over it. If so, it should have been limited to a private session. Not something to embarrass the child in front of others.

[Marcus Bryant]

Children do not enjoy constitutional rights?

[DarkReign]

No, I am not going to focus that hard on this subject. I prefer other topics and to add this one to real research would take to much more time than I already want to spend indoors.

Do you agree the quality of education has decreased?

Do you agree that too many social agenda's are taught in schools?

I'm willing to read the stuff you said to start at, but I'm not going to look for it. Post any relevant information if you have the time please.

He's referring almost verbatim to another thread.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=127000

[ploto]

I am actually pro-life but the actions of many others who are make me look bad- such as sending or allowing a kid to wear something like that to an elementary school. It is stated that it is a K-8 school which means kids as young as 5 years old are there. It is not the appropriate place for this display.

[DarkReign]

Children do not enjoy constitutional rights?

Rhetorical. Children have extremely limited to no rights while in school buildings.

Is that ok? Not in my book, but that hasnt been published yet.

[Wild Cobra]

I am actually pro-life but the actions of many others who are make me look bad- such as sending or allowing a kid to wear something like that to an elementary school. It is stated that it is a K-8 school which means kids as young as 5 years old are there. It is not the appropriate place for this display.
By the description I read, there is nothing inappropriate about the shirt.

Have a picture of the shirt by chance?

Was it appropriate for the school to embarrass the kid, or could they have handled that better?

Do you approve of the intimidation tactics used by the school?

[DarkReign]

I am actually pro-life but the actions of many others who are make me look bad- such as sending or allowing a kid to wear something like that to an elementary school. It is stated that it is a K-8 school which means kids as young as 5 years old are there. It is not the appropriate place for this display.

Where is the appropriate place for a child to learn of the vicious world we hand to them?

Sooner the better? Or resentment and mistrust when they find out the happy-go-lucky bullshit the adults/tv have been selling is exactly that?

[DarkReign]

Was it appropriate for the school to embarrass the kid, or could they have handled that better?

Come now, lets not re-re-redirect this discussion towards a line of thinking that shelters people (children or adult) from having their sensibilities offended.

She/he was bold enough to wear the shirt, he/she is bold enough to have their feelings hurt, vis a vis.

[Oh, Gee!!]

children should be seen and not heard

[DarkReign]

children should be seen and not heard

..and get the hell off my lawn!!

[George Gervin's Afro]

Right. 'tis better for students to learn about their constitutional rights as historical subjects instead of actually exercising them. More accurate too, IMO.

:hat

right.. of course you don't necessarily have all of your rights available when you are in school. do you have the right to not go to school?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Children do not enjoy constitutional rights?
\

stop acting stupid. schools can tell you what to wear, what kind of haircut you can have and so on..

don't be stupid

[ploto]

By the description I read, there is nothing inappropriate about the shirt.

Have you ever had a five year old kid?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Have you ever had a five year old kid?

The people who are defending this are the one's without children.

[Wild Cobra]

Have you ever had a five year old kid?

Two, they are now both over 21.

Your point?

[Marcus Bryant]

\

stop acting stupid. schools can tell you what to wear, what kind of haircut you can have and so on..

don't be stupid

You first.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You first.

kids can't do what they want when in school. very simple so your notion of constitutional rights in this case is wrong. admit it.

[Marcus Bryant]

right.. of course you don't necessarily have all of your rights available when you are in school. do you have the right to not go to school?

Sure, but that doesn't mean infringements on one's constitutional rights are at the discretion of the school management. This isn't a prison and even prisoners actually have constitutional rights.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Sure, but that doesn't mean infringements on one's constitutional rights are at the discretion of the school management. This isn't a prison and even prisoners actually have constitutional rights.

I am all for wearing whatever t shirt you want to in public. i am pro free speach but you can't cause disruptions in school which is what this t shirt did. schools have been limiting student's rights for a long time now..

[Marcus Bryant]

kids can't do what they want when in school. very simple so your notion of constitutional rights in this case is wrong. admit it.

Kids do not lose their full constitutional rights in school. There are limited curtailments which are allowed in order to facilitate instruction.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Kids do not lose their full constitutional rights in school. There are limited curtailments which are allowed in order to facilitate instruction.

:rolleyes

[Marcus Bryant]

I am all for wearing whatever t shirt you want to in public. i am pro free speach but you can't cause disruptions in school which is what this t shirt did. schools have been limiting student's rights for a long time now..

Was the disruption caused by fellow students or simply was a reaction of an administrator?

Of course, I guess you could say that this helps train the children for corporate life. Convenient, no?

[ChumpDumper]

So the plaintiffs would want other kids to be able to wear "Abort Baby Jesus" t-shirts as well.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Was the disruption caused by fellow students or simply was a reaction of an administrator?

Of course, I guess you could say that this helps train the children for corporate life. Convenient, no?

It was a distraction... how hard is that to comprehend?

[Marcus Bryant]

The complaint quotes school district officials saying that they ordered Amador's daughter to remove the shirt because it constituted "inappropriate subject matter" in violation of the school's dress code, which bans clothing with "suggestion of tobacco, drug or alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, profanity, vulgarity, or other inappropriate subject matter."

So much for the disruption claim.

[Marcus Bryant]

"Other inappropriate subject matter." Nice.

This reminds me of whoever was fine with cops searching their car at will without cause.

[Marcus Bryant]

So the plaintiffs would want other kids to be able to wear "Abort Baby Jesus" t-shirts as well.

That probably wouldn't garner their support, but that doesn't change the validity of their claim.

[George Gervin's Afro]

So much for the disruption claim.


That is not the case in schools. We need to make sure students learn. So if speech is highly disruptive, well … in that case we can suppress it.

[ChumpDumper]

That probably wouldn't garner their support, but that doesn't change the validity of their claim.I'm not sure it is valid given the other rights that students do not enjoy in school.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Kids do not lose their full constitutional rights in school. There are limited curtailments which are allowed in order to facilitate instruction.

one of the curtailments is free speech if you believe the Supreme Ct

[Marcus Bryant]

Where's the "disruption," other than a pissed off manager?

[Wild Cobra]

It was a distraction... how hard is that to comprehend?
So a larger distraction is justified by the schools action? Give me a break.

I will not try to interpret if the shirt was in violation or not. I see it can be seen as a violation, but that is a matter subject to interpretation. Without knowledge that the student or parent(s) were clearly trying to violate the rules, it should have been handled in a far more respectful manner. The way they handled the situation was clearly more disruptive than a few students questions, seers, etc.

I would say the school violated it's own rules.

[LnGrrrR]

I think it would have been better had the girl worn a shirt with just the pro-life caption and not the picture.

I can understand the school objecting to a graphic picture. But, if they had made her take off a shirt that simply promoted the "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day.", I feel that would have been unjust.

Certainly though, the very image of the fetus is what makes the message so strong? I'm guessing it's essential to the message she was trying to make, which should be her protected right under the 1st Amendment.

Kids don't give up their rights at the school doors.

[LnGrrrR]

\

stop acting stupid. schools can tell you what to wear, what kind of haircut you can have and so on..

don't be stupid

I fail to see why public schools would have a right to tell you what kind of haircut you can have.

They're a publicly funded operation, so unless they can prove that a hairstyle or piece of clothing is majorly disruptive, and was worn with the intention of doing so without it having any other merit, then they should allow it.

[Marcus Bryant]

I fail to see why public schools would have a right to tell you what kind of haircut you can have.

They're a publicly funded operation, so unless they can prove that a hairstyle or piece of clothing is majorly disruptive, and was worn with the intention of doing so without it having any other merit, then they should allow it.

Commie.

[ploto]

the very image of the fetus is what makes the message so strong
And so innappropriate at a school with 5 year olds in it.

[ploto]

They're a publicly funded operation, so unless they can prove that a hairstyle or piece of clothing is majorly disruptive, and was worn with the intention of doing so without it having any other merit, then they should allow it.

You do know that some public schools require uniforms.

[Jacob1983]

Aren't your rights somewhat limited when you're a student at a public school especially when it comes to freedom of speech?

[LnGrrrR]

You do know that some public schools require uniforms.

Yes, which I think is absolute BS. No way I'm sending my kid to a public school that requires a uniform.* It just seems way too corporate to me. :) I have to wear a uniform at work... I don't think my kid should have to at school.

*Of course, this is assuming that there is at least another school with decent teachers, low crime rate, etc etc.

[LnGrrrR]

And so innappropriate at a school with 5 year olds in it.

Why is it inappropriate? If it's too mature for five year olds, then couldn't you simply not explain it to the five year olds?

I went to a K-12 school during high school. Should I not have been allowed to wear clothing expressing free speech?

The First Amendment is of no use if it only protects things that everyone wants to see or hear. It is designed to protect speech that, god forbid, may be inflammatory, that may make people actually THINK.

[Winehole23]

Subversive!

[sam1617]

I fail to see why public schools would have a right to tell you what kind of haircut you can have.

They're a publicly funded operation, so unless they can prove that a hairstyle or piece of clothing is majorly disruptive, and was worn with the intention of doing so without it having any other merit, then they should allow it.

Schools often times get parents and students to sign documents that say the school can do things like that. If you already signed, then I guess the school has that ability...

[LnGrrrR]

Schools often times get parents and students to sign documents that say the school can do things like that. If you already signed, then I guess the school has that ability...

Yes, but if the law isn't constitutional, then it doesn't matter, really. The law would be considered to be non-valid.

It reminds me of skiing places where you have to sign a form saying they're not liable for anything... you can still sue if their lift breaks and you fall out and break your arm, or something like that.

You can't sign away some rights.

[sam1617]

Yes, but if the law isn't constitutional, then it doesn't matter, really. The law would be considered to be non-valid.

It reminds me of skiing places where you have to sign a form saying they're not liable for anything... you can still sue if their lift breaks and you fall out and break your arm, or something like that.

You can't sign away some rights.

I guess. Except that you can, people in the military for example give away certain rights that are granted by the Constitution, most notably certain forms of free speech. I would think that if a release had been signed that stated that controversial, or provocative shirts would not be allowed, that the school was capable of making this girl change shirts. I don't agree that it is right, but I believe that it is probably legal.

[LnGrrrR]

I guess. Except that you can, people in the military for example give away certain rights that are granted by the Constitution, most notably certain forms of free speech. I would think that if a release had been signed that stated that controversial, or provocative shirts would not be allowed, that the school was capable of making this girl change shirts. I don't agree that it is right, but I believe that it is probably legal.

True about the military, but I think that's a different beast altogether. :) Military get special rules to play by!

Children, however, can't volunteer not to go to school. I'm not sure if parents can sign away some of their rights.

It very well could be legal. I don't think it should be. :)

[sam1617]

True about the military, but I think that's a different beast altogether. :) Military get special rules to play by!

Children, however, can't volunteer not to go to school. I'm not sure if parents can sign away some of their rights.

It very well could be legal. I don't think it should be. :)

Children have limited rights to start with though, so I'm guessing that something like this could stand up in a court, if the school had gotten parental consent for the rules.

And I mostly agree that I don't think it should be legal.

[Wild Cobra]

Children have limited rights to start with though, so I'm guessing that something like this could stand up in a court, if the school had gotten parental consent for the rules.

And I mostly agree that I don't think it should be legal.

That just it. Public schools are not schools of choice. You have to attend the public school in your area unless you have the money to send your kind elsewhere. Since is isn't a voluntary pick, the schools should have no right to infringe on the harmless activity of others. Parental consent has no place here.

[ChumpDumper]

Parental consent has no place here.:rollin

[Wild Cobra]

Parental consent has no place here.:rollin
Sorry I must explain it too you. Must have been over your head.

Parental consent has no place because you are asking parents to sign a consent, that to be valid, you have to have 100% of the parents sign. Otherwise, you have some children not required to wear the uniforms.

[LnGrrrR]

Sorry I must explain it too you. Must have been over your head.

Parental consent has no place because you are asking parents to sign a consent, that to be valid, you have to have 100% of the parents sign. Otherwise, you have some children not required to wear the uniforms.

I actually agree with WC here.

Sure, parents can give consent for their kids for many things. However, I don't agree that the child's usage of free speech must be curbed because their parents signed an agreement.

Do the rights of the parents to determine their child's actions outweigh the child's right to free speech? I would argue not, ESPECIALLY in a public school, which is taxpayer owned/provided.

[Wild Cobra]

I actually agree with WC here.

Sure, parents can give consent for their kids for many things. However, I don't agree that the child's usage of free speech must be curbed because their parents signed an agreement.

Do the rights of the parents to determine their child's actions outweigh the child's right to free speech? I would argue not, ESPECIALLY in a public school, which is taxpayer owned/provided.
I agree with what you are saying to a limited degree. Parents are expected to be responsible for their childrens actions, therefor, they should not be denied control over them. I was pointing out that only the parents had the right to tell their children what they can and cannot do, of legal activities. The school could performing this right of the parent, but ONLY with such consent. Then, as for a school uniform policy, it's absolutely pointless, unless somehow, 100% of the parents give that right to the schools.

[sam1617]

I actually agree with WC here.

Sure, parents can give consent for their kids for many things. However, I don't agree that the child's usage of free speech must be curbed because their parents signed an agreement.

Do the rights of the parents to determine their child's actions outweigh the child's right to free speech? I would argue not, ESPECIALLY in a public school, which is taxpayer owned/provided.

Within limits. Your argument would say that parents would be incapable of removing certain rights and privileges of their children. This would prevent a parent from grounding their child for what the child says. After all, a kid telling a parent they are a fucking moron is an example of free speech (and a good example of a kid that needs a whipping).

[Marcus Bryant]

So your child has the right to free speech until a school bureaucrat is offended.

[sabar]

I think individual liberty is important, but the shirt was inappropriate for the setting. The girl's peers have no idea of what abortion means and entails, she is just a mouthpiece for her parent. This is something for high school where angry teens will actually know what they are debating about to some degree, not for very impressionable 7-11 year old kids.

Honestly, this is a common sense issue. The second the mother send her kid to middle school with that shirt she knew what would happen. There is no point in trying to debate this issue on whether or not children have or deserve rights and the state's role in acting as guardian. Why? Because those things are highly ingrained in the system and will not change in 200 years.

As it stands, in our culture, wearing it was inappropriate to her peers and grounds for suppression of free speech. I see no advantage in a bunch of prepubescent children debating things like war and abortion when they know nothing of them. They are two very harsh realities that require a mature understanding of life to seriously discuss. Children are innocent, impressionable, and very naive.

Once in high school is where things should be different. That is the obvious transition to adulthood, voting, driving, working, taxes, and actually needing your rights to participate in the political process. This is where grounds to sue would of been reasonable.

Notice that children have no right to bear arms, to buy legal drugs, to make medical decisions for themselves, to consent to sex with adults and so on. The rights to free speech on school grounds have been suppressed for a very long time. The girl would of also been ordered to not wear skimpy clothing on any grounds and entire outfits if there is a dress code. I myself was witness to plenty of kids that had clothes taken for having innuendo, nudity, profanity, violence, gore, and many things much more real/personal than abortion is.

Parents want to keep their children away from influence, from propaganda. Whether it is drugs/sex/gangs or even political views, parents have a natural desire to raise a child in their image. When little Johnny comes home shouting anti-war slogans in his military family, the parents will feel like they have failed. When the role of guardianship is passed to the state, there is little doubt that parents want the state to treat their children like any parent does, with a watchful eye and a disciplined system that follows rules.

I think I've hit most of the points on why this girl's action isn't normal in our society or even accepted. Thems the breaks. I'm more concerned about securing my own freedom than that of our children. While the state can indoctrinate anything they want in a child, the parent should still retain much more influence. I went to public school and I'm no welfare begging socialist. But this is Texas and NISD is a good district. For example, they really emphasized that the civil war was about state rights and not just slavery like most schools would teach. I attribute that and other things from geographic location and a good area to live in general. Plus very good parents.

Anywho, nice to see taxpayer money will go to paying state attorneys or to some kid's genius mom instead of something productive. Face it, this isn't going to make one person a libertarian, just a little girl rich.

[LnGrrrR]

Within limits. Your argument would say that parents would be incapable of removing certain rights and privileges of their children. This would prevent a parent from grounding their child for what the child says. After all, a kid telling a parent they are a fucking moron is an example of free speech (and a good example of a kid that needs a whipping).

That's why I'm willing to limit it to Constitutionally protected things like freedom of speech, especially in a situation where the school is acting in loco parentis. If a parent allows a child to go to school in clothing, why should the school be able to determine better?

Unless it can be shown that the clothing was worn ONLY to disrupt or offend, I don't think they should. (Even then, I would lean towards protecting the First Amendment in nearly all cases.)

Didn't a student win a case where he was handing out flyers in school, which the school tried to prevent, ruling his First Amendment rights had precedent? I believe there was, but I can't remember the case at this moment.

[Wild Cobra]

This is something for high school where angry teens will actually know what they are debating about to some degree, not for very impressionable 7-11 year old kids.
Didn't this article say she was a seventh grader? I remeber girls being pretty well informed about the ways of life back then.

Honestly, this is a common sense issue. The second the mother send her kid to middle school with that shirt she knew what would happen.
That requires the assumption the parents knew what she wore that day. I clearly remeber girls in school wearing clothes to school that they shed and stuffed in their lockers, not wanting their parents to see them wearing the 'daisy dukes' and tied shirts.

As it stands, in our culture, wearing it was inappropriate to her peers and grounds for suppression of free speech. I see no advantage in a bunch of prepubescent children debating things like war and abortion when they know nothing of them. They are two very harsh realities that require a mature understanding of life to seriously discuss. Children are innocent, impressionable, and very naive.
Maybe, but I still haven't seen a picture of the shirt to jump to that conclusion.

I thought you had an open mind. Am I wrong?

The rights to free speech on school grounds have been suppressed for a very long time. The girl would of also been ordered to not wear skimpy clothing on any grounds and entire outfits if there is a dress code. I myself was witness to plenty of kids that had clothes taken for having innuendo, nudity, profanity, violence, gore, and many things much more real/personal than abortion is.
But was it necessary for them to do it the way they did?

Parents want to keep their children away from influence, from propaganda. Whether it is drugs/sex/gangs or even political views, parents have a natural desire to raise a child in their image. When little Johnny comes home shouting anti-war slogans in his military family, the parents will feel like they have failed. When the role of guardianship is passed to the state, there is little doubt that parents want the state to treat their children like any parent does, with a watchful eye and a disciplined system that follows rules.
Well, you must not have any kids in these modern schools. They are so filled with political crap, it's ridiculous. If anything, I would assume this girl was rebelling against something a teacher said, trying to indoctrinate her.

I'm more concerned about securing my own freedom than that of our children. While the state can indoctrinate anything they want in a child, the parent should still retain much more influence.
My God. You just lost my respect there. Kids aren't always on the best of terms with their parents, and if the school says something different that what the parents believe, who do they tend to believe?

Anywho, nice to see taxpayer money will go to paying state attorneys or to some kid's genius mom instead of something productive. Face it, this isn't going to make one person a libertarian, just a little girl rich.Maybe the schools should start being school, and not indoctrination centers.

[LnGrrrR]

Sabar,

You bring up a lot of good points. However, I feel (and no, I'm not a parent yet, so my views on this might change) that it is the parent's responsibility to install their values on their children. If you don't want your kid shouting anti-war stuff when he gets home, you should discuss it with him/her and tell him/her why.

I think children are smarter at younger ages than we give them credit for, and I don't think we have to wait for a magical age to get them to start critically thinking. Heck, at six, my mother was divorced. At eight, I was having conversations with her about the person who she was looking to become my new father. Certainly that's as important as some of the 'big issues'?

If more parents discussed these things with their children, instead of just hoping no one ever mentioned it in school, I think we'd be better off as a society.

[sam1617]

That's why I'm willing to limit it to Constitutionally protected things like freedom of speech, especially in a situation where the school is acting in loco parentis. If a parent allows a child to go to school in clothing, why should the school be able to determine better?

Unless it can be shown that the clothing was worn ONLY to disrupt or offend, I don't think they should. (Even then, I would lean towards protecting the First Amendment in nearly all cases.)

Didn't a student win a case where he was handing out flyers in school, which the school tried to prevent, ruling his First Amendment rights had precedent? I believe there was, but I can't remember the case at this moment.

If the parent signs the form acknowledging and accepting the rules concerning clothing, then they are accepting the school's judgement on the matter. They shouldn't let their kid where clothes that violate that, and if they do, they should be prepared for the consequences.

And if the school had no previous rule concerning this, or had not notified the parent of it, then I agree with you.

[jman3000]

I remember I refused to wear a "No BULL he's back" shirt (in reference to Michael Jordan's first comeback in 1996) to school because I thought it was bad language.

[LnGrrrR]

If the parent signs the form acknowledging and accepting the rules concerning clothing, then they are accepting the school's judgement on the matter. They shouldn't let their kid where clothes that violate that, and if they do, they should be prepared for the consequences.

And if the school had no previous rule concerning this, or had not notified the parent of it, then I agree with you.

Ah, but what if the child has a message to send? Do you feel that the school should have the right to quash free speech if the parents sign that form?

Does the child have no say until they're 18? :)

[Marcus Bryant]

Well, the purpose of public schools is to turn out predictable, obedient, nationalistic, gullible, and expendable citizen-consumers.

[George Gervin's Afro]

After reading most of the posts against the school's reactions I can assume that you fools feel that 7th graders are now old enough to debate the abortion issue. Yet they can't hear about birth control or read about gay people..

[Winehole23]

GGA turns the tables.

Ole'!

[LnGrrrR]

After reading most of the posts against the school's reactions I can assume that you fools feel that 7th graders are now old enough to debate the abortion issue. Yet they can't hear about birth control or read about gay people..

I was watching Nighmare on Elm Street when I was 10 or so.

If my kid wants to talk about birth control, or gay people, or abortion, then I'll talk to him about it.

Heck, it's going to be fun enough raising him with my wife being Catholic and me atheist. :)

[Wild Cobra]

After reading most of the posts against the school's reactions I can assume that you fools feel that 7th graders are now old enough to debate the abortion issue. Yet they can't hear about birth control or read about gay people..
My biggest complaint is the way the school handled the situation. I don't like that they think they should squelch such a statement the girl made, but I really am uncertain without actually seeing the shirt.

She was already there through half the day. Lunchtime. Any damage, was already done. Why not just privately chastise her and contact the parents? Why humiliate her?

[Marcus Bryant]

I was watching Nighmare on Elm Street when I was 10 or so.

If my kid wants to talk about birth control, or gay people, or abortion, then I'll talk to him about it.

Heck, it's going to be fun enough raising him with my wife being Catholic and me atheist. :)


Such is the inherent problem with extending childhood to age 25 or whatever it is in this country.

[Winehole23]

There's no set age.

[George Gervin's Afro]

My biggest complaint is the way the school handled the situation. I don't like that they think they should squelch such a statement the girl made, but I really am uncertain without actually seeing the shirt.

She was already there through half the day. Lunchtime. Any damage, was already done. Why not just privately chastise her and contact the parents? Why humiliate her?

I have a feeling they did it because they needed to make sure that a precedent wasn't set. If a pro choice parent saw that t-shirt they could have made their child wear one the next day that could be derogatory towards conservatives...and here we go.... why did you let that kid where this and now my kid can't wearr this?...etc..

[Marcus Bryant]

There's no set age.

Not officially, but for many it does drift into the 20s.

[J.T.]

I was never asked to take off my "MAKE 7 / UP YOURS" shirt in school, although I was sent to alternative high school for two weeks for throwing water balloons off the 12th floor of a hotel on a trip and not hitting anyone.

[J.T.]

although I was sent to alternative high school for two weeks for throwing water balloons off the 12th floor of a hotel on a trip and not hitting anyone.

Which school officials signed off on because it was "assault with a deadly weapon" :lmao

Fuck you NEISD

[Jacob1983]

7th graders shouldn't care about politics especially things like abortion. They should just be kids and have fun.

[sam1617]

Ah, but what if the child has a message to send? Do you feel that the school should have the right to quash free speech if the parents sign that form?

Does the child have no say until they're 18? :)

Thats a different story. As much as I dislike protesters of any type, if you have something to say, and you are willing to accept the consequences, thats fine. But don't come crying to me when you get punished. I don't necessarily think that this is the most effective strategy, but hell, it could be.

[sam1617]

Sabar,

You bring up a lot of good points. However, I feel (and no, I'm not a parent yet, so my views on this might change) that it is the parent's responsibility to install their values on their children. If you don't want your kid shouting anti-war stuff when he gets home, you should discuss it with him/her and tell him/her why.

I think children are smarter at younger ages than we give them credit for, and I don't think we have to wait for a magical age to get them to start critically thinking. Heck, at six, my mother was divorced. At eight, I was having conversations with her about the person who she was looking to become my new father. Certainly that's as important as some of the 'big issues'?

If more parents discussed these things with their children, instead of just hoping no one ever mentioned it in school, I think we'd be better off as a society.

Absolutely. Parents, and no offense to anyone who is one, I'm speaking in generalities, think that just because a kid is a kid, it means they can't be responsible and knowledgeable. A huge chunk of why I am who I am is because my Dad took the time to argue with me about every subject known to man, probably because my Mom hates arguing, and my Dad needed someone too, but still. It taught me to think, and to question things, and in the end, I also ended up with much the same views as my Dad, even if we didn't agree on stuff when we were arguing about it.