|
On October 28 2010 19:14 dogabutila wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 18:47 Fenrax wrote:
That guy is a piece of trash. How can he have the audacity to not intervene into this and what the fuck is wrong with the students and teachers of that school that it is not HE but her who has to hide from social activities?
Even in an Islamic country women are treated with more respect. You mean, not having freedom of religion nor freedom of speech? Being only allowed to marrry another Moslem? Not being allowed to go to school? Yes. Sounds like they respect women more.
well....
1. its not like Muslims get to build a mosque in the USA without being called a terrorist training ground
2. its not like marriage bears any meaning in the USA anymore
3. its not like the USA tolerates any man or woman who has attended a madrassa
|
On October 28 2010 15:58 vol_ wrote:
At my school if you had missed any homework or your grades were low you could not participate in sport. I was the captain of our cricket team and got let off easy all the time. Not very fair, but shut like this happens all the time.
>.< In my school, no one gave a **** about sports. Talking about being Aussie.
|
In my country, if u convict a sexual assault to a under 18, or just have a sexual intercourse (with the co-operation of the girl), u go to jail for at least 6 years, and it happen right away not like this, this is sick man
|
The only possible justification I could imagine for any of this shit, is if everyone thinks she's lying.
|
well according to the other articles on this matter, initially the grand jury refused to indict the male students due to lack of evidence. so they were dismissed of their charges and returned to school. at the time the school removed the girl from the team, for all intents and purposes, those boys were "innocent".
eventually another jury indicted the male student and he plead guilty. but by that time, they already graduated from high school so the matter was moot.
|
I dont understand people telling her to quit cheerleading, after an experience like that, I'd imagine it would bring her some sort of comfort, doing the things she likes, instead of just going underground and only speaking with a handful of trusted friends. Should she close herself completely in?
Or should Kobe B, get sent to Afghanistan to play against Jihad Allstars?
|
On October 28 2010 15:20 EvilNalu wrote:
I'm glossing over many issues here for the sake of simplicity, but I'll try to keep the big picture on track. The specific decision here is the work of a federal appellate court. This federal court only ruled on the issue of whether the Attorney General, School District, Superintendent, Principal, Cheer Coach, etc. violated certain aspects of the girl's 1st or 14th amendment rights. The 1st amendment claim is the section of the opinion your "mouthpiece" and "substantial interference" quotes come from. It is important to note that the question in front of this court was limited to these constitutional claims. The court was not deciding the question "were the school board's actions correct?" It therefore makes no sense to state, as you do, that you disagree with their reasoning on non-1st amendment grounds when the only thing they are deciding is a 1st amendment claim. Texas state law does not apply here. This is a federal court deciding constitutional issues.
Thanks for injecting some fact into this. I think most people are just getting inflamed over the moral aspect of the decision (and perhaps rightfully so) and are consequently unable to separate from the legal aspect of things. Yes, this situation stinks. No, her free speech rights were not infringed. Two separate issues, people.
And I don't understand where all this concern about the law as a cold, calculating process comes from. It was your votes that put the laws into place; the court only applies those laws to factual circumstances. In doing so, it will consider ALL factors, not only those favorable to the victim, and that is why decisions sometimes don't go your way. That's the problem with laws of general application--they will invariable benefit some and not others depending on the situation. That's life.
And to the person who requested that I refer to Texas law, there is no need. This is a constitutional claim; it has nothing to do with the laws of Texas. That being said, I would be hard pressed to find a single "law" that was broken by the school's denial of participation in an extracurricular activity. I do, however, think there could be a valid claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
|
This just remembers me of that gift were LeBrown James disrespects a worker from his team... He never got any shit going at him... if someone else would have done that, they would have need to apologise...
How he came back to the same school or the team... ?
|
On October 28 2010 04:26 john0507 wrote:
Now , I'm pretty sure that every country that isn't named Texas has a jail sentence to attempted rape/sexual assault even if the guy confessed and isn't a HS sports star.
Now in this case , not only did that not happened , but the school involved even urged the victim to be low profile and so on and so on.
Honestly, such and such , is just simply mindboggling to prolly anyone living outside the states.
While I do agree with you that kicking her off cheerleading team was right and totally the right thing to do , cos she didn't perform her duties.
Everything beforehand that led to such an incident is just plain wrong.
I really like this post, even before my corrections.
[edit
ohh. Nice post EvilNalu
|
On October 28 2010 15:20 EvilNalu wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 11:54 Krigwin wrote:
There is no misunderstanding, you just appear to think courts should just be one guy holding up sheets of paper and reading the law by the letter. The whole reason why we have an entire judicial system is so that we can interpret the law and dole out judgments appropriate for the situation. The school in this case made a series of seriously questionable decisions which ultimately led to the removal of this girl from her cheer squad and the entire situation must be considered before rendering judgment on whether it was the school's right to do so...
...And you didn't provide any actual laws from Texas to back up your points here, and I'm guessing you're not, after all, Chief Justice, or even just a judge...
...By the way, I disagree with the court's reasoning on entirely non-First Amendment related reasons. Their argument was intrinsically bizarre, as is even pointed out in the article. I mean, seriously, "mouthpiece through which the school could disseminate speech"? "Substantial interference with the work of the school"? This place sounds more like a Ministry of Truth propaganda factory than a United States high school. OK, I've edited some of your post so I can try to clear up some of the legal confusion here. Many of the posters are (understandably) confused about the scope of this decision, what it says, and what it does not say. I'm glossing over many issues here for the sake of simplicity, but I'll try to keep the big picture on track. The specific decision here is the work of a federal appellate court. This federal court only ruled on the issue of whether the Attorney General, School District, Superintendent, Principal, Cheer Coach, etc. violated certain aspects of the girl's 1st or 14th amendment rights. The 1st amendment claim is the section of the opinion your "mouthpiece" and "substantial interference" quotes come from. It is important to note that the question in front of this court was limited to these constitutional claims. The court was not deciding the question "were the school board's actions correct?" It therefore makes no sense to state, as you do, that you disagree with their reasoning on non-1st amendment grounds when the only thing they are deciding is a 1st amendment claim. Texas state law does not apply here. This is a federal court deciding constitutional issues. The girl does have some state law claims alluded to in the opinion. These could potentially include questions about whether the school's decisions were reasonable in light of their mandate/policies/state law, etc. These claims are presumably still pending in state court. This federal appellate decision does not address them.
Thanks for the explanation mang. This still sounds like an incredibly messed up situation though.
|
On October 28 2010 23:42 j2choe wrote:I do, however, think there could be a valid claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
The Federal tort claims act only covers Federal actors. All the people alleged to have wronged the girl are Texas State officials (DA, Superintendent, Principal, etc.) so the Federal Tort Claims Act does not apply.
|
Sooo why the hell did the school not kick the guy out?
Keeping him in the school, the same scool as the victim, is admitting publicly that they accept what he did... very very poor administration on that school thats for sure.
|
On October 28 2010 12:49 Number41 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 08:53 infinitestory wrote:
What I don't get is how a juvenile sex offender managed to get into the same school as his victim AND get put into a position of some respect (basketball team player). If anything, after this situation emerged, the school (ethically) should have removed the rapist rather than the cheerleader, so in that sense the girl getting kicked off the cheerleading squad is wrong IMO There seems to be a lot of confusion on the time line of events: The alleged assault occurred in October of 2008. The accused were arrested and removed from their school (and allowed to attend an alternative school during the investigation.) In January 2009, the grand jury refused to indict the accused. The accused, innocent until proven guilty, were allowed to return to their normal school. In February 2009, the cheer-leading incident occurred. In December 2009, a new grand jury was convened. In September of 2010, one of the accused plead guilty to a lesser charge. The article in the OP seems a bit misleading. This was a very controversial, racially charged case. The NAACP even came out in support of the accused, and demanded an investigation of the prosecutor's behavior.
Now if this is the exact timeline of the events ,then it would explain a lot of stuffs. At the very least it explains why the boy was in the school at that particular time.
However it still doesn't justify how the school not only did not protect/concern/care about the girl , but rather ask her to "lay low", and basically just hinting for her to "disappear".
While it's true that in the eyes of the law , that no one did anything wrong.
But really , how cruel can people get? How important is sports and this star athlete that the school authorities would outright discard their moral values and responsibilites towards one of their student's well being.
And if such a fucked up situation is right in the eyes of the US law.
Then that just makes it even more fucked up.
|
On October 28 2010 19:22 dybydx wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 19:14 dogabutila wrote:On October 28 2010 18:47 Fenrax wrote:
That guy is a piece of trash. How can he have the audacity to not intervene into this and what the fuck is wrong with the students and teachers of that school that it is not HE but her who has to hide from social activities?
Even in an Islamic country women are treated with more respect. You mean, not having freedom of religion nor freedom of speech? Being only allowed to marrry another Moslem? Not being allowed to go to school? Yes. Sounds like they respect women more. well.... 1. its not like Muslims get to build a mosque in the USA without being called a terrorist training ground 2. its not like marriage bears any meaning in the USA anymore 3. its not like the USA tolerates any man or woman who has attended a madrassa
1 - Bullshit, there are a LOT of americans on both sides of that issue, and that issue is a lot deeper than you have portrayed it.
2 - Bullshit, marriage throughout ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY has meant what culture decides it to mean.
3 - Bullshit, I had classmates growing up who were foreign exchange students from Saudi Arabia. They were tolerated and respected just like everyone else. Just like if some kid went to a Jesuit school.
Not everyone is a bigot. Pointing to an entire nation and saying "All of you are bigots." citing the fact that SOME people are is being a bigot yourself.
Can we stop making stupid racist and sexist generalizations? Please? Really?
|
On October 28 2010 07:10 ev8 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 06:54 Asjo wrote:On October 28 2010 06:42 ev8 wrote:On October 28 2010 06:15 Asjo wrote:
[*] Even if cheerleading is, strangely, a possible career choice in Texas, it's hardly something to educate young kids to do. There are much more important things to educate young kids to do - if necessary, they could make seperate cheerleader academies for the few who end up doing this). Doing athletics or something the like would rather be the direction that the girl could take, and she is fully able to do this after finishing the important basic stuff in her current education (keep in mind, she's only still in high school). I doubt it's impossible for her to learn these things in other ways if she's really determined about athletics.
Cheerleading IS an athletic activity with a professional wing, like gymnastics or baseball. To deny her the right to cheerlead is to limit her opportunities. To limit her opportunities over issues stemming from her self-expression is fascistic. No doubt that it's ahtletic activity, but when it comes to athletic education it's not exactly high school material, and I'm sure that they don't do it to educate the half-time entertainers from American football, but rather as a social activity. If she's really doing it for a career, maybe gymnastics would be a better alternative. Many things in life limit us - nothing crimial about that. Things happen and the situations changes. Now, to say that it's "over issues stemming from her self-expression" is quite a twist of words. It's pedagogical issue with some kids who have an unhealthy relation to each other which is creating problems in a social environment. How is cheerleading not exactly high school material? You state that it's primarily a social activity. It is. You state that gymnastics would be a better alternative. It is. But you don't have a point. How is saying that she was removed over issues stemming from her self-expression a twist of words? You state that it's an educational issue. It is. You state that it involves two kids. It does. You state that it creates problems. It does. But you don't have a point.
I gotta admit that reading your post was a good laugh, although it left me a bit confused. You don't have a point
Either way, I'll try to explain. The point that people have made is that the girl is somehow being deprived of significant education, making her removal from the team a more serious and fundamental issue. I'm simply pointing out that, in terms of high school, the focus of cheerleading isn't really "education", rather social activity. If this was a cheerleading academy, it would be. If the girl wants to pursue a career within athletics, she would have more use doing gymastics, so no opportunities missed here either.
We express ourselves in pretty much anything we do. To say that the issue stems from this is to twist the statements given about the situation. The girl was expressing herself, but the issue was pedagogical (or possibly strategic, if you read into the perspective of the school), not about fascist oppression of self-expression. I've never said it's an educational issue - it doesn't really relate directly to education, rather the social environment around it.
|
I despise rapists.. Hope he gets whats coming to him someday.
I remember when I was in highschool, a girl got raped in the bushes walking home from a dance. Supposedly she was only a block from the school and some guys pushed her into a bush and started raping her. What's fucked up is that she said people from the dance were walking by and didn't even help her. Fucked up world...
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On October 28 2010 19:14 dogabutila wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 18:47 Fenrax wrote:
That guy is a piece of trash. How can he have the audacity to not intervene into this and what the fuck is wrong with the students and teachers of that school that it is not HE but her who has to hide from social activities?
Even in an Islamic country women are treated with more respect. You mean, not having freedom of religion nor freedom of speech? Being only allowed to marrry another Moslem? Not being allowed to go to school? Yes. Sounds like they respect women more.
I chose the Muslim example because I know about those Scharia excesses in Muslimic countries. Wrong understood Religion. And though it is the choice between the devil and the deep blue sea I'd prefer those Muslimic restrictions over being raped and later on being ridiculed and bullied by the rapist and his cool basketball friends.
|
On October 29 2010 05:38 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 19:14 dogabutila wrote:On October 28 2010 18:47 Fenrax wrote:
That guy is a piece of trash. How can he have the audacity to not intervene into this and what the fuck is wrong with the students and teachers of that school that it is not HE but her who has to hide from social activities?
Even in an Islamic country women are treated with more respect. You mean, not having freedom of religion nor freedom of speech? Being only allowed to marrry another Moslem? Not being allowed to go to school? Yes. Sounds like they respect women more. I chose the Muslim example because I know about those Scharia excesses in Muslimic countries. Wrong understood Religion. And though it is the choice between the devil and the deep blue sea I'd prefer those Muslimic restrictions over being raped and later on being ridiculed and bullied by the rapist and his cool basketball friends.
You're ridiculed if you're raped there as well. It's also considered shameful there. You're not really making a case.
|
Well, topic author said it all. I completely agree.
|
I can understand the legal reasons behind this action, but, "Legal is not a synonym for, 'Right.' "
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
