Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Jeep [Chat]okee

14244464748

Posts

  • amateurhouramateurhour One day I'll be professionalhour The woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Preach, supernatural looks like it's going to be a monster of the week tonight, which sounds good, but the recent storyline developments make me not want to see monster of the week anymore

    amateurhour on

    Arch wrote: »

    I never expected this burn from captain bushmeat
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Only one man can kill this many Russians. Bring his guitar to me! Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Organichu wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »

    Those students are loathsome, but it seems like (protected) political speech to me. They shouldn't be forced to cover it up.

    Did you miss this part:
    when three students wore the T-shirts, which also quoted a Biblical passage advocating death as a punishment for homosexual activity.

    Students have much less leeway when it comes to making threats.

    further on it goes to say some kids wore shirts without that part

    So make the threat once and then the reminders that lack the explicit threat become okay?

    different kids

    Same message.

    i'm not contesting that fuck-with-gay-kids is a shitty message

    I didn't say you were. But wearing the same t-shirt sans bible message doesn't remove the fact that the implied threat had already been made.

    Thomamelas on
  • DaxonDaxon Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Organichu wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    did anyone else watch the wave when they were in school

    we had a teacher try to do that to us once and she just wound up finding out that a bunch of 5th grade boys are perfectly okay with subverting others

    i don't know what this is or means

    you are talking in riddles, sir

    This is cause Gooey is too ancient.

    His riddles have become lost in the mists of time and now only he knows the context within they exist.

    Daxon on
  • GooeyGooey (\/)┌¶─¶┐(\/) pinch pinchRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Organichu wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    did anyone else watch the wave when they were in school

    we had a teacher try to do that to us once and she just wound up finding out that a bunch of 5th grade boys are perfectly okay with subverting others

    i don't know what this is or means

    you are talking in riddles, sir

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave

    Gooey on
    919UOwT.png
  • TehSlothTehSloth Hit Or Miss I Guess They Never Miss, HuhRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Sarksus wrote: »
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I was thinking that if Netflix wants to call itself a streaming company it should have a hell of a lot more of its library available for streaming. They can call themselves a streaming company when every season of Top Gear is available!

    I thought they had most of new format up for streaming, and really you aren't missing out on to much with the older stuff. Although seeing a young Jeremy Clarkson is pretty bizarre and interesting.

    They only have seasons nine through twelve and some of the episodes are missing in a few of them. I've finished those already! I'd rather see everything rather than only some and then not have anything to watch.

    Do they have the Vietnam special/ finale for 12, I made my roommates watch that on some crappy streaming site cause I didn't think of Netflix, it's soo good. After that I might make them watch the off-roading through the amazon special which I think was the end of season 11, it was pretty epic.

    TehSloth on
    FC: 1993-7778-8872 PSN: TehSloth Xbox: SlothTeh
    twitch.tv/tehsloth
  • MrMisterMrMister A pup must first get in the water to be successful as a seal!Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Actually it means enforcing a productive and smooth learning environment. Blocking offensive speech or actions falls under that provision, particularly when it creates a hostile environment for another group of students, in this case the gay students.

    The bolded is just false. I challenge you to find a single piece of case law supporting that claim.

    The latter, about a hostile environment, is more tenable. But even there you have to deal with the fact that the shirts are both religious and political, which are two of the very most protected types of speech, and furthermore, that they are being worn as passive symbols, which, again, is very difficult to restrict.

    MrMister on
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Only one man can kill this many Russians. Bring his guitar to me! Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Organichu wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    did anyone else watch the wave when they were in school

    we had a teacher try to do that to us once and she just wound up finding out that a bunch of 5th grade boys are perfectly okay with subverting others

    i don't know what this is or means

    you are talking in riddles, sir
    The Third Wave

    Thomamelas on
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Preach, supernatural looks like it's going to be a monster of the week tonight, which sounds good, but the recent storyline developments make me not want to see monster of the week anymore

    I like what they've done so far with the show, and it looked like it tied into the main story while still kind of being monster of the week.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    MrMister wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    There needs to be a finding to the effect that there is substantial interference with school discipline and the rights of others. And being offended, or exposed to contradictory opinion, is explicitly designated as insufficient.

    So you can't see how a quote affirming that it is just to kill homosexuals, worn on a day designed to foster a safe environment for gay students, would substantially interfere with school discipline and the right of certain students to not be assailed with inflammatory religious rhetoric?

    That, importantly, is not a right.

    School says clothing may not promote hatred as it fosters an unsafe learning environment, bam, done. There's no way in hell these students are going to win the suit.

    Captain Carrot on
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Organichu wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    did anyone else watch the wave when they were in school

    we had a teacher try to do that to us once and she just wound up finding out that a bunch of 5th grade boys are perfectly okay with subverting others

    i don't know what this is or means

    you are talking in riddles, sir

    It is a film about a youth movement that is basically fascism. It's a giant gotcha of a film that teachers delight in showing to classes of kids that are not yet fully politically aware.

    japan on
  • OrganichuOrganichu jacobkosh Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »

    Those students are loathsome, but it seems like (protected) political speech to me. They shouldn't be forced to cover it up.

    Did you miss this part:
    when three students wore the T-shirts, which also quoted a Biblical passage advocating death as a punishment for homosexual activity.

    Students have much less leeway when it comes to making threats.

    further on it goes to say some kids wore shirts without that part

    So make the threat once and then the reminders that lack the explicit threat become okay?

    different kids

    Same message.

    i'm not contesting that fuck-with-gay-kids is a shitty message

    I didn't say you were. But wearing the same t-shirt sans bible message doesn't remove the fact that the implied threat had already been made.

    by someone else

    i mean, the mance of the threat is still extant but i think this is different from your initial phrasing

    Organichu on
  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Sarksus wrote: »
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I was thinking that if Netflix wants to call itself a streaming company it should have a hell of a lot more of its library available for streaming. They can call themselves a streaming company when every season of Top Gear is available!

    I thought they had most of new format up for streaming, and really you aren't missing out on to much with the older stuff. Although seeing a young Jeremy Clarkson is pretty bizarre and interesting.

    They only have seasons nine through twelve and some of the episodes are missing in a few of them. I've finished those already! I'd rather see everything rather than only some and then not have anything to watch.

    Do they have the Vietnam special/ finale for 12, I made my roommates watch that on some crappy streaming site cause I didn't think of Netflix, it's soo good. After that I might make them watch the off-roading through the amazon special which I think was the end of season 11, it was pretty epic.

    Yeah I've seen the Vietnam and Bolivia specials. I've also seen part of the Arctic special. They're all hilarious.

    Sarksus on
  • YamiNoSenshiYamiNoSenshi A point called Z In the complex planeRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Sarksus wrote: »
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I was thinking that if Netflix wants to call itself a streaming company it should have a hell of a lot more of its library available for streaming. They can call themselves a streaming company when every season of Top Gear is available!

    I thought they had most of new format up for streaming, and really you aren't missing out on to much with the older stuff. Although seeing a young Jeremy Clarkson is pretty bizarre and interesting.

    They only have seasons nine through twelve and some of the episodes are missing in a few of them. I've finished those already! I'd rather see everything rather than only some and then not have anything to watch.

    They're adding episodes. I noticed last night that the two missing ones from I think season 9 were added in.

    YamiNoSenshi on
    Damn it, it's fucking noon. I demand to know if Yami shit on a desk yet.

    Watch me sometimes stream games.
  • MrMisterMrMister A pup must first get in the water to be successful as a seal!Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    School says clothing may not promote hatred as it fosters an unsafe learning environment, bam, done. There's no way in hell these students are going to win the suit.

    I think you'd have to show that the environment was literally unsafe, i.e. that there was a real possibility of violence.
    Tinker wrote:
    The District Court concluded that the action of the school authorities was reasonable because it was based upon their fear of a disturbance from the wearing of the armbands. But, in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949); and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom--this kind of openness--that is [509] the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society.

    In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained. Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749.

    MrMister on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    MrMister wrote: »
    Actually it means enforcing a productive and smooth learning environment. Blocking offensive speech or actions falls under that provision, particularly when it creates a hostile environment for another group of students, in this case the gay students.

    The bolded is just false. I challenge you to find a single piece of case law supporting that claim.

    The latter, about a hostile environment, is more tenable. But even there you have to deal with the fact that the shirts are both religious and political, which are two of the very most protected types of speech, and furthermore, that they are being worn as passive symbols, which, again, is very difficult to restrict.


    The case linked a page or so ago pretty clearly shows that the elimination of a hostile environment is prioritized over speech rights in schools. A literal threat of violence is not nessecary, only the creation of a hostile environment.

    As I recall the reasoning behind this is has something to do with how school attendance is required, the students are minors, and that the school maintains some level of custody over the child while they're attending.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Organichu wrote: »

    by someone else

    i mean, the mance of the threat is still extant but i think this is different from your initial phrasing

    That someone else wore the shirt sans the hate speech, doesn't meant hey also weren't still advocating the message.

    Not to mention I haven't heard of straight people being singled out and bullied based on the fact they are straight, so why would they need to advocate "pride" other then being dill weeds.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    MrMister wrote: »
    School says clothing may not promote hatred as it fosters an unsafe learning environment, bam, done. There's no way in hell these students are going to win the suit.

    I think you'd have to show that the environment was literally unsafe, i.e. that there was a real possibility of violence.
    Tinker wrote:
    The District Court concluded that the action of the school authorities was reasonable because it was based upon their fear of a disturbance from the wearing of the armbands. But, in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949); and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom--this kind of openness--that is [509] the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society.

    In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained. Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749.

    Right, but black armbands are a lot less explicit than shirts saying that gays should be put to death, and thus the latter fulfill that standard where the former as a symbolic protest against the Vietnam Police Action did not.

    Captain Carrot on
  • MrMisterMrMister A pup must first get in the water to be successful as a seal!Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    The case linked a page or so ago pretty clearly shows that the elimination of a hostile environment is prioritized over speech rights in schools.

    As I recall the reasoning behind this is has something to do with how school attendance is required, the students are minors, and that the school maintains some level of custody over the child while they're attending.

    You are clearly not talking about Tinker, since it concludes the opposite. Are you talking about Frasier? Because in that case the fact of mandatory attendance was salient, however, the speech was 1) obscene and 2) apolitical, which changes everything.

    MrMister on
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Only one man can kill this many Russians. Bring his guitar to me! Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    MrMister wrote: »
    Actually it means enforcing a productive and smooth learning environment. Blocking offensive speech or actions falls under that provision, particularly when it creates a hostile environment for another group of students, in this case the gay students.

    The bolded is just false. I challenge you to find a single piece of case law supporting that claim.

    The latter, about a hostile environment, is more tenable. But even there you have to deal with the fact that the shirts are both religious and political, which are two of the very most protected types of speech, and furthermore, that they are being worn as passive symbols, which, again, is very difficult to restrict.

    Bethel School District v. Fraser. The implied threat of violence is slightly more disruptive then a bunch of sex jokes.

    Thomamelas on
  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    I don't think it's reasonable for a high school to be made into a hostile environment. I ended up dropping out of school because I feared a hostile school environment.

    I don't really care about what the law says, only what should be the case.

    Sarksus on
  • OrganichuOrganichu jacobkosh Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Preacher wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »

    by someone else

    i mean, the mance of the threat is still extant but i think this is different from your initial phrasing

    That someone else wore the shirt sans the hate speech, doesn't meant hey also weren't still advocating the message.

    Not to mention I haven't heard of straight people being singled out and bullied based on the fact they are straight, so why would they need to advocate "pride" other then being dill weeds.

    dude

    of course they're dill weeds

    i'm certainly not defending them

    i am only clearing up what seemed like the impression that the kids with the bible passage erased that and went back at it again the next day

    (though apparently they did too)

    saying there were other kids who went in who didn't have the bible thing at first, apparently on the second day... that's how it reads at least

    Organichu on
  • AriviaArivia Registered User
    edited November 2010
    So, who wants to join my Third Orgasm movement?

    Arivia on
    huntresssig.jpg
  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Arivia wrote: »
    So, who wants to join my Third Orgasm movement?

    What's the initiation entail.

    Sarksus on
  • MrMisterMrMister A pup must first get in the water to be successful as a seal!Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Right, but black armbands are a lot less explicit than shirts saying that gays should be put to death, and thus the latter fulfill that standard where the former as a symbolic protest against the Vietnam Police Action did not.

    The standard of immediately leading to violence?

    I mean, that just strikes me as untrue. The students were able to wear their shirts without starting any brawls, which seems like strong evidence that they do not, in fact, immediately lead to violence. Or, really, materially disrupt the function of the school in any way.

    I could see an argument to the effect that they interfere with gay students ability to learn, which is a real right (as opposed to the right not to be offended). However, I am uncertain of the legal standing of that general strategy.

    MrMister on
  • OrganichuOrganichu jacobkosh Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Sarksus wrote: »
    Arivia wrote: »
    So, who wants to join my Third Orgasm movement?

    What's the initiation entail.

    well

    a hammer is involved

    Organichu on
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Arivia wrote: »
    So, who wants to join my Third Orgasm movement?

    I've got a bit of catching up to do today

    Senjutsu on
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • MrMisterMrMister A pup must first get in the water to be successful as a seal!Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Bethel School District v. Fraser. The implied threat of violence is slightly more disruptive then a bunch of sex jokes.

    Obscene speech isn't protected. Political speech is.

    edit: to elaborate, there is plenty of precedent that obscene speech can be suppressed, especially when it has no political, artistic, or other purpose. That's why Fraser lost. Not because offensive speech can be suppressed; nothing of that sort is the case.

    MrMister on
  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    MrMister wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Bethel School District v. Fraser. The implied threat of violence is slightly more disruptive then a bunch of sex jokes.

    Obscene speech isn't protected. Political speech is.

    Harassment is not protected, and what qualifies as harassment in schools more loose.

    Styrofoam Sammich on
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    This seems like a prime thread-candidate, gentlemen

    Senjutsu on
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • AriviaArivia Registered User
    edited November 2010
    Specifically, this kind of hammer:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxQW8BWaEz0

    Arivia on
    huntresssig.jpg
  • GooeyGooey (\/)┌¶─¶┐(\/) pinch pinchRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Preacher wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »

    by someone else

    i mean, the mance of the threat is still extant but i think this is different from your initial phrasing

    That someone else wore the shirt sans the hate speech, doesn't meant hey also weren't still advocating the message.

    Not to mention I haven't heard of straight people being singled out and bullied based on the fact they are straight, so why would they need to advocate "pride" other then being dill weeds.

    one time i was at a party that was mostly gay dudes and girls who felt comfortable around gay dudes and a guy started verbally attacking me for being straight with my straight girlfriend at a "gay" party

    it was really pretty odd and he was pretty drunk and thought i was the guy who bullied him in highschool or something

    i ended up punching him and some other dude came up and apoligised for him saying that he always does this whenever someone brings a straight guy to one of their parties

    i then had a fabulous watermelon martini thing


    weird personal anecdote but i thougt id share because it was so weird

    Gooey on
    919UOwT.png
  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Gooey wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    did anyone else watch the wave when they were in school

    we had a teacher try to do that to us once and she just wound up finding out that a bunch of 5th grade boys are perfectly okay with subverting others

    i don't know what this is or means

    you are talking in riddles, sir

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave

    The closest thing we had to that was DARE.

    Proud to say it triggered my bullshit alarm even at that young age.

    Regina Fong on
  • OrganichuOrganichu jacobkosh Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    This seems like a prime thread-candidate, gentlemen

    you seem like prime-meat, candidate

    Organichu on
  • CindersCinders Whose sails were black when it was windy Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Ugh, metal.

    Cinders on
  • SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Candidate Meat-Prime reporting for duty

    Senjutsu on
    Sarksus wrote: »
    I'm gonna get a PhD in incest.
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Alexandria, VARegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    This seems like a prime thread-candidate, gentlemen

    It does indeed. Anybody want to start it?

    Captain Carrot on
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Only one man can kill this many Russians. Bring his guitar to me! Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    MrMister wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Bethel School District v. Fraser. The implied threat of violence is slightly more disruptive then a bunch of sex jokes.

    Obscene speech isn't protected. Political speech is.

    And Morse v Frederick put a clear restriction on political speech that may violate the law or advocate for illegal activities. Threatening someone is still a violation of the law.

    Thomamelas on
  • YamiNoSenshiYamiNoSenshi A point called Z In the complex planeRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    YamiNoSenshi on
    Damn it, it's fucking noon. I demand to know if Yami shit on a desk yet.

    Watch me sometimes stream games.
  • OrganichuOrganichu jacobkosh Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Organichu on
  • GooeyGooey (\/)┌¶─¶┐(\/) pinch pinchRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Gooey wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    did anyone else watch the wave when they were in school

    we had a teacher try to do that to us once and she just wound up finding out that a bunch of 5th grade boys are perfectly okay with subverting others

    i don't know what this is or means

    you are talking in riddles, sir

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Wave

    The closest thing we had to that was DARE.

    Proud to say it triggered my bullshit alarm even at that young age.

    My teacher started it out as a "hall monitor" thing, then expanded our duties to police more and more things (while being immune from prosecution ourselves)

    She gave us armbands and everything

    in the end she did the great reveal and all the students were like "OH EMM GEE"

    We just wanted to know when our next meeting was and TEACHER SALLY ISN'T SITTING CORRECTLY PUNISH HER INFRONT OF EVERYONE MAKE AN EXAMPLE OUT OF HER

    Gooey on
    919UOwT.png
This discussion has been closed.