In a message dated 11/6/2005 9:17:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So let’s
understand – the next kid that tells my 7 year old that we are going to hell,
which whether Rick agrees or not is always where that conversation goes, is
going to get a basic
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
I have a black belt in the game of go. Does that count? :)SteveOn Nov 7, 2005, at 8:33 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 11/6/2005 9:17:31 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So let’s understand – the next kid that tells my 7 year old that we are going to hell,
In a message dated 11/7/05 8:48:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
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
I thought that we were talking about the United States? I was.
-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 5:24 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: non-disruptive speech ?
Well, Catholics, as I understand
-disruptive speech ?
I thought that we were talking about the United States? I was.
-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2005 5:24 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: non-disruptive speech ?
Well
Rich Duncan says:
The law is clear that public school students do not shed their free
speech rights at the public schoolhouse door. They have a clear right to engage
in non-disruptive speech.
Discussing the doctrine of salvation by faith is not hate speech. It is quite
the opposite
Are you seriously suggesting that a kid who talk to your 7 year old about
religion in a way that you find offensive is going to be physically
assaulted by your child? That's not just unacceptable at school. It's
criminal, and I cannot conceive of why you would permit your child to
respond to
In a message dated 11/6/05 11:47:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Are you seriously suggesting that a kid who talk to your 7 year old about
religion in a way that you find offensive is going to be physically
assaulted by your child? That's not just unacceptable at school.
06, 2005
8:32 AM
To: Law
Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: non-disruptive speech
?
If I understand Joel correctly, the next time a peer informs my son, a
3d Degree Black Belt, that it is homophobic to discriminate against
same-sex marriages, my son ought tokick the hateful
, November 06, 2005 8:32 AMTo: Law Religion issues for Law AcademicsSubject: Re: non-disruptive speech ?
If I understand Joel correctly, the next time a peer informs my son, a 3d Degree Black Belt, that it is "homophobic" to discriminate against same-sex "marriages," my son ough
.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Rick Duncan
Sent: Sunday, November 06,
2005 8:32 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: non-disruptive
speech ?
If I understand
rom:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Paul FinkelmanSent: Sunday, November 06, 2005
12:15 PMTo: Law Religion issues for Law
AcademicsSubject: Re: non-disruptive speech
?Rick the difference is that you or your son could
teach and learn to be tolerant about
le don't like their
ideologies challenged.
Eugene
-Original Message-
From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of Paul Finkelman
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 200512:15 PM
To: Law Religion issues for LawAcademics
Subject: Re: non-disr
sure" is defined.
Eugene
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Paul FinkelmanSent: Sunday, November 06, 2005
1:26 PMTo: Law Religion issues for Law
AcademicsSubject: Re: non-disruptive speech
?"Entitled" do
have evidence rules in U.S. courts. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Rick DuncanSent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 8:32 AMTo: Law Religion issues for Law AcademicsSubject: Re: non-disruptive speech ? If I understand Joel correctly, the next time a peer informs my son, a
16 matches
Mail list logo
