@splitshockvirus >Judge Nina Y. Wang wrote that wearing a sash during a graduation ceremony falls under school-sponsored speech, not the student’s private speech. Therefor, “the School District is permitted to restrict that speech as it sees fit in the interest of the kind of graduation it would like to hold,” Wang wrote.
If they're not disallowing **any** changes/additions to the gowns, caps and etc., then this is a content restriction, not a time/place restriction. People frequently put on pins, write things on their cap, maybe attach a photo of someone who died, etc. There's really no difference between those and this person wearing two country flag designs.
They either need to allow every change within a clear framework that's written down in the Big Book of Don't, or they need to allow no changes at all and enforce a uniform policy.
Let’s say you were in charge of a country that is racially and culturally homogenous. Then, you let in millions of impoverished ppl on “humanitarian” grounds. Then those ppl tell you that your country sucks and that theirs is better, and demand to display their national flag and so on while taking advantage of what you provided them. That’s ok in your opinion?
Student (probably illegally, like 99.999%) immigrated. Student takes advantage of opportunities that would have never been available in their shithole country. That school has a tradition and standards as to attire for their ceremony. The student demands they change the standards to accommodate “pride” for the shithole country they “escaped” because muh “persecution”. How are you not seeing this?
@splitshockvirus@bot@RustyCrab@r000t >How does displaying a national flag assume that you are saying the host country sucks? "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other."
@bot@RustyCrab@r000t@splitshockvirus I'm confident that a significant number of the chinese foreign students I met in college were literal CCP assets on a mission to spy on America.
I’m more concerned with cultural and ideological subversion. Have you seen the videos of what mexicans do to each other? For any video you can show me of whites doing that, I can show you 100 or the other.
Again, the exact same protections that let someone wear a pink ribbon for breast cancer, or have a bunch of people sign their cap, and all that symbolic nonsense... They should protect this person just as much.
Would you still vehemently back the school if it was a student who was told they couldn't wear a free software foundation scarf?
They are 100% allowed to adorn themselves with their national flags and so forth in their home country, which is where they belong. Why don’t they return there to celebrate if they’re so proud?
@bot@RustyCrab@splitshockvirus@book Not allowing any adornments or changes to the uniform would be a valid time/place restriction on speech, and would be fully constitutional.
Allowing some but not others isn't what we're about. Because who decides what's allowed and what's not can change instantly.
School administration is taken over by *checks your profile* leftists. Evil, rotten leftists. Adrenochrome drinking leftists. Just the worst. With me so far?
So anyway, they're now deciding what is and isn't allowed. As part of their decision-making process, they've decided that the following is no longer allowed to be expressed, especially at graduation: - Crosses, crucifixes, crowns of thorns, or anything related to the Christian/Cathlolic lore - Anything Trump/MAGA related, as well as anything containing the string "Brandon" - Any red, white, and blue pattern
Something tells me you'd suddenly find their authority to be illegitimate and disobedience of it to be a patriotic duty. Well, same here. Either all of it's okay, or none of it is.
The creation of rules is not arbitrary prerogative. One must both have authority and use it properly. The school has the authority to make good and just rules.
As such you should be allowed to display your belief in Christ during your graduation. But how this thread is being worded the "tradition" of the school outweighs your right to display such?
@splitshockvirus@RustyCrab@r000t@bot >But how this thread is being worded the "tradition" of the school outweighs your right to display such? Their traditions should be correct.
The school is an extension of the state who is a secular body, thus their authority is already illegitimate, any traditions they create cannot be correct as they are not ordained by God.
If all traditions are already illegitimate, how is this one now legitimate in regards to national advertisement?
You’re assuming a sane homogenous culture (as the US constitution did). Do you think gangbangers from Chicongo give af about that? If you tell them they should stop selling crack or shooting each other, they’ll literally just shoot you in the head and kill you.
The solution is to disallow the banning of expression by government bodies. This is the idea behind the 1st amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, which states
"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."
Why aren’t the proud mexicans moving back to mexico after graduation then? Do they not believe in their own cultural empowerment? Do they doubt their ability to bring about change?
>Why the *fuck* would you want that force or group to have powers to control expression? If you do not enforce a culture you quickly will not have one. > Literally any power you give to the government can be used to beat you over the head when someone you don't like, or who does not like you, assumes power. We should never let people we don't like and who don't like us assume power.
Why the *fuck* would you want that force or group to have powers to control expression? Literally any power you give to the government can be used to beat you over the head when someone you don't like, or who does not like you, assumes power.
If you truly hold these hilariously ignorant views of yours, then you should be equally frightened of a "New World Order" or "globalist zionists" having the powers being discussed here. Period.
Yet he wrote the defining document that establishes the powers and restrictions by which the State operates. If the constitution is illegitimate then so are the institutions established. Scholastic institutions banned teaching creationism in 20s. Why should I care what the traditions of an institution that is just an extension of the state who is illegitimate?
> If the constitution is illegitimate then so are the institutions established An institution is legitimate insofar as it acts legitimacy. A good ruler is one who makes good rules. Only criteria.
Three fifths was more than generous tbh. Like literally imagine Tyquandrius and Lashateefa playing a serious role in modern politics even today, it’s a joke.
@r000t@splitshockvirus@bot@RustyCrab You are arbitrarily choosing to suspect that because it's a convenient out for having to actually argue and self-reflect. It's far easier to believe everyone just agrees with you.
If the assumption was a homogenous culture then yes I might see your point. If I was in Feudal, foreigners would be executed unless they had the explicit permission of the Shogunate to trade.
I still do not believe this as a healthy for the salvation of mankind. Japan was prevented Christianization due to similar mindsets and policies that you are sponsoring.
It's really fucking bizarre to me that despite schools acting in evil debauchery. That the one thing you like them doing is banning national flags.
None of my children will be attending public schools, but even still I wouldn't really care if a student wanted to be patriotic about their home country. It just seems like a very minor grievance, and when you compare it to all the other sins that schools sponsor, it very much becomes insignificant.
Please answer this, if they’re so proud of their home country, why don’t they return their after graduation? They are fully educated and prepared to confront life, right?
One, I’m not a “dude”, and two, I would never “block or suspend” you because I’m not a faggot. You’re not addressing the issues in the thread, or forming any real argument at all really. But ok, I accept your resignation.
I don't believe either of them are intentionally combative, I have observed both of them I do think they really are sincere with the arguments. But I am trying to understand how or why they belief the things they do.
@splitshockvirus@bot@RustyCrab@book That they are sincere is why further discussion would be detrimental to all involved. Nobody's changing anybody's opinions today, and both sides said their piece for anybody reading the thread, which is the only purpose of online debate.
More to the point, dude has made clear to anybody watching that his arguments run on top of a really fucked up kernel that's not really built on top of anything except not liking anybody or anything. I remember being like that. I understand it just fine. You know what I did? I grew up. I learned how to play someone else's side of the board, to know why people make the decisions they do, with the information they have and the resources available.
In hopes that some day this dude might grow up too, I'm just letting the thread come to a conclusion instead of blocking/suspending people. This is what I expect of people across the network and so it's how I'll behave myself.
Here's a tip: Next time you want to bow out of a conversation, JUST STOP REPLYING. Don't slander your interlocutor, accuse them of being fake, gaslight them, and declare universal victory to an audience that literally doesn't fucking exist.