So, you can wear an American flag on your shirt. What do you think about people wearing it on the seat of their pants, as war protesters did? Is that still OK?
Conversation Voice wrote: I'm with RocDoc. I remember this from the 60s.
So, you can wear an American flag on your shirt. What do you think about people wearing it on the seat of their pants, as war protesters did? Is that still OK?
It is one thing if someone takes an actual american flag and turns it into a shirt. It is totally different when I see someone with what my appear to be a flag but is not but is a shirt. It does not have the 50 starts just a few etc. Now if I was to see someone taking an American Flag and have it sewn on thier shirt, in a disrespectfuly manner then yes I will go to that person tell them. Will it do any good, doubt it. The Flag of the United States is considered a living symbol. It should be treated as such. It is that simple.
I am all about the respect part. It is the symbol of our nation.
That means honoring it, taking care of it and defending it. It also means understanding and believing in what it stands for.
If you burn it, crap on it, deface it or make it into something malicious, that is disrespectful and I have a problem with that.
jf1acai wrote: It is totally different when I see someone with what my appear to be a flag but is not but is a shirt. It does not have the 50 starts just a few etc.
If you're wearing the shirt for the fashion statement? Good for you, but please understand the respect that the symbol you are wearing commands from other people. Some people don't understand that and show no regard at all, positive or negative. It is not a disrespect, they just don't get it or don't care. But if some bozo wants to burn a shirt that has a flag image on it? It's really just a shirt and they are still a bozo. But the disrespect for the symbolism is still there and I guess I'd have a small problem with that too.
Now, if you are going out to buy a flag shirt just to rub it in somebody elses face on a specific date or possibly to incite action? I have a problem with that too. It is not respectful to the flag to do that. It is an intentional misuse of the symbolism of the flag IMO.
The first thing I thought was that maybe there's a scenario at this school that makes this prudent and after reading the article it's seems that that is exactly what is going on there. Sometimes it's better to tone things down early instead of having to mop up it later.
When you plant ice you're going to harvest wind. - Robert Hunter
Soulshiner wrote: The first thing I thought was that maybe there's a scenario at this school that makes this prudent and after reading the article it's seems that that is exactly what is going on there. Sometimes it's better to tone things down early instead of having to mop up it later.
I can understand the desire to avoid confrontations in school. What I CAN NOT understand is the following part of the ruling???
"The court found that the rights of students promoting their Mexican heritage trumped the rights of students expressing their patriotism," Becker said. If school officials feared disruption, he said, they should have canceled the Cinco de Mayo observance.
What kind of BS is that? How do you get a trump card out of that? Isn't this the US? So if people object to my promoting my German heritage I trump over the natives??? It makes no F***ing sense to me. First of all why is it that Mexican students would be allowed to wave their flag in school? And don't give me the educational BS either. There seems to be inconsistency in how this whole mess is being approached. The sympathy card being plaid also about them being 1,300-student Live Oak High School students, where 20 percent of the students are English-language learners and 18 percent come from low-income families. Perhaps I have a warped perspective, but when I went to school right after having arrived from Germany, my primary objective was to fit in not to agitate. This is not to say there wasn't some ridicule and testing of my fortitude involved. Kids reflect what their parents teach them. So I got called Nazi (like some here do). Then like now I ignored the a**holes until I got pushed too far. Then I took care of their promoted champion and never had another altercation after that incident. I simply question the wisdom of intervention. The message we send to these kids is confusing at best and at worst very damaging for later in life. First, they need to learn how to deal with such issues themselves or with some guidance instead of preventing any sort of resolution to take place with the opposing groups. Oh, it solves the confrontation issue, but is has done nothing but reinforce the existing tension. Students fail to learn how to stand up for themselves. Instead they learn that other need to stand up for them. It would be a whole lot better if the kids actually found some common ground between themselves and it doesn't matter what it is. Perhaps simply agreeing to avoid one another, respect one another or to develop personal friendship. There are a whole host of possibilities. Most of all I think the non-English speaking students need to learn that if they wish to live in the US, they need to adapt their new country and respect it. That is the message the school and community ought to be sending them. From my perspective in looking at the attitudes, these students have no respect. It's one thing to be kind and bend over backwards to be considerate, but experience has shown me over and over again that people will look at you as weak. You need to stand up for what is right to gain or preserve respect.
Rockdoc Franz wrote:
I can understand the desire to avoid confrontations in school. What I CAN NOT understand is the following part of the ruling???
"The court found that the rights of students promoting their Mexican heritage trumped the rights of students expressing their patriotism," Becker said. If school officials feared disruption, he said, they should have canceled the Cinco de Mayo observance.
Rockdoc, that was NOT part of the ruling, that was an interpretation of the ruling by the lawyer for the students, Bill Becker. Of course he is going to say something like that to inflame people. And you bought it.
I'm not sure how I feel about the ruling, I disagree with infringing on the kids rights, but I agree that a school should do everything it can to avoid violence if they reasonably believe it will occur.
Rockdoc Franz wrote:
I can understand the desire to avoid confrontations in school. What I CAN NOT understand is the following part of the ruling???
"The court found that the rights of students promoting their Mexican heritage trumped the rights of students expressing their patriotism," Becker said. If school officials feared disruption, he said, they should have canceled the Cinco de Mayo observance.
Rockdoc, that was NOT part of the ruling, that was an interpretation of the ruling by the lawyer for the students, Bill Becker. Of course he is going to say something like that to inflame people. And you bought it.
I'm not sure how I feel about the ruling, I disagree with infringing on the kids rights, but I agree that a school should do everything it can to avoid violence if they reasonably believe it will occur.
Sounds like appeasement to me. How did that work for Neville Chamberlain .
