California School Bans American Flag?

[woody60707]

It's actually a sign of disrespect to put a flag on a common piece of clothing.

Only by the patriotic gate-keepers.

 

[Traitorfish]

I'm sure it's just me, but that's how I feel. Say I was President and trying to decide who to make Sec. State. If one of the candidates happened to be someone who publicly self-identified as Italian-American, I'd never choose them even if they were most qualified in every other respect. Why? Because they show themselves to be someone of split loyalty by clearly viewing themselves as Italian equally (and even moreso) with being an American.

As an Irish-Briton, I resent the implication that I have so much as the barest slither of loyalty to Great Britain.

I'd ask them to set the menu for all lunch meetings.

It's an ethnic background. Pray tell, what is the American ethnicity?

Ethnic identities are defined contextually, they're not objective properties of individuals handed down from time immemorial. If somebody constructs themselves as "ethnically American", as the census reports several tens of millions of people do, then who is to say that they are not? It's certainly no less a constructed identity than "Mexican", which taken literally simply means having ancestral origins from within the borders of the United Mexican States.

The issue is whether automatic assimilation to an "American" ethnic identity should be desired, if it is even possible to begin with (hint: nope), not whether such a thing as an "ethnic American" is possible to start with. Case in point, the bawbags at this school have at least implicitly constructed themselves as ethnically American (perhaps layered over other ethnic identities), or their daft little protest wouldn't make any sense.

 

[Commodore]

Cinco de Mayo is an American holiday. Not an official day but it's by far more celebrated in the US than it ever was in Mexico. It's no more "foreign" than other technically unofficial American holidays like Saint Patrick's day, Mardi Gras, Halloween.

And none of those holidays officially get you a day off work or school either, so why should Cinco de Mayo? That was my point. I have no problem with people celebrating it, but I do not think it should be officially recognized as a holiday where businesses and government facilities are mandated to give employees/students a day off.

 

[Formaldehyde]

This isn't a recent development. What you choose to wear has been considered part of your 1st Amendment rights since at least the 1960s (probably even before that). I'm not saying whether or not I agree with it, I am just stating this is not a new thing and there is actually legal precedent for it.

Someone should have told Congress and the Capitol Police.





Shirt tales differ for Sheehan, GOP wife

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Call it the tale of two different shirts worn by two very different women: a well-known peace activist who has agitated the White House and a lawmaker's wife who has staunchly supported the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan wore a shirt with the message "2,245 Dead. How many more?" -- a reference to the number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq.

Beverly Young, the wife of 18-term Republican U.S. Rep. Bill Young of Florida, wore a shirt that read "Support the Troops."

Both shirts resulted in their owners being ejected from the House chamber before President Bush's State of the Union address on Tuesday night. (Full story)

Sheehan, an invited guest of Rep. Lynn Woolsey, a California Democrat, was arrested around 8:30 p.m. ET on charges of unlawful conduct. Young was asked to leave but not arrested. (Watch what Young said about the profanity she used and why -- 1:53)

On Wednesday afternoon, U.S. Capitol Police Chief Terrance Gainer said neither woman should have been removed from the chamber. "We made a mistake," he told CNN.

He said an apology was made to Bill and Beverly Young, and the congressman has been told that Capitol officers will receive better training. He said they are operating under outdated guidance on House rules regarding demonstrations.

"Just wearing a T-shirt is not unlawful," Gainer said. Wearing a T-shirt and engaging in actions meant to draw attention to the shirt is against the law, he said, but neither woman was doing so.

Gainer said he has attempted to reach Sheehan to tell her he is recommending that charges be dropped and to express his willingness to talk to her at her convenience, but has only been able to leave her a message.

Woolsey has called for a withdrawal of troops in Iraq and supports legislation for the creation of a Department of Peace.

"Since when is free speech conditional on whether you agree with the president?" Woolsey said in a statement issued Wednesday.

Sheehan told CNN Wednesday that she planned to file a lawsuit despite Gainer's statements.

"I was there for four hours," she said. "It seems like someone could have figured out they made a mistake in four hours."

Sheehan said she was treated roughly and left bruised by the incident.

"I'm going to file a lawsuit for defamation of character and because my civil rights were violated, hoping that it will never happen to another person," she said.

Before Gainer's statements, Capitol Police spokeswoman Sgt. Kimberly Schneider said of Sheehan's shirt, "She was asked to cover it up. She did not."

'She has a real passion for our troops'

Outrage also came from the pro-war Young.

On Wednesday, he held up his wife's shirt on the House floor and denounced her treatment.

"She has a real passion for our troops, and she shows it in many, many ways," Young said.

"And most members in this House know that. But because she had on a shirt that someone didn't like, that said 'Support Our Troops,' she was kicked out of this gallery while the president was speaking and encouraging Americans to support our troops. Shame. Shame."

Young and his wife are known as passionate supporters of U.S. service members. He has spoken in the past about their many visits to military hospitals during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and their efforts to ensure the needs of the wounded and their families are met.

Sheehan, on the other hand, was thrust into the spotlight after her 24-year-old son, Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, was killed in Iraq in April 2004.

"Cindy Sheehan, who gave her own flesh and blood for this disastrous war, did not violate any rules of the House of Representatives," Woolsey's statement said. "She merely wore a shirt that highlighted the human cost of the Iraq war and expressed a view different than that of the president."

Sheehan, a Vacaville, California, resident gained national attention in August, when she and hundreds of fellow protesters camped outside the president's Crawford, Texas, ranch, demanding an audience. She also recently penned a book, "Not One More Mother's Child."

Sheehan said Wednesday she was trying to "make a statement" with the shirt but did not intend to get arrested.

"I didn't think I would be provoking an incident," she said, suggesting that her message contributed to her arrest.

"I got arrested and [Young] didn't," she said. "What does that tell you?"

 

[Commodore]

Someone should have told Congress and the Capitol Police.

Yeah, our esteemed leaders in Washington haven't had a very good track record for recognizing Constitutional rights in recent years.

 

[Farm Boy]

Yeah, our esteemed leaders in Washington haven't had a very good track record for recognizing Constitutional rights in recent years.

I suppose it might be related to the culture that's grown up around "acceptable language" particularly in the internet era. When you're used to much of your social discussion happening in privately controlled space, and that space can be censored freely, it might get a little bit more challenging to accept as lawful speech that you don't agree with and are no longer used to being "subjected" to, regardless of its intent.

Then again, maybe Washington isn't really doing anything new. I doubt there was ever really a golden era when the powerful in government or industry or whatever particularly well tolerated speech that they don't like. They're usually just a little bit more clever about the legality of forcing people into silence than they were in that example.

 

[Quackers]

As an Irish-Briton, I resent the implication that I have so much as the barest slither of loyalty to Great Britain.

I'm amazed a Marxist would identify as any nationality. Isn't that anathema to Marxists?

After all, isn't the existence and prosperity of the tribe/nation/country a significant contradiction to the basis of Marxist thought?
Or do you only wheel out the nationality when it suits your argument?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Quackers!

 

[Quackers]

David Hobbs !!!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

XD How goes it?

 

[Lord Baal]

I'm amazed a Marxist would identify as any nationality. Isn't that anathema to Marxists?

After all, isn't the existence and prosperity of the tribe/nation/country a significant contradiction to the basis of Marxist thought?
Or do you only wheel out the nationality when it suits your argument?

Welcome back, you crazy bastard. Marx mentions the existence of nations in his future utopia several times in his works, so he doesn't appear to have a problem with the idea of nationality. Just the idea of the nation-state.

 

[Traitorfish]

I'm amazed a Marxist would identify as any nationality. Isn't that anathema to Marxists?

After all, isn't the existence and prosperity of the tribe/nation/country a significant contradiction to the basis of Marxist thought?
Or do you only wheel out the nationality when it suits your argument?

Yes, obviously. Have you been away so long that you've forgotten what I'm like?

 

[timtofly]

He must have missed the "Ask An Anarchist" thread as well.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Quackers!

I second this motion

 

[Hygro]

Yes, obviously. Have you been away so long that you've forgotten what I'm like?

You must absolutely conform to a book doctrine or your identity and personhood is invalid.

and can't semi-facetiously adopt positions you don't really hold for the sake of conversation that should be clear to everyone

 

[GoodGame]

Red is a color which has been adopted by the Norteños (also by the Bloods, although I wouldn't say they have much of a presence at all in the south Bay). They're also identifiable by "N" and "XIV" graffiti which is visible all throughout Northern California. They have a very strong presence around the Bay. The Rival gang, the Sureños, have adopted blue and grey as their colors, and use "XIII" as a distinguishing mark of their gang. Incidentally that's what "ese" means - it's a reference to a compatriot of the Sureño gang. Members of the respective gangs wear those colors to identify each other and to "rep" them. Norteño members commonly wear red sports jerseys and hats, such as Nebraska, SF 49ers, K Swiss, and just bright red t-shirts. Sureños commonly wear Dodgers paraphernalia, Rams, Padres, Yankees, Cowboys, etc. These two gangs have a bitter rivalry with each other going back 30 or 40 years and violence between them isn't uncommon. Because both gangs recruit heavily and have a fairly strong presence in Morgan Hill most of the schools ban the wearing of colors affiliated with those two gangs. This stuff was banned at my Middle School too.

Interesting reading and puts some of it in context.

 

[JollyRoger]

The American flag is also insensitive to those with British heritage.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Maybe replace the US flag with the emblem of McDonalds?

Although some sign of the NSA seems to be more in tune with current events.