Two students at a Los Angeles High School face “severe punishment” after being seen in racist photo.

Any speech that disrupts the educational process is deemed not protected.

 

There's a problem when that speech in question is deemed to take place outside of the classroom.

Which has happened in several cases.

 

Dred Scott was seeking to incite hatred and increase racism, toward a group? Dred Scott promoted hate speech??

Well I voted for Trump because Obama is the worst President in USA history. I support the wall, and I want us to drop bombs on Iran instantaneously. So please, take your ridiculous assumptions elsewhere.

 

So the legal principles don't matter, only the intentions?

The Ded Scott case sought to define Blacks as "non-citizens" to take away their rights. Hitherto before it had generally been presumed they were citizens, as a matter of course.

That seemed to be what you were doing when it came to free speech.

I was just pointing out that your tactics were the same as had been employed by racists in the past.

 

Yes, the intentions are exactly the legal principles.

Saying I want to kill you to a, human, is not the same as saying I want to kill you to a cockroach walking across your garage floor. It is free speech for you to say "he's got a gun" while you're standing at the snack-bar of your local, shooting range, but it is not free speech to say that same thing if you're 26K-ft high flying the friendly skies on commercial airlines.

Promoting free speech to push an idea or a thought or a position, is not the same, as speaking out public hatred for humans and overtly begging for racism to be practiced against other humans.

 

That's the same view of activist judges.

 

What happens if the idea or thought has to do with doing something about a group of people who are not citizens and trying to enter the country?

I don't think you can completely separate racism from legitimate political belief which people are entitled to.

 

Nope. That's the view of the Founding Fathers, who declared the law, if you go back and analyze the real time circumstance which created the law.

 

You can remove some one without hating them.

For example...I love all HISP, from Mexico, and I even almost married one ---because that's how beautiful and lovely those people are.

But that does not change how I voted for Trump, because I support the wall/I hate the idea of people entering the country illegally to stay for good.

Oh, of course you can separate them! Mainly, because they are not the same and they are not related.

 

You can, but for it to be done in a democracy, it oftentimes just requires a little bit of hate. That's the practical reality.

Both political sides have plenty of groups they hate, so let's not play double standards here.

 

Sometimes it is about cultural values or religion.

 

Courts have ruled in the past that the educational process continues outside the classroom.

 

What is your opinion as to why the police are involved in this case?

 

I doubt that and doubt even more that it disrupted anything.

 

I can see the lunatic lefty's out there now reading books and circling letters to find the secret racist message.

They'll get their racism, even if they have to manufacture it, which they do continuously.

 

Of course, inciting hatred is PERFECTLY legal, but I assume that you meant inciting violence.

 

I don't have one. I remain in TOTAL confusion. In my mind, it is just as ridiculous than if the police were called because a student called another student an idiot. And this even IF this was a guaranteed racist incident.

 

So let's play pretend there is a racial slur when there really isn't one that can be seen except by those folks who are looking for it then anything can be seen as a racial slur. Why put a Y in NYGGER if a person reallys wants to send a racial message?

 

It’s confirmed by the USSC

 

Is there a difference??? According to 2019 operating procedures, in every nation??


In every nation including the, USA, humans incite hatred toward targeted groups in hopes that the GOVT and general population soon joins in then inevitably move toward violence onto the targeted group.

Look at darkskin Black's plight, today, over in Israel and in France and in China and in Japan and in Dominican Republic. etc. It's sickening.

 

Because they are racists who know that 1)people who also have hatred on their, agenda, will join in to play pretend that the "Y" made it into something different than what White racism always intended the word to be plus 2)the Y did not change the enunciation.

But hey, feel free to continue to make excuses for demonic behavior. They were hoping that humans like you, would step forward, to protect their Right to be satanic fools who burden Democracy.

 

Sorry, I was just talking about the US in terms of it being perfectly legal to incite hatred. And YES, there is a difference between them, its just that both are illegal in certain authoritarian nations.

"Darkskin Black?"

 

This isn 't even remotely a police matter. They demonstrate poor taste, not criminal behavior. Its a conduct code matter for the school, since the first amendment does not protect somebody from negative reactions to the content of the speech in question.

Teenagers do stupid things thinking they're being smart, or what passes for "thinking" at times.

 

That's so true.

 

What is yours?