Support NeoGAF

[Gaborn]

Or if you determine that he's been wearing the shirt every day for a week because he feels like it's a pretty obvious way to get attention, and possibly a way to get around any other restrictions placed on him preaching at the other students. The problem doesn't seem to be the message of the shirt, instead the problem's using the shirt as an intentional harassment tool. I mean, it's a bright yellow shirt with an aggressive message about salvation; seems like a great way to get the Word out without directly violating any requests to cease preaching.

The wording in the article is somewhat vague, but I got the impression he was suspended for repeatedly refusing to cease an activity after multiple requests from his classmates and administrators. That he's also got tacky taste in T-shirts is a secondary concern at best.

Well, like I said, the mere fact that it's bright and has a message should not be enough to suspend someone and I'm 90% sure it wouldn't be (and shouldn't be) in the US. Just because a particular form of political speech can provoke an internal reaction in some students that should not justify banning a student from expressing that message in a non-verbal way.

Yea, there is really anyway to know that unless you are there.

I do think the school administration could have handled this situation better. However, it was clear he was making the other students uncomfortable. Could it be that the T-shirt was making the students uncomfortable given his history?

If that is the case, does the school have an obligation to ask the student to take the T-shirt off?

Again, it's Canada so I'm not sure, but I go back to the Tinker v Des Moines example in the US. Students chose to wear black armbands as a silent protest against Vietnam, EVERYONE knew they were going to do it, so school administrators banned the wearing of all armbands. Several students did it anyway and were suspended. The court explicitly ruled that students have a right to the own personal political views so long as the manner they express them is not materially and substantially disruptive. The fact that some students might be upset by that message is not sufficient to ban the student's speech.

 

[adamsappel]

As a nerdy Atheist, I would wear the fuck out of that shirt.

Years ago, I came across a shirt with this logo at a flea market. I always regret never buying it, but I realized nobody would know I was wearing it ironically (and I'm no longer at an age where one wears clothing ironically).

 

[SmokyDave]

I'm not sure you'd get much learning done in a school where everybody wore their political opinions on the front of their shirts. I'm in favour of standardised school uniforms.

 

[MMaRsu]

School uniforms solve all these problems. Never understood schools that didn't have them

To promote individuality?

 

[dinazimmerman]

Was he preaching to the kids in class or during lunch or whenever it is that students have free time to converse with one another?

 

[ScreenSplitter]

To promote individuality?

Girls in low cut tops and slogan t shirts from the bargain bin never did scream "individuality" to me.

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

Wear the shirt but shut the fuck up in doing so.

 

[jorma]

Girls in low cut tops and slogan t shirts from the bargain bin never did scream "individuality" to me.

I'm not sure they care.

 

[Aiii]

Well young kids usually don't have as much confidence in their beliefs as us adults.

Come on, we're talking 17-years old here if my knowledge of US schoolgrades is correct. I'm pretty sure that's of an age where people are knowlegable enough to have made up their own minds.

I'll grant you that at least some of them will still be in conflict on this issue, but not enough they can't tell another kid that tries to condemn them to get lost and shrug it off.

 

[Omegasquash]

Let the kid wear his shirt. If he's an ass to other students and preaching, that'll take care of itself. Behavior is one thing, wearing a shirt is another.

My question...would they have an issue with a shirt that had a depiction of evolution on it, or something that the Christian religious are against, like gay marriage? It has to go both ways, as much as I disagree with the message on the shirt.

 

[bengraven]

Jesus Christ, let them wear their non-offensive T-shirt. You're just contributing to Christians feeling like there's a war on Christianity...

 

[Davidion]

A silly shirt, but I don't see why he should be banned from wearing it.

This is about as essential as religious speech gets.

Fake edit: Oh he preaches hardcore and tells kids that they're going to hell. Yeah fuck him.

 

[Gaborn]

Let the kid wear his shirt. If he's an ass to other students and preaching, that'll take care of itself. Behavior is one thing, wearing a shirt is another.

My question...would they have an issue with a shirt that had a depiction of evolution on it, or something that the Christian religious are against, like gay marriage? It has to go both ways, as much as I disagree with the message on the shirt.

 

[Earthstrike]

I thought the shirt was taking a subtle jab at christianity, as in, you will be drunk and partying all the time if you are not a traditional christian. Hence wasted being in such large, extravagant letters.

 

[Gustav]

School uniforms yo! Y u not wear them?

Freedom of expression and such.

 

[BeesEight]

Just added it to the OP. as I said there, I'm not sure it changes anything. Those incidents were wrong and should be suspendable, the shirt should not be.

It really does change things:

"He's told kids they'll burn in hell if they don't confess themselves to Jesus," student Riley Gibb-Smith said.

Katelyn Hiltz, student council vice-president, agreed the controversy didn't begin with the T-shirt.

"It started with him preaching his religion to kids and then telling them to go to hell. A lot of kids don't want to deal with this anymore," she said.

Much as Suariyu has said, schools are not places for religious protesting. Canada is also far more serious about bullying in schools, especially if it comes to discrimination against minorities. As has already been mentioned, him wearing the shirt is not the problem. I saw lots of stupid shirts when I was in school. It's his behaviours culminating in the continued wearing of the shirt.

Also, Canadian Free Speech laws are not the same as in America. This certainly doesn't violate it, but I'd be surprised if the kid hasn't said some things that would not be acceptable. As the article even says, if the shirt was changed to "My life is wasted without Jesus" the administration wouldn't care. But you can bet, if the student came in wearing a shirt saying "Islam is a lie," they would be told immediately to go home and change.

Was he preaching to the kids in class or during lunch or whenever it is that students have free time to converse with one another?

Doesn't matter. You don't preach on school grounds. If someone wants to hold a discourse with you, that's fine, but you can't just confront people in the halls and start essentially picking on them for not sharing your religion. This would also go for atheists, so it isn't some war on Christianity which I'm sure someone will spin it as.

 

[theignoramus]

I can understand why the headteacher felt it was inappropriate; as it DOES imply superiority over those who aren't Christian.

I can also understand why he was suspended if he continually defied orders from authority to not wear it.

so do lots of ironic t shirts. want to ban those too?

 

[Gustav]

It really does change things:

"He's told kids they'll burn in hell if they don't confess themselves to Jesus," student Riley Gibb-Smith said.

Katelyn Hiltz, student council vice-president, agreed the controversy didn't begin with the T-shirt.

"It started with him preaching his religion to kids and then telling them to go to hell. A lot of kids don't want to deal with this anymore," she said.

Much as Suariyu has said, schools are not places for religious protesting. Canada is also far more serious about bullying in schools, especially if it comes to discrimination against minorities. As has already been mentioned, him wearing the shirt is not the problem. I saw lots of stupid shirts when I was in school. It's his behaviours culminating in the continued wearing of the shirt.

Also, Canadian Free Speech laws are not the same as in America. This certainly doesn't violate it, but I'd be surprised if the kid hasn't said some things that would not be acceptable. As the article even says, if the shirt was changed to "My life is wasted without Jesus" the administration wouldn't care. But you can bet, if the student came in wearing a shirt saying "Islam is a lie," they would be told immediately to go home and change.

How fucked up must one be to tell others at that age to go to hell if they don't convert/become better christians? This is truly baffling. Maybe child protective services should be alerted?

 

[Farooq]

Well, like I said, the mere fact that it's bright and has a message should not be enough to suspend someone and I'm 90% sure it wouldn't be (and shouldn't be) in the US. Just because a particular form of political speech can provoke an internal reaction in some students that should not justify banning a student from expressing that message in a non-verbal way.




Again, it's Canada so I'm not sure, but I go back to the Tinker v Des Moines example in the US. Students chose to wear black armbands as a silent protest against Vietnam, EVERYONE knew they were going to do it, so school administrators banned the wearing of all armbands. Several students did it anyway and were suspended. The court explicitly ruled that students have a right to the own personal political views so long as the manner they express them is not materially and substantially disruptive. The fact that some students might be upset by that message is not sufficient to ban the student's speech.

After thinking about this, I agree with you. He should not have been suspended for wearing the T-shirt.

The preaching however, fuck that. I have been in a Canadian public school system for my entire grade school education. They like to keep the culture of secularity.

 

[Aiii]

It really does change things:

"He's told kids they'll burn in hell if they don't confess themselves to Jesus," student Riley Gibb-Smith said.

Katelyn Hiltz, student council vice-president, agreed the controversy didn't begin with the T-shirt.

"It started with him preaching his religion to kids and then telling them to go to hell. A lot of kids don't want to deal with this anymore," she said.

All fine and dandy, but why did it take a shirt to suspend him then? Shouldn't they have suspended him sooner?

Did he stop the preaching before he started wearing the shirt? If that's the case he shouldn't have been suspended at all.

 

[alekth]

Was he preaching to the kids in class or during lunch or whenever it is that students have free time to converse with one another?

Would that be acceptable though? Can a preacher just go into a school during recess and preach? At my uni this is forbidden.
Though with his behaviour I don't think the kind of activity really matters, if he's harassing people.

 

[bengraven]

I thought the shirt was taking a subtle jab at christianity, as in, you will be drunk and partying all the time if you are not a traditional christian. Hence wasted being in such large, extravagant letters.

Nah, there are some "truth bomb" shirts out there for Christians that trick you into reading them and then their small print is basically witnessing to you. My wife has some from her missionary days. One says "DRINK" and you're like "yeah, man, I like to get drunk, too" until you realize it says in smaller letters "in the spirit of Jesus" or something similar. She also has a Mountain Dew and Starbucks parody shirts that are actually subtly preaching.

I suppose that's why I have tolerance of this.

 

[Gustav]

I am thinking that maybe they didn't suspend him over the preaching/insults to avoid a "freedom of speech" kind of discussion. Banning over a shirt is less controversial. I mean I was even banned for wearing a shirt that my principal thought was in support of terrorists.

 

[LegatoB]

Well, like I said, the mere fact that it's bright and has a message should not be enough to suspend someone and I'm 90% sure it wouldn't be (and shouldn't be) in the US. Just because a particular form of political speech can provoke an internal reaction in some students that should not justify banning a student from expressing that message in a non-verbal way.

Again, the problem isn't the message in itself; he was suspended for repeatedly violating school policies and defying administrators. Perhaps the shirt should be permitted; if so, that'll likely be the outcome of this whole situation as soon as the administrators can find a way to make themselves not look like they're "giving in" in the process. But wearing a bright shirt to silently preach after being told to stop harassing other students verbally (the "You'll burn in hell if you don't pray to Jesus" quotes from the second article) is clearly an act intended to provoke the administration and circumvent other restrictions placed upon the student.

 

[mugurumakensei]

But as has been noted he was suspended for the shirt, not for the preaching.

The shirt is preaching though. He was wearing a shirt that was saying the same thing he was preaching. and, given the high contrast in the colors, it will draw attention. In effect, he was preaching in written or verbal speech constantly to the point that some students complained.

And you can't say any message should be allowed on a shirt. You wouldn't get away with a shirt that says "God hates fags." or "Muslims should go to hell" in any school. Why should a shirt that calls all non-christians useless people be allowed?

 

[BeesEight]

All fine and dandy, but why did it take a shirt to suspend him then? Shouldn't they have suspended him sooner?

Did he stop the preaching before he started wearing the shirt? If that's the case he shouldn't have been suspended at all.

It wasn't like they suspended him the moment he put the shirt on. He'd been wearing it constantly for over a week and likely his behaviour got worse. The principal asked him to stop and he defied the principal's request. It could be hard to prove that the kid was still preaching if he wasn't doing it around teachers, however. But you can easily prove he's been wearing the ugly shirt.

 

[zlatko]

I say let him rock the shirt.

 

[Seep]

Freedom of expression and such.

You're there to learn in a peaceful environment, not to be surrounded by attention seeking wankers who want to express their beliefs.

 

[krae_man]

Swinimer says the principal would have accepted a shirt with the slogan, "My life is wasted without Jesus."

And that my friends is the difference between saying "This is what I believe in" and "What you believe in is wrong"

Schools teach tolerance, and this kid clearly had none.

 

[dude]

Hmm... Freedom of speech?

I don't understand why people can't ignore his shirt.

You're there to learn in a peaceful environment, not to be surrounded by attention seeking wankers who want to express their beliefs.

If he was disrupting class, that's one thing. I don't see how he's disrupting the "peaceful environment" with a shirt.

 

[mugurumakensei]

Hmm... Freedom of speech?

I don't understand why people can't ignore his shirt.

Freedom of speech is "My life would be wasted without Jesus" and "I <3 Jesus". It's not "Anyone who doesn't believe as I do should constanly be disrupted, heckled, and told they're going to hell"


And if you don't think a shirt can disrupt the peace, imagine if he wore a short that said "God only loves white people."

 

[daycru]

Hmm... Freedom of speech?

I don't understand why people can't ignore his shirt.



If he was disrupting class, that's one thing - and if . I don't see how he's disrupting the "peaceful environment" with a shirt.

Read the fucking thread.

 

[Septimius]

All fine and dandy, but why did it take a shirt to suspend him then? Shouldn't they have suspended him sooner?

Did he stop the preaching before he started wearing the shirt? If that's the case he shouldn't have been suspended at all.

Because you want to be tolerant, but when someone just keeps pushing you, at some point, you push back. This was the breaking point, it seems.

 

[dude]

Read the fucking thread.

I did right after posting, and I don't feel it changed anything I said -

Freedom of speech is "My life would be wasted without Jesus" and "I <3 Jesus". It's not "Anyone who doesn't believe as I do should constanly be disrupted, heckled, and told they're going to hell"


And if you don't think a shirt can disrupt the peace, imagine if he wore a short that said "God only loves white people."

If he was harresing students and disrupting the class they should have suspended him for that, not for sporting a T-shirt with a stupid slogan.

And huh? Racist shit is also protected by freedom of speech until the point it reaches incitement. Anyone wearing a shirt with the slogan "God only loves white people" is protected by freedom of speech just as much as that kid.

 

[Stet]

The atheist kid in the other thread was reportedly a pain in the ass too. Neither of them should've been suspended, and I hope someone goes through this and thread and compares posts so we can see the hypocrites.

 

[BeesEight]

And huh? Racist shit is also protected by freedom of speech until the point it reaches incitement. Anyone wearing such a shirt with the slogan "God only loves white people" is protected by freedom of speech just as much as that kid.

Not in Canada.

 

[jorma]

Freedom of speech is "My life would be wasted without Jesus" and "I <3 Jesus". It's not "Anyone who doesn't believe as I do should constanly be disrupted, heckled, and told they're going to hell"


And if you don't think a shirt can disrupt the peace, imagine if he wore a short that said "God only loves white people."

I'm pretty sure that US freedom of speech covers all of these, or the WBC would not be operational by now.

 

[mugurumakensei]

And huh? Racist shit is also protected by freedom of speech until the point it reaches incitement. Anyone wearing a shirt with the slogan "God only loves white people" is protected by freedom of speech just as much as that kid.

You will still be rightfully kicked out of school. His freedom of speech rights are not being violated cause he got suspended from school. He hasn't been arrested.

I'm pretty sure that US freedom of speech covers all of these, or the WBC would not be operational by now.

WBC would be rightfully kicked off school grounds if they protested at any public or private school in the US. They would also probably be arrested if they didn't comply.

 

[Zeppu]

Student's dickishness sparks feud with school.


That being said, I see nothing wrong with the t-shirt and I wouldn't even consider it being a valid straw to have had broken the camel's back.

 

[dude]

Not in Canada.

Do you have a citation for that? Not that I don't believe you, I just can't find it on Wikipedia and would like to learn more on how freedom of speech works in Canada.

You will still be rightfully kicked out of school. His freedom of speech rights are not being violated cause he got suspended from school. He hasn't been arrested.

Well, I guess so - But if it's a public school he might have a case that his freedom of speech was violated. Guess it depends on the school and/or country. But that's moot because the shirt in the OP is not near as problematic as the hypothetical racist one. If the school wanted to get rid of him, they should have found an actual reason to suspend him instead of some harmless shirt.

 

[Ripclawe]

the shirt is fine but annoying students with through preaching is not. but the school fucked up by suspending for the shirt and not through other

 

[BeesEight]

Do you have a citation for that? Not that I don't believe you, I just can't find it on Wikipedia and would like to learn more on how freedom of speech works in Canada.

Specifically, our Criminal Code prevents the spreading of hate propaganda.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/hate-propaganda
http://www.media-awareness.ca/engli.../federal/criminal_code/criminal_code_hate.cfm

 

[FrontalMonk]

it always amuses/frightens me when Christians get all up in arms about defending their freedom of religion, like somehow the overwhelming majority religion in the Americas is under attack and needs protecting. Then say that to protect their freedom they need to persecute, proselytize and generally harass anyone who disagrees.

Note: not all Christians do this, I'm aware. Yes, I'm generalizing. I'm generalizing about Christians who are assholes, because their excuses for their actions are bullshit.

 

[dude]

Specifically, our Criminal Code prevents the spreading of hate propaganda.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_Canada
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/hate-propaganda
http://www.media-awareness.ca/engli.../federal/criminal_code/criminal_code_hate.cfm

Sorry if I'm derailing the thread, maybe we should continue in PMs, but are there any exceptions, like artistic expressions or some such?

 

[Zeppu]

Look at that smug look

 

[EliCash]

That really might be the worst t-shirt I've ever seen.

Spoiler

I kind of want it

edit: that guy looks annoying.

 

[dude]

I don't think there's anyone in the thread arguing against the kid probably being a complete asshat.

 

[mavs]

the shirt is fine but annoying students with through preaching is not. but the school fucked up by suspending for the shirt and not through other

Seems like the principal was power trippin and ran out of patience with a kid who wouldn't do what he was told

 

[BeesEight]

Sorry if I'm derailing the thread, maybe we should continue in PMs, but are there any exceptions, like artistic expressions or some such?

Yes, there must be an intent behind the propaganda for it to be a criminal offence. A scriptwriter including racism in their movie (so long as it wasn't clearly promoting it) is fine. People can civilly discuss those issues.

 

[Zeppu]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...-who-wore-life-is-wasted-without-jesus-shirt/

John Swinimer said he wants Forest Heights Community School in Chester Basin, Lunenburg County, to only teach the basic courses, leaving religion out of it.
“He will not attend this school unless they are having reading, writing and arithmetic — good old-fashioned academics,” he said, waving a New Testament bible. “When they’re having forums, when they’re having other extra-curricular activity, he will not attend that school.”

What exactly is going on here?