primetime
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2005
- Messages
- 13,627
- Reaction score
- 15,375
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.This is patently unAmerican.
If you're going to go corporate (and that's what the NFL is, a corporation) by allowing people to show their support of one entity of this monopolistic corporation, then you have opened the doors to support of other teams.
The principal--based on his own quotes and his bias--has a brain that is incapable of grasping such nuances, and I would be far more concerned about the quality of education at that school if I were a parent, than I would be with dress codes.
Anyone here saying that the kid got what he deserved would be singing another tune if a kid who moved from Brockton was wearing his Welker jersey in a Pats/Saints Superbowl and frankly speaking on behalf of all of us who show our team support OUTSIDE of the region it takes a lot more guts when you're not in the majority!
This is patently unAmerican.
If you're going to go corporate (and that's what the NFL is, a corporation) by allowing people to show their support of one entity of this monopolistic corporation, then you have opened the doors to support of other teams.
The principal--based on his own quotes and his bias--has a brain that is incapable of grasping such nuances, and I would be far more concerned about the quality of education at that school if I were a parent, than I would be with dress codes.
This is patently unAmerican.
If you're going to go corporate (and that's what the NFL is, a corporation) by allowing people to show their support of one entity of this monopolistic corporation, then you have opened the doors to support of other teams.
The principal--based on his own quotes and his bias--has a brain that is incapable of grasping such nuances, and I would be far more concerned about the quality of education at that school if I were a parent, than I would be with dress codes.
Another false assumption, just like the guy calling me a 'homer' for having the opinion I do (which is doubly funny/ironic because I was called a 'frontrunner' in the Manning-Brady thread for saying Manning would be ahead if he won Sunday). The kid broke a rule, I don't care what jersey he was wearing. You can agree or disagree with me but pulling the 'homer' card is a weak argument especially if you've read my posts.
Look, I live in enemy territory too. I got eggs thrown at me and several people getting my face for wearing Patriots gear to Heinz field a few years ago. But if my school was like this one, I'd either just wear my regular uniform or wear my Pats stuff and accept whatever punishment for it. Those are your options, live with it.
Ok, I used sweeping terms like "Everyone" when I wasn't refering to your posts and for that I semi-apologize, I think I was more against anyone suggesting that the kid should get punched in the face more than anything and that's just absurd!
How's what I said UnAmerican. If you want to take your stand, go for it. But accept the consequences. If the kid becomes an icon and there is a mass revolution in the south for allowing clear breaches of the uniform code, great for him!
The school has a dress code. You can wear the uniform - or, on that one day, wear black and gold. He disagreed with the rule and chose the path of civil disobedience. Considering he knew the rule and had been warned beforehand, the student and his father knew their would be consequences. At that point he had the option to change his shirt, but chose to go home instead.
While I don't care for the one and only option other than the uniform, the family knew the rules. If they felt so strongly as to get the ACLU involved, why couldn't they take the time to meet with the principal ahead of time and plead their case?
To me this is more of an example of people being overly sue-happy than denial of freedom to express yourself.
In hindsight they probably should have let the student wear the Colt's jersey just to avoid the media distraction and legal fees. The problem is they were backed into a corner; they had already made the rule and warned him it would be enforced. If they did nothing it sends a message that their rules mean nothing and can be broken without repercussion.
As for freedom of expression, I don't see how it applies. I'd like to express myself by wearing Pats gear to work every day, but the dress code doesn't allow for that. But as soon as I leave work I'm free to express myself however I want.
Oh I definitely agree with you here. The first few posts in the thread are a bit over the top. But I think they were joking (I hope they were).
I see the point you guys are trying to make I just don't think sports is really worth bowling over authority to make a point like this. If it was something religion related like saying you can wear your Kufi today but not your Yamaka then I could see that. I hope that doesn't spark another discussion here but just an example
Oh I definitely agree with you here. The first few posts in the thread are a bit over the top. But I think they were joking (I hope they were).
I see the point you guys are trying to make I just don't think sports is really worth bowling over authority to make a point like this. If it was something religion related like saying you can wear your Kufi today but not your Yamaka then I could see that. I hope that doesn't spark another discussion here but just an example
It's not a stand to ask that your rights be respected. Allowing Saints jerseys and disallowing Colts jerseys isn't a rule, it's just jackarseity.
If the principal made a rule that said, kids formerly from Indiana need to spend lunchtime in a bathroom stall, would you follow it? This rule is not as loony as that but it's close.
How's what I said UnAmerican. If you want to take your stand, go for it. But accept the consequences. If the kid becomes an icon and there is a mass revolution in the south for allowing clear breaches of the uniform code, great for him!
Like I said in the last post, there are some situations that are worth taking a stand for. In my opinion, not being able to wear your favorite NFL teams colors isn't on my list. We've all followed a rule that we didn't agree with in the past, and one like this, just not worth it for me. The kid and his family chose to fight, we'll see where they get with it.
To tell you the truth, I laughed at those early posts because I hate all things Colt-y, and thought this was funny. But then I read the article and realized that the situation was way over the top. I thought the kid had to go home for his own safety. I didn't realize he was tossed out of school and the principal told him to go back to Indiana. Suddenly things weren't so funny any more.
This unnecessary restriction was imposed in a forum, a school, where Mr. Frost had a reasonable expectation that he would be allowed to express his reasonable and legitimate allegiance in a reasonable and responsible way when others were being allowed, and indeed encouraged, so to express themselves. This is a classic case of abridging the rights of Free Speech of a minority, which sought only reasonable expression of such rights, while permitting the expression of the majority.
Yes, but the first amendment is precisely about you, me or anyone else not being able to define the limits of reasonable Free Speech and what is "worth taking a stand for." The fact that the circumstances under discussion are "not on [your] list" is, with all respect, irrelevant.
Who said that supporting the Colts is reasonable or responsible?
Anyways refer to my last post for my response. I'm really not trying to get into a big debate over this. If I were in the kids shoes I would've worn a Colts jersey inside a Saints sweatshirt. Then stand on top of my desk and rip the sweatshirt off at the end of the day when I was about to go home anyway.