Political correctness devours yet another college "Two students face impeachment for wearing mini-sombreros", the motto of Catherine Rampell of The Washington Post since 2016, I strongly disagree with Rampell that these two students should face impeachment by their Administrators for wearing mini-sombreros. What evil transgression did they commit? Thievery, plagiarism, bullying? They committed no evil transgression whatsoever they only attended a party hosting their friend where they wore mini-sombreros. The administrators of Bowdoin College went way over their heads in political disciplinary actions to innocent students wearing mini-sombreros at a birthday party celebrating their friend's birthday enjoying signing happy birthday to him …show more content…
For instance, some students attended a party with a Cold War theme at the same moment the two students attended the birthday party wearing mini-sombreros. The Bowdoin Administration Board estimated the acceptable political policies such the Warfare party except, the birthday party because two students wore mini-sombreros in-place of Soviet culture clothing such as hats and coats. The Administration Board were white and some of the guests were black. Why should these two students face impeachment proceedings? They did nothing wrong attending that birthday party with mini-sombreros because their theme was a fiesta celebrating a friend's birthday. The Administration office members decided to send more than one email school-wide to notify students they suspect an "act of ethnic stereotyping" (Rampell 1). Why? Because, of an invitation that must have read: the party subject is liquor, you're allowed to use the liquor any way you choose. We're not saying the party has a feast, and definitely, there was no feast. This invitation must have caused the College Administration Board to have extreme caution about people's private information being jeopardized. For instance, all students who attended parties consequently
Over five years have passed since high school senior Joseph Frederick was suspended for 10 days by school principal Deborah Morse after refusing her request to take down a 14-foot banner he was displaying at a school-sanctioned event which read “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” Born as a seemingly trivial civil lawsuit in which Frederick sued the school for violating his First Amendment rights to free speech, the case made its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the long-awaited ruling of Morse v. Frederick has finally been released. In a 5-4 split decision, the court ruled in favor of Morse and upheld the school board’s original ruling that Morse was acting within her rights and did not violate Frederick’s First Amendment rights by taking away his banner and suspending him for 10 days. The controversial decision has led followers of the case to question the future of student speech rights.
The case under review involves Bill Foster, who attends a large high school in the northeastern part of the United States. Due to a strong gang presence in the high school, the administrators created a strict policy which denies students the wearing of earrings, jewelry, athletic caps, and emblems. Foster was suspended for wearing an earring to school. He claims that wearing the earring was a form of his self expression and individuality; his intention was not as a gang emblem, but rather a means to attract girls. Foster is suing the school district for violation of his freedom of expression right, guaranteed under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
With this movie being based on the nonfiction book titled All the President’s Men, the governmental aspects of the film were very true. The corruptness of this extensive story makes it seem almost as though it is fiction and unable to happen, but this was an important piece of history and it very much did so occur. There are several aspects from this film that directly relate with things we have learned in class, including the characteristics of governmental officials in Washington D.C., the process of being elected president of the United States, the supreme court, and the process for impeachment of a
In a bigger picture, students don’t come to school for a fashion show they come to school for an education. Somewhere along the line some students and parents have forgotten that simple fact. In some districts, like Wilson County Schools, the dress code violations got so out of hand that administration had to threaten suspensions, “During the first six days of the policy change 184 high school students were suspended.” (Creech, 1). The Lima Senior High School campus made the same decision as the Wilson County Schools. On Tuesday January 27, 2009, the Lima City Schools suspended about 164 students for dress code violations. They both knew that their students were having problems following the rules, and since the punishments that were set didn’t affect the students they did the one thing that got the students attention.
Almost ten years in the past, Bill Clinton’s story in the White House is all but written in stone. No matter the accomplishments the administration accomplished in its time, Clinton’s extramarital affair and subsequent impeachment will pervade, if not dominate, the president’s legacy. The major facts stand mostly undisputed: the president engaged in sexual activity with Monica Lewinsky and maneuvered to keep the affair secret, culminating in explicit lies to a grand jury. Republican opponents of the president had unreserved political motivations to remove the president from office. Revisiting this scandal with these facts would be both fatiguing and evasive of the underlying issues at stake. To truly gauge the justness of Clinton’s impeachment, one must look at the original intent of impeachment as well as its history with regard to other presidents. Furthermore, analyzing the investigation itself requires understanding specific motives and laws that both Democrats and Republicans took advantage of. Here we examine the ethics of the impeachment of former President Bill Clinton with regard to original Constitutional intent, historical precedent, and the political climate during his administration.
Jahn, Karon L. “School Dress Codes v. The First Amendment: Ganging up on Student Attire.”
The first amendment states some of the freedoms we have. These are freedom of religion and freedom of expression. These include the right to free speech, press, assembly, and to petition the government. The reason for wanting to wear the black armbands was to show their anti-war belief in the Vietnam War. Rebelling against the authority figures’ ruling, three students wore the armbands and got suspended. The students’ names are John F. Tinker, who was 15 years old at the time, Christopher Eckhardt, 16 years old, and 13 year old Mary Beth Tinker (John’s younger sister). Getting suspended, the students did not return until after New Year’s Day (FORTAS). “This case was significant because the justices stated, “students do not abandon their civil rights at the school house door....” The school is not allowed to limit a student or teachers first amendment...
Many public schools are requiring students to wear uniform to help deplete bullying. With that said many students have either been victimized do to bullying or bullied victims in the past. Bullying happens almost every day whether in one’s own neighborhood, a local park and or at school. Children fine many things to bully others about; such as fashion, gang affiliations, school spirit. Therefore, the debate over uniforms and dress codes is long going and also familiar Kizis, S. (2000, 09). Schools then experimented with an option for uniforms to see if any changes in behavior will evolve. Moreover some education facilities find that a supplement solution that helps eliminate some aspects of bullying is an implication of school uniforms.
Censorship even extends to school dress codes. A school dress code is a set of rules about what clothing may or may not be worn in schools. As previously mentioned, a set of criteria are used to determine whether or not student expression should be censored in schools. For censorship involving dress codes, there are two: the “Tinker disruption standard” and the “forum issue,” which determine if student expression disrupts the school day and by who it is regulated, respectively (Emert). One case involving censorship of the school dress code was of a boy who violated his school’s dress code (Nguyen). Zachary Guiles, a thirteen year old boy, had to cover up his shirt denigrating former President George W. Bush, which violated his First Amendment rights (Nguyen). The shirt showed President Bush’s head on a chicken with derogatory names. It had images of oil rigs and lines of cocaine (Nguyen). A student, who had opposite views as Guiles, notified the administration of the shirt (Nguyen). Guiles was sent home on May 13, 2004, when he didn’t cover up the shirt after being asked to. The next day, Guiles’ wore the shirt, which was covered with tape and the word ‘censored’ was written on the tape (Nguyen). The school which Guiles attended, Williamstown Middle High School in Vermont, said that the shirt violated the dress code. Guiles’ parents felt that their son’s “rights to engage in political speech” were violated, and they sued the school (Nguyen). Guiles did not win the lawsuit in December 2004, when the US District Court for Vermont ruled in favor of the school, saying the images were “’plainly offensive and inappropriate’” (Nguyen). Guiles appealed, and the Second Circuit court ruled that the images were not offensive an...
One of the greatest controversies that is spreading throughout high schools in the United States is parents and their children against the enforcement of their school’s uniform policy. More schools have been adopting uniform policies within the past decade. Rules contained in the policy that are implemented range from wearing certain types of tops (shirts) in specified colors to students being required to tuck in their shirts. In the past, uniforms were exclusively for students who attended private schools because they were “well-off”, but now uniforms are being seen more frequently in public schools on students of all economic levels. Having gone through a school system that considered adopting a uniform policy, I would have to press against the issue of mandated uniforms, because it is simply un-American and unjust.
middle of paper ... ... Retrieved 11 20, 2010, from First Amendment Center: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/studentexpression/topic.aspx?topic=pledge. Jr., D. L. (2010, 11 19). Student Expression. Retrieved 11 23, 2010, from First Amendment Center: http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/studentexpression/topic.aspx?topic=clothing_dress_codes_uniforms.
School Uniforms: A Positive or Negative Effect? Today, school uniforms and dress codes are controversial. School uniforms for high school students have numerous positive effects, but at the same time, they have a variety of negative effects too. School uniforms positive effects are shown through attendance records, academics, and behavior; but its negative effects violates ones individuality and increases the amount of money spent on clothes.
Is her midriff showing? Are her shorts to short? Is her bra visible? Do these shoes look right with her outfit? These are all conflicts that could be avoided with school uniforms. School uniforms are special clothes worn by students from a particular school. They typically include bottoms in neutral colors like khaki, black, or even dark green, and tops that are either neutral or in the school colors. Sometimes the uniforms will include a special striped tie in the school colors for both girls and boys. The girls may also have the option to wear pants, skirts, or dresses. Students may or may not be required to wear specific shoes. Historically private schools mainly required uniforms which began in the sixteenth century in England. A statement
Uniforms in our Public Schools. School Uniforms are a logical choice for the public school venue. Uniforms prevent students from a lower income background from being singled out for poorly made or cheap clothing, prevents use of gang colors, allows for certain safety measures, and allows teachers to form impressions of students based on actions and work rather than dress code choices. Since the 1990s schools have reported amazing results by mandating a school uniform policy. Konheim-Kalkstein, Y. L (2006): “School uniforms, proponents have said, can lead to improved discipline and classroom behavior, increased school attendance, respect for teachers, better school performance, higher student self-esteem and confidence, lower clothing costs, promotion of group spirit, reduction in social stratification, and lower rates of violence and crime.
(“Quotes about Uniform Policy” 1). Theodore R. Mitchell, UCLA School of Education says, "I think its great news for all of us who have advocated school uniforms as a way of building community.” A pressing issue, bullying has become a big problem in many school, and to eliminate this problem, school policies should require students to wear uniforms. Many people believe that school uniforms build the community into a safer, more positive environment. School uniforms improve school academics, prevent gang violence, and assist families, who can not afford expensive clothing.