Kansas High School Column Advocates Death to Gays

  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Feb 24, 2011 11:47 PM GMT
    Kansas High School Column Advocates Death to Gays


    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/02/24/Kansas_High_School_Column_Advocates_Death_to_Gays/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 1:08 AM GMT
    District officials and the newspaper’s faculty adviser say the column is free speech and is protected by the First Amendment and the Kansas Student Publications Act.


    By saying this, I wonder if school officials have thought about how they have opened themselves up to having to allow just about anything written by a student reporter to be published in the school paper?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 1:33 AM GMT
    The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 2:03 AM GMT
    I wonder if the author is a congregant at the WBC...

    As an aside, while the article is certainly disturbing and inflammatory - just what sort of constitutional restrictions are there against our rights to free speech?

    Though I'm reasonably sure that had a student wrote an opinion piece about how good it is to have sex with other men, it might not have gotten past the editor's desk.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 5:32 AM GMT
    Thanks for proving, yet again, why it's called a fly-over state.

    Can stupid people stop breeding already? There are too many of you as it is.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 25, 2011 12:06 PM GMT
    District officials and the newspaper’s faculty adviser say the column is free speech and is protected by the First Amendment and the Kansas Student Publications Act.

    Yeah? ..... Let em write a column against abortion protesters and see how true that stays

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRSVRg6No9uUPG3rV_3n00
  • ueatzit

    Posts: 174

    Feb 25, 2011 12:19 PM GMT
    Shouldn't the dialog be about why a jejune teenager who isn't mature enough to fully appreciate what he is writing is given protection of free speech? Free speech is a wonderful thing for a society to uphold, to accept it unquestionably when it possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others is silly. While he isn't a child, he doesn't grasp that others DON'T subscribe to his religious fundaments and that those people should have the freedom to live unpestered.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 12:29 PM GMT
    ueatzit saidShouldn't the dialog be about why a jejune teenager who isn't mature enough to fully appreciate what he is writing is given protection of free speech? Free speech is a wonderful thing for a society to uphold, to accept it unquestionably when it possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others is silly. While he isn't a child, he doesn't grasp that others DON'T subscribe to his religious fundaments and that those people should have the freedom to live unpestered.



    You are right, there is a line where Freedom of Speech has to be drawn, however, where do you draw that line but also protect someone's right to free speech... cause I think our society is way to sensitive on both sides and that one could easily come up where something possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others?
  • ueatzit

    Posts: 174

    Feb 25, 2011 12:42 PM GMT
    flatstate2010 said
    ueatzit saidShouldn't the dialog be about why a jejune teenager who isn't mature enough to fully appreciate what he is writing is given protection of free speech? Free speech is a wonderful thing for a society to uphold, to accept it unquestionably when it possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others is silly. While he isn't a child, he doesn't grasp that others DON'T subscribe to his religious fundaments and that those people should have the freedom to live unpestered.



    You are right, there is a line where Freedom of Speech has to be drawn, however, where do you draw that line but also protect someone's right to free speech... cause I think our society is way to sensitive on both sides and that one could easily come up where something possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others?


    Free speech advocating the harm to the life of others would be unacceptible, what do you think? Is it cultural that as Americans (yes I am an American) we're too afraid on infringing on someone's rights or being sued rather than make a judgement as to what is over the line for a civil society?

    Can we take out ads for Realjock and plan B pills in the school newspaper? Or perhaps have a helpful column written about how to tell your bf that he needs to douche before anal sex?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 12:44 PM GMT
    what ueatzit wrote ;-)
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Feb 25, 2011 1:08 PM GMT
    Well, what a nice way to start the day, thanks Metta......

    I know East HS, I have clients in that building and was there about 2 weeks ago. Honestly, I'm surprised something that that appeared in their newspaper, but I can say this..... there is going to be a lot of heat based on that op ed.. and there will be an alternative view expressed. I hope diligence is shown to show that when it appears.

    Notwithstanding, the editor of this piece is probably the offspring of a couple
    of right wingers. Unfortunate and sad.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 2:20 PM GMT
    A student should write a reply listing all the other abominations with their attendant punishments, and ask the original author if he is advocating that they all be adopted, too. It would be hypocritical to cherry-pick one and ignore the rest.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 2:39 PM GMT
    There is a difference between free speech and hate speech. Had the boy written the same about Jews or any other minority, I don't believe any Constitutional protections would apply so easily.

    His words will come back to haunt him. In time, he will learn that the pen he wields is actually a double-edged sword.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 2:50 PM GMT
    Ermine saidThanks for proving, yet again, why it's called a fly-over state.

    Can stupid people stop breeding already? There are too many of you as it is.



    Watch it, now. Those fly-over states are the "real" America. Remember? God help us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 3:02 PM GMT
    I don't see what the problem/issue is, the student cited references from the bible to make his case of why people view the issue as not normal, he does not say that’s how it should be. Overall I though the column was very good for a high school student, makes simple valid points on either side. Gay-rights activist are just always looking for something to get upset about, if everyone does not accept us with open and loving arms they get upset for some reason. I’m happy to let people have their beliefs and talk to them about why they believe what they do. Not force them to believe one way or another, which is what is trying to be done here.
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Feb 25, 2011 3:44 PM GMT
    I think that is actually good if someone else is allowed to rebuttal it. Imagine how exposing that would be of how stupid it is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 3:50 PM GMT
    ueatzit said
    flatstate2010 said
    ueatzit saidShouldn't the dialog be about why a jejune teenager who isn't mature enough to fully appreciate what he is writing is given protection of free speech? Free speech is a wonderful thing for a society to uphold, to accept it unquestionably when it possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others is silly. While he isn't a child, he doesn't grasp that others DON'T subscribe to his religious fundaments and that those people should have the freedom to live unpestered.



    You are right, there is a line where Freedom of Speech has to be drawn, however, where do you draw that line but also protect someone's right to free speech... cause I think our society is way to sensitive on both sides and that one could easily come up where something possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others?


    Free speech advocating the harm to the life of others would be unacceptible, what do you think? Is it cultural that as Americans (yes I am an American) we're too afraid on infringing on someone's rights or being sued rather than make a judgement as to what is over the line for a civil society?

    Can we take out ads for Realjock and plan B pills in the school newspaper? Or perhaps have a helpful column written about how to tell your bf that he needs to douche before anal sex?


    Great post!

    I loled over that last line. And you know just what will happen. Ads and plan b pill censored.




  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Feb 25, 2011 3:56 PM GMT
    Simon78928 saidI don't see what the problem/issue is, the student cited references from the bible to make his case of why people view the issue as not normal, he does not say that’s how it should be. Overall I though the column was very good for a high school student, makes simple valid points on either side. Gay-rights activist are just always looking for something to get upset about, if everyone does not accept us with open and loving arms they get upset for some reason. I’m happy to let people have their beliefs and talk to them about why they believe what they do. Not force them to believe one way or another, which is what is trying to be done here.



    I understand the point you are trying to make, and I agree with you that people should be able to voice their opinion, even when it's not popular among any particular group. That said, I think the biggest problems with this column is:

    A) The timing. The whole "Gay Suicide" issue and how it has been particularly significant among "Gay Teens" has been brought to the forefront of the American consciousness in recent months. The HS newspaper should have been more sensitive to this, and deemed the column inappropriate due to safety concerns of the students at the HS who may be gay. It was short-sighted at best, regardless of freedom of speech.

    B) The publication itself. A HS newspaper is probably not the appropriate platform for such a topic that specifically targets any particular minority group in a negative way, especially if members of that group exist at the high school. It fuels negative stereotypes and, more importantly, it is (or can be) hurtful to those in the minority group.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 4:26 PM GMT
    For once, I completely agree with CuriousJockAZ.
  • MuscleComeBac...

    Posts: 2376

    Feb 25, 2011 5:16 PM GMT
    The editorial, and that's what it is folks - a student editorial in a student newspaper - does not call for death, nor is it as inflammatory as the Advocate article implies.

    It is a sad voice, and one that mimics a perspective that is still held by some young people. But it is indeed free-speech in action, whether we like it or not.

    I don't like the tone of it, but it is not incendiary, it is simply ignorant, and we can't censor ignorant editorial perspectives. That's a very dangerous game.

    We can ask for students who are member of GLSEN or a parental editorial in counter-point, but I'd caution against commenting on the editorial itself until after having read it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 5:24 PM GMT
    Run another one calling for the death penalty for men who associate with menstruating women, and insist it is protected free speech. icon_biggrin.gif
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Feb 25, 2011 6:17 PM GMT
    MuscleComeBack saidThe editorial, and that's what it is folks - a student editorial in a student newspaper - does not call for death, nor is it as inflammatory as the Advocate article implies.

    It is a sad voice, and one that mimics a perspective that is still held by some young people. But it is indeed free-speech in action, whether we like it or not.

    I don't like the tone of it, but it is not incendiary, it is simply ignorant, and we can't censor ignorant editorial perspectives. That's a very dangerous game.

    We can ask for students who are member of GLSEN or a parental editorial in counter-point, but I'd caution against commenting on the editorial itself until after having read it.


    This ^

    Well said MuscleComeBack, you took the words right out of my mouth.
  • neosyllogy

    Posts: 1714

    Feb 25, 2011 6:38 PM GMT
    ueatzit saidShouldn't the dialog be about why a jejune teenager who isn't mature enough to fully appreciate what he is writing is given protection of free speech? Free speech is a wonderful thing for a society to uphold, to accept it unquestionably when it possibly infringes upon the health and safety of others is silly. While he isn't a child, he doesn't grasp that others DON'T subscribe to his religious fundaments and that those people should have the freedom to live unpestered.

    Wow. People like you are scary.



    Also, it seems like people in this thread are conflating the wisdom of the editorial judgement of what I assume is student editors with the legal rights and ethical obligations of the school to censor the paper.
    Most likely the paper is student run or mostly student run and does not received direct oversight from the school. They are treating it like a paper - and hence not specifically controlling single articles. That's quite reasonable.

    As to whether or not they would violate their principle w.r. other topics, that's quite an aside. Either allowing the paper to run freely is right or wrong, their hypothetical consistency on the issue has no direct bearing on the article in question.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 25, 2011 6:47 PM GMT
    Why even post this? I don't care what a high school kid in the middle of BFE thinks. I'm sure there are plenty more examples we could find.
    At least society and our government, taken as a whole, are moving in the right direction.
    By the way, Fred Phelps' church is in Kansas.
  • dhinkansas

    Posts: 764

    Feb 25, 2011 6:49 PM GMT
    I can't imaging a high school student being so consumed with hate, and probably has gay feelings himself and is overwhelmed by them. I also think sometimes stuff like this is for shock value. The kid is certainly getting his 15 minutes of airtime.

    I wonder how many people are aware the abortion activists that set up shop in Wichita actually relocated from San Diego. Yeah, liberal So Cal. So stop with the fly over jokes. We don't have a monopoly on bigots.