02/14/2008
Judge Rules Again for School District in Anti-Gay T-Shirt Suit
In a case that has been underway since 2004, U.S. District Judge John Houston ruled Tuesday in favor of school officials who pulled Tyler Chase Harper from class for wearing an anti-gay T-shirt.
"Tyler Harper sued the Poway Unified School District in 2004 alleging his freedom of speech and religion rights were violated when he was pulled out of class earlier that year. The self-described Christian wore a shirt during the school 'Day of Silence,' which is intended to promote tolerance of gays and lesbians. The shirt said 'I Will Not Accept What God Has Condemned' on one side and 'Homosexuality is Shameful, Romans 1:27' on the other. Harper was removed from class, but not otherwise disciplined. His suit was aimed at a school district policy aimed at eliminating 'hate behavior' that offended students in certain minority groups based on race, gender or sexual preference."
After Harper graduated, the case continued with his sister Kelsie as a replacement plaintiff.
In Tuesday's ruling, Houston "wrote that a school 'interest in protecting homosexual students from harassment is a legitimate pedagogical concern that allows a school to restrict speech expressing damaging statements about sexual orientation and limiting students to expressing their views in a positive manner.'"
The San Diego Union Tribune adds: "While the school district has won three previous rulings, lawyers for the students and free speech activists said Houston's ruling has the potential of greatly expanding school officials' power to censor student speech."
Poway again wins free speech decision over anti-gay T-shirt [san diego union tribune]
Previously
Tyler Chase Harper Finally Loses Anti-Gay T-Shirt Lawsuit [tr]
Tyler Chase Harper and his Anti-Gay Shirt are Back [tr]
Fashion Statement [tr]
Posted 9:06 AM EST by Andy in California, Fashion Men, News, Religion, San Diego | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Shows you how much of a supposed Christian this little closet cases parents are for even allowing him to wear this kind of "statement" to school....Home school the little Brainwashed weirdo!
Posted by: Disgusted American | Feb 14, 2008 9:21:14 AM
I disagree with the kid's opinion, of course, but don't think that the school's response was defensible. How is it possible for him to express his opinion "in a positive manner"? So fas as I can tell, he wasn't advocating violence against anybody, nor did he use derogatory terms. Instead of giving everybody a chance to engage in any talk that might have been productive, even if no opinions were changed, the school officials wimped out...giving the bigots a new icon to rally around. Protecting gay students from harassment in schools isn't always served by shutting off the speech of people who don't like them.
Posted by: gregory brown | Feb 14, 2008 9:27:32 AM
I disagree with the kid's opinion, of course, but don't think that the school's response was defensible. How is it possible for him to express his opinion "in a positive manner"? So fas as I can tell, he wasn't advocating violence against anybody, nor did he use derogatory terms. Instead of giving everybody a chance to engage in any talk that might have been productive, even if no opinions were changed, the school officials wimped out...giving the bigots a new icon to rally around. Protecting gay students from harassment in schools isn't always served by shutting off the speech of people who don't like them.
Posted by: gregory brown | Feb 14, 2008 9:29:42 AM
Is there such a thing as a "Christian" that does not have a heart filled with hate? Every last one of them seems to be a homophobe or racist xenophobic bigot.
And, free speech is not free if its hateful. What if someone walked around with a shirt on denouncing Jesus, since not everyone thinks or believes he existed, Tyler would not happy and would be suing and saying it was not that persons right as it offended him. Can't have it both ways.
Posted by: Sebastian | Feb 14, 2008 9:33:41 AM
What if he had a jacket that said "Black = Monkey" It doesn't say any BAD words...but we ALL know what its referring too.....Its just wrong,and does NOT make a Healthy learning environment.
Posted by: Disgusted American | Feb 14, 2008 9:40:40 AM
good, i'm glad the school won, the kid is a hateful ingnorant bigot... kids are in school to learn not to spout their ignorance and personal opinions which they may have learned from equally bigoted parents or others ... this is the kind of thing that leads to violence, look at that poor kid murdered yesterday in california ... there are other quotes in the bible that are equally if not more inflammable, which can lead to violence. what kids need to be taught is tolerance and compassion not bigotry...
Posted by: the queen | Feb 14, 2008 9:53:11 AM
This kid is either going to come out of the closet in a few years or go on a shooting rampage at a gay bar.
Posted by: FernLaPlante | Feb 14, 2008 10:37:53 AM
Or more likely, he'll get an "internship" with Concerned Women for America.
Posted by: John T | Feb 14, 2008 10:47:24 AM
I think that the judge did overstep his boundaries in the second-half of his statement. "limiting students to expressing their views in a positive manner" is a violation of free speech. If the judge had ruled that it allows schools to restrict damaging statements (shaming is emotionally damaging, so this case would stand). Limiting speech to only positives is far too broad of a statement to make.
Posted by: DN | Feb 14, 2008 10:52:24 AM
Is it just me or does anyone else think this kid looks like a member of the Aryan youth movement?
Posted by: shane | Feb 14, 2008 11:06:07 AM
I'm with the ACLU in this troubling case:
"'This theory is a novel and extreme expansion of a school's rights to limit speech,' he said. Potentially schools could ban any speech they say is 'psychologically damaging,' he said.
“'And let's face it: what about high school is not psychologically damaging? This student wore a T-shirt that expressed an idea. It's an idea we don't agree with at the ACLU, but that is the essence of free speech. It's not just for ideas you like.'"
The "he" being quoted is David Blair-Loy, the legal director of the ACLU for San Diego and Imperial Counties.
This is a dangerous ruling. Any gay person who expects to gain acceptance by denying someone else his right to self-expression is fooling himself. My mom always taught me: two wrongs don't make a right.
Posted by: Michael M. | Feb 14, 2008 11:14:02 AM
What a righteous entitled Nazi pillock, all he's missing is his swastika.
His impulse was hostile and shaming and directed toward his fellow students, creating a climate of intolerance that was narrowly focused, and the judge recognized that and rules accordingly.
Posted by: FASTLAD | Feb 14, 2008 11:28:47 AM
There is a fine line between free speech and hostile speech that puts people in danger. I think the message on his T-shirt crosses the line and creates a unnecessarily hostile environment for gay kids at that school. Not being allowed to wear this T-shirt did not restrict the student's ability to express his "idea" in another way. The fact is speech and dress ARE ALWAYS restricted in schools; there is always a line. That said, I understand the ACLU's concerns about the judge's broad wording.
On a side note, I get tired of every bigot being labeled a closet case. Sure, some bigots are closet cases, expressing hatred to cover up their internal homophobia, but most are simply bigots. And in the case of young people, usually bigots brainwashed by their ignorant parents.
Posted by: Ernie | Feb 14, 2008 12:26:25 PM
I agree with Ernie :-)
I bet if someone had worn a t-shirt that said "Christianity is Shameful" or "Christians are Morons" it would also be banned on grounds of offense or harassment. There's a big difference between "expressing an opinion" and "expressing an opinion ABOUT SOMEBODY IN THE CLASS."
Every student has to be comfortable in the educational environment, which is why offensive speech targeting certain groups and creating a hostile environment is not allowed.
"Gay is Good" doesn't target Christians.
"Homosexuality is Shameful" does target gays.
Simple as that.
Posted by: kevinvt | Feb 14, 2008 1:43:25 PM
As usual, the first amendment is not particularly popular. The idea, though, is that the power to make decisions is removed from political authority because there is no way to make rulings with complete wisdom. We simply don't have the power to decide what this kid can wear.
Posted by: anon | Feb 14, 2008 2:05:04 PM
We're talking about high school here...I wasn't allowed to wear clothes promoting things such as tobacco use or alcoholic beverages, and the girls weren't allowed to wear clothes that bared too much skin...you just have to follow the rules in high school, and I agree with the judge.
Now, that being said, as much as I hate the shirt and detest the hatemonger wearing it, if he wanted to walk down the street when he wasn't in school, or even wear it to a university-level Day of Silence rally, I'd have to support his right to free speech.
But in a high school classroom??? Come on. He no more deserves the right to wear that shirt than I deserved the right to wear my Maker's Mark t-shirt.
Posted by: Lucas | Feb 14, 2008 3:17:02 PM
Fuck the ACLU and not in the good way! This is exactly the kind of thing that keeps me from giving them a dime even though I agree with some of what they do. I don't agree with everything groups I do donate to do either, but they don't equate to the damage of some of the absolutist crap that the ACLU spouts. The freedom of speech that comes with someone wearing a homophobic T-shirt in a truly "public place" like the street or a mall is NOT analagous to school setting where the victims of that speech have no freedom to association. E.g., a vulnerable gay kid having to sit behind such an Aryan Youth in class wearing such hate crap is not in the same position he or she would be in a truly, move where you want to/when you want to public space. Forgive the application of the cliche, but yell FIRE in a parking lot and people are just likely to look at you strange. Yell it falsely in a crowded theatre and you're liable to cause people to be trampled to death.
Posted by: Michael Bedwell | Feb 14, 2008 7:04:25 PM
Everyone abuses the first amendment in this country. It's invoked way too often in the heat of argument (i.e. "this is a free country" and similar nonsense). As a legal term, it is also rarely applied appropriately. Free speech was never envisioned as a say whatever you wish 'free-for-all.'
This country has always, always limited expression. And the Supreme Court constantly rules on the scope of these issues. Sometimes they agree to expand free speech doctrine. But more often than not (as with hate crime laws), they side with the government. Here are just three examples of how speech isn't free:
U.S. Customs can seize anything deemed "obscene" and "harmful to national security" at a border checkpoint. At various times in our history, Karl Marx's Das Kapital would've been considered a threat to national security.
The FCC censors scripted television programmes. And as Super Bowl "boob-gate" illustrates, they can cause lots of trouble for unscripted - and indeed accidental - events as well.
It is still illegal for members of the military to disrespect the President, Vice President, Speaker of the House, Secretary of Defense, Members of Congress, State Governors, and State Legislators while on active duty.
Posted by: John | Feb 15, 2008 1:10:34 AM
If his t-shirt is OK'd, then it should also be OK to wear ones that say other biblical verse things like:
It's GOOD to stone a rape victim!
It's GOOD to have slaves!
It's GOOD to beat your wife!
It's GOOD to live in bigamy!
It's nifty to kill in the name of God!
and many, many more! Gosh, the bible has so many fun verses that are so warm and nice!
Lovely, nice zealots and their fun bible!
Posted by: johnny | Feb 16, 2008 11:44:31 PM