Read this! fucking unbelievable!

[BaalChatzaf]

http://www.nj.com/hssports/blog/football/index.ssf/2013/09/new_jersey_institutes_ban_on_biased_language_at_high_school_football_games.html#incart_m-rpt-1

Using the N-word at a high school football game can get the "offender" registered with the NJ Attorney General office.

Using the F-word can get one in trouble also:

Calling an opponent a "faggot" also will end a player’s day immediately. In fact, any verbal, written or physical conduct related to race, religion, ethnicity, gender, disability or sexual orientation is grounds for disqualification. After that, it can get a little tricky. In some instances, using the "F-word" is sure to get you tossed; in others, referees seemingly will have leeway to chalk it up to good-natured trash talking.

It is as if the First Amendment never happened.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[anthony]

Now, now Ba'al - one more infraction of using the F word, and I must report you.

(Does this issue mean you are going to move out of your state?)

[Selene]

But everyone gets a trophy because everyone is special!

[syrakusos]

The First Amendment protects you against the government. It does not empower you to assault other people with words. The Supreme Court long ago recognized the "fighting words" doctrine. Anyone who reads science fiction should wonder what it would be like if we gave up aggression on this planet. Calling people names while bashing them in a football game seems appropriate.

[Selene]

The First Amendment protects you against the government. It does not empower you to assault other people with words. The Supreme Court long ago recognized the "fighting words" doctrine. Anyone who reads science fiction should wonder what it would be like if we gave up aggression on this planet. Calling people names while bashing them in a football game seems appropriate.

However, a case can be made that a significant percentage of these teams are extensions of the educational system which is a subset of the State and the Federal government through subsidies, grants and direct support.

Therefore, it is a potential violation of the 1st and 14th Amendment.

[Francisco Ferrer]

The root problem is state control of education. Most high school athletic associations are government-run. We have no way to predict exactly how things would be different if government were to exit the field of education entirely. One thing is for sure: there would be far more choice.

[anthony]

The First Amendment protects you against the government. It does not empower you to assault other people with words. The Supreme Court long ago recognized the "fighting words" doctrine. Anyone who reads science fiction should wonder what it would be like if we gave up aggression on this planet. Calling people names while bashing them in a football game seems appropriate.

Seems to me that what's in school (public or private) should stay in school, and be disciplined there. (Naturally, also calling upon the parents). It's reporting up the line to outside authorities that disturbs me most.

[syrakusos]

The First Amendment protects you against the government. It does not empower you to assault other people with words. The Supreme Court long ago recognized the "fighting words" doctrine. Anyone who reads science fiction should wonder what it would be like if we gave up aggression on this planet. Calling people names while bashing them in a football game seems appropriate.

However, a case can be made that a significant percentage of these teams are extensions of the educational system which is a subset of the State and the Federal government through subsidies, grants and direct support.

Therefore, it is a potential violation of the 1st and 14th Amendment.

When I was a campus patrol officer in 2005-2006, we were made aware that Washtenaw Community College is not a First Amendment space. The county taxpayers vote for millages to support it. The county voters choose the Board of Trustees. We could stop our Congressman from collecting ballot signatures. We could stop people from distributing Bibles.

From 2012, this reminder from the Board:

In promoting freedom of expression among its students, the Board reaffirms its commitment to preserving College property as a nonpublic forum as to non-students. Unlike the public streets, sidewalks, and parks, the property, buildings, or facilities owned or controlled by the College are not open for assembly, speech, or other activities. The Board delegates to the Office of Conference Services the authority, consistent with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Board policy, to establish reasonable regulations for the use of campus grounds and facilities by non-students.

http://www4.wccnet.edu/trustees/policies/index.php?policy=8018

The First Amendment protects you from the government. It does not give you the right to assault other people on government property.

whYNOT:"Seems to me that what's in school (public or private) should stay in school, and be disciplined there. (Naturally, also calling upon the parents). It's reporting up the line to outside authorities that disturbs me most.

We made the same argument in the 1960s when we wanted to occupy the administration building but not be removed by the police. When I was enrolled in criminology at Eastern Michigan University in 2008, we had a murder in a dormitory on campus. Do you think that the Student Judiciary should have handled that and then maybe expelled the perpetrator -- and that would be the end of it? Do you have some standard for knowing which violations of which person's rights should be limited to campus judiciary and which deserve the protection of government "up the line"?

I do have one example: for academic dishonesty or research fraud, they can take your degree away.

[Selene]

From 2012, this reminder from the Board:

In promoting freedom of expression among its students, the Board reaffirms its commitment to preserving College property as a nonpublic forum as to non-students. Unlike the public streets, sidewalks, and parks, the property, buildings, or facilities owned or controlled by the College are not open for assembly, speech, or other activities. The Board delegates to the Office of Conference Services the authority, consistent with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Board policy, to establish reasonable regulations for the use of campus grounds and facilities by non-students.

http://www4.wccnet.edu/trustees/policies/index.php?policy=8018

The First Amendment protects you from the government. It does not give you the right to assault other people on government property.

The expression "nigger" when used by an individual is protected speech...

In accordance with the educational mission of the College, the Board intends to provide students enrolled at the College with a forum for free expression. The Board delegates to the Associate Vice President for Student Services the authority to establish means for students to have access to College grounds, facilities, and resources for the purpose of expression, and, consistent with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, reasonable regulations to preserve safety and orderly conduct and to prevent litter or disruption of College operations.

I believe we are making different arguments here Michael.

A...

[caroljane]

I bet it is helicopter parents behind this move, and school trying to protect itself from lawsuits if the little darlings get their feelings hurt on the sports field.

[BaalChatzaf]

Now, now Ba'al - one more infraction of using the F word, and I must report you.

(Does this issue mean you are going to move out of your state?)

No. My grandchildren live here.

[BaalChatzaf]

The root problem is state control of education. Most high school athletic associations are government-run. We have no way to predict exactly how things would be different if government were to exit the field of education entirely. One thing is for sure: there would be far more choice.

We have a separation of Church and State. How about a separation of School and State?

[jts]

The root problem is state control of education. Most high school athletic associations are government-run. We have no way to predict exactly how things would be different if government were to exit the field of education entirely. One thing is for sure: there would be far more choice.

We have a separation of Church and State. How about a separation of School and State?

We should have a separation between State and damn near everything else. Government should have nothing to do with:

-- religion

-- education (Most schools are government indoctrination centres.)

-- economy

-- money

-- banking (Listen to Yaron Brook.)

-- business

-- agriculture (Look at what happened with the collective farms in the Soviet Union.)

-- wages and prices ("The Government Against the Economy" by George Reisman)

-- doctoring (It started off protecting against snake oil, and now almost everything that is not snake oil is illegal.)

-- food safety (The FDA [Fraud and Deception Administration] approves only bad things, never good things.)

-- etc etc etc

-- and probably damn near anything else you can think of

Government should protect individual rights and do nothing else, and I'm not sure about protecting individual rights. It seems government screws up on that like they screw up on everything else.

Having government protect individual rights is like having the wolf guard the chicken house.

Government is predator; the people are prey.

Government is the farmer; the people are the cattle.

Government does care about the people; like a farmer cares about health and welfare of his cattle that he is preparing for slaughter.

The correct rate of tax is the rate that brings in the most revenue for government; if the tax rate is too high, the revenue goes down; this is the Laffer curve.

A government might start half ass decent. But it is the nature of government to tend toward evil. There is no limit to how evil government can become, except poverty of the people who pay taxes. This tendency toward evil can be somewhat resisted by Constitutions and rebellions and the blood of martyrs.

Government is fed by taxes. In England 1000 AD, if you were a typical person, you probably lived in a one room hut with a dirt floor and you probably had to work sun-up to sun-down every day to keep body and soul together and your life probably was brutal, nasty, short. How much could the government tax you? Government had to leave you with enough to live on; otherwise government would lose you as a source of revenue. In 2013, if you are a typical person, government can tax you more than half of your income and you can still live a wonderful life. This means modern governments have more power, which means more power to control your life.

The sequence of events is:

1. Freedom leads to prosperity. (Everybody who knows simple economics knows this.)

2. Prosperity leads to more revenue for government via taxes.

3. More revenue for government leads to more government power.

4. More government power leads to more tyranny.

This is why the USA, once the most free of all countries, is becoming the most tyrannical of all countries.

[BaalChatzaf]

Are you suggesting we dispense with government? If so the country won't last a year since government is the only agency that has any experience is funding, arming and deploying our armed forces.

[jts]

Are you suggesting we dispense with government? If so the country won't last a year since government is the only agency that has any experience is funding, arming and deploying our armed forces.

Paranoia. Stand down and they will stand down.

Your government tells you lies to justify war. Don't believe anything your government says. They probably couldn't tell the truth even if they tried to.

What most likely will happen is Russia, China, and a bunch more countries are going to get so &^%$# pig biting mad at the USA that some day when the economy of the USA is collapsed enough that it can't fight wars, they will gang up against the USA and there will be World War 3, probably with nukes.

[syrakusos]

Jerry, when our economy collapses, theirs will have, too: theirs first, as the most collectivized.

[jts]

Jerry, when our economy collapses, theirs will have, too: theirs first, as the most collectivized.

That may be. But His Royal Messiahship Obama seems hell bent determined to destroy the USA economy on purpose. And Ron Paul said many times that the USA is broke and can't afford wars, and yet they are taking on more wars. And according to wiki, China is the world's fastest growing major economy.

Government is a cancer. If you had a cancer, how much of it would you want to get rid of? 80% perhaps? Maybe 90%? You probably would want to get rid of all of it. But government is a necessary evil. There is no solution. The human race is screwed.

[BaalChatzaf]

Are you suggesting we dispense with government? If so the country won't last a year since government is the only agency that has any experience is funding, arming and deploying our armed forces.

Paranoia. Stand down and they will stand down.

Where does naive end and bullshit out of one's mind begin?

Ba'al Chatzaf