|
In a message dated 11/6/2005 12:40:27 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
While it may not be acceptable at school, it seems to me it is based, in some part, on the notion of fighting words, which is recognized in Free Speech jurisprudence (admittedly in the context of lying outside the protection of the First Amendment). Now, whether a remark disparaging another student's religion rises to the level of fighting words is a question a tribunal might well take into account--either when punishing the speaker and/or the student at whom the words were directed. There is an uncertainty to be injected into Free Speech Doctrine if
Frances' suggestion takes hold. The concept of "fighting words" is not a
license to bullies with fragile psyches or low self-esteem and a lack of
confidence. It is simply not the case that every thing spoken is a
fighting word.
If some folks whose kids go to public schools are raising bullies at
home and feeding them raw meat, giving "rah rah" speeches about how they don't
have to take guff from no one, nowhere, no how, that is a sad commentary on
affairs, but it doesn't change that Free Speech Doctrine so
that words suddenly rise to the level of fighting words because
select, fragilely constructed individuals, act as though words are likely to
provoke an immediate, violent response.
Jim Henderson
Senior Counsel
ACLJ
|
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
