Quantcast

Categorized | Featured, News

The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools

Screen-Shot-2013-03-21-at-9_23_17-PM

Don’t you just love it when liberals pull out the First Amendment to silence the critics of the far left?

This is not new. Liberals like to use the first amendment to spew their radical agenda and then try to turn it around when challenged. And at the same time, these same people are willing to attack Christians for expressing the same unalienable right on religion.

In case you missed it, the Hanover School System has been showing a video that depicts America as the aggressors in 9/11 and teaches the kids that America deserved what it got.

And of course the teachers and administrators line up to push back claiming they are just trying to present “both” sides – without ever having looked at the American “side”. And worse, they do not preface this 9/11 video with facts. Facts like this film was shot in Muslim countries where they do not have freedom of speech. Had these students come out against the Islamic line that America is to blame for 9/11, they would have been executed before the day was out. No trial. Just dead.

And the Times Dispatch reports that a student, Daniel Longest, is upset and fears that the new rule Hanover Schools will be following that parents must be notified when a controversial video is shown will harm his education.

The Patrick Henry High School senior said a new requirement for teachers to obtain permission from principals and parents to use a list of controversial books and films is harming the quality of his education. This new requirement was detailed in a memo sent from school administrators to school staff members last month.

“Putting books on a controversial list … is restricting knowledge,” Longest said. “The government is getting in between what the teachers want to teach and students want to learn.

The purpose of the new requirement is not to restrict, but rather to control quality and ensure that if students are receiving controversial instruction in school that parents are notified.

Obviously the Hanover Schools are pressuring the students because they do not like to be restricted and believe their right to teach anything they want to the students is absolute. Well, it’s not. The community and the parents decide what is appropriate. And this is settled law.

So for all the hand-wringing and crying from Daniel Longest and the absurd article from Michael Paul Williams in the Times Dispatch, you all need to chill and know that if this case reaches the point that parents decide to go to court, the parents will likely prevail.

In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1988 – now called the Hazelwood Standard, the student run newspaper published articles on abortion and divorce. The principal believed the abortion article was inappropriate and ordered it removed. And in the divorce article a student’s name was used and the principal ordered that article removed because the boy’s parents were not given the chance to respond.

The students took the principal to court in a case that eventually wound up in the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in favor of the principal writing “educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns”.

The Court ruled that “a school must be able to set high standards for the student speech that is disseminated under its auspices — standards that may be higher than those demanded by some newspaper publishers or theatrical producers in the ‘real world.'” In addition, the ruling contains broad language on what type of speech school officials may censor, including any speech that might “associate the school with any position other than neutrality on matters of political controversy.

The Court then defined school-sponsored expression equally broadly, including “school-sponsored publications, theatrical productions, and other expressive activities that students, parents and members of the public might reasonably perceive to bear the imprimatur of the school . . . whether or not they occur in a traditional classroom setting, so long as they are supervised by faculty members and designed to impart particular knowledge or skills to student participants and audiences.”

Since the ruling, courts have applied the Hazelwood standard not only to school-sponsored newspapers, but also to the selection of school band songs, school assignments, and even student campaign speeches.

And in Arizona, the schools were teaching a controversial class on Mexican-American studies. Opponents claimed:

But conservative opponents accused the teachers of encouraging students to adopt left-wing ideas and resent white people, a charge the teachers deny. Aiming squarely at Tucson’s Mexican-American Studies program, the Arizona legislature passed HB 2281 — a law banning courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, foster racial resentment, are designed for students of a particular ethnic group or that advocate ethnic solidarity.

Sound familiar?

A Federal Court upheld the law.

So we see that the schools may legally and within the First Amendment control the speech of students in any school related setting. And the schools do not have a right to teach anything they want, especially if it subverts young minds against America – which the 9/11 video clearly does.

And the left loves to redefine and misstate the objections of those who oppose their views. They accuse others of censorship when it is they who are often guilty of censorship by teaching only the radical left viewpoint and considering that to be  “both sides” with little or no time spent on the views they oppose.

There are plenty of videos out there that can fairly and accurately show both views. This joint interview by Megyn Kelly of Dinesh D’Souza, filmmaker and Conservative activist and Ward Churchill, the left wing radical college professor who blames America for 9/11.

 

And the fact is, if the schools wanted to present “both” views, Dinesh D’Sousa’s film “America” should be required viewing in class to make sure the students receive a fair pro-American view.

I created this video below to show where we are heading in Hanover Schools if we do not carefully watch what is being taught. This is a bit tongue in cheek (today) but when you listen to people like Ward Churchill, Bill Ayres and the people in this 9/11 video in question, is it really so far fetched?

Don’t you just love it when liberals pull out the First Amendment to silence the critics of the far left?

This is not new. Liberals like to use the first amendment to spew their radical agenda and then try to turn it around when challenged. And at the same time, these same people are willing to attack Christians for expressing the same unalienable right on religion.

In case you missed it, the Hanover School System has been showing a video that depicts America as the aggressors in 9/11 and teaches the kids that America deserved what it got.

And of course the teachers and administrators line up to push back claiming they are just trying to present “both” sides – without ever having looked at the American “side”. And worse, they do not preface this 9/11 video with facts. Facts like this film was shot in Muslim countries where they do not have freedom of speech. Had these students come out against the Islamic line that America is to blame for 9/11, they would have been executed before the day was out. No trial. Just dead.

And the Times Dispatch reports that a student, Daniel Longest, is upset and fears that the new rule Hanover Schools will be following that parents must be notified when a controversial video is shown will harm his education.

The Patrick Henry High School senior said a new requirement for teachers to obtain permission from principals and parents to use a list of controversial books and films is harming the quality of his education. This new requirement was detailed in a memo sent from school administrators to school staff members last month.

“Putting books on a controversial list … is restricting knowledge,” Longest said. “The government is getting in between what the teachers want to teach and students want to learn.

The purpose of the new requirement is not to restrict, but rather to control quality and ensure that if students are receiving controversial instruction in school that parents are notified.

Obviously the Hanover Schools are pressuring the students because they do not like to be restricted and believe their right to teach anything they want to the students is absolute. Well, it’s not. The community and the parents decide what is appropriate. And this is settled law.

So for all the hand-wringing and crying from Daniel Longest and the absurd article from Michael Paul Williams in the Times Dispatch, you all need to chill and know that if this case reaches the point that parents decide to go to court, the parents will likely prevail.

In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1988 – now called the Hazelwood Standard, the student run newspaper published articles on abortion and divorce. The principal believed the abortion article was inappropriate and ordered it removed. And in the divorce article a student’s name was used and the principal ordered that article removed because the boy’s parents were not given the chance to respond.

The students took the principal to court in a case that eventually wound up in the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in favor of the principal writing “educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns”.

The Court ruled that “a school must be able to set high standards for the student speech that is disseminated under its auspices — standards that may be higher than those demanded by some newspaper publishers or theatrical producers in the ‘real world.'” In addition, the ruling contains broad language on what type of speech school officials may censor, including any speech that might “associate the school with any position other than neutrality on matters of political controversy.

The Court then defined school-sponsored expression equally broadly, including “school-sponsored publications, theatrical productions, and other expressive activities that students, parents and members of the public might reasonably perceive to bear the imprimatur of the school . . . whether or not they occur in a traditional classroom setting, so long as they are supervised by faculty members and designed to impart particular knowledge or skills to student participants and audiences.”

Since the ruling, courts have applied the Hazelwood standard not only to school-sponsored newspapers, but also to the selection of school band songs, school assignments, and even student campaign speeches.

And in Arizona, the schools were teaching a controversial class on Mexican-American studies. Opponents claimed:

But conservative opponents accused the teachers of encouraging students to adopt left-wing ideas and resent white people, a charge the teachers deny. Aiming squarely at Tucson’s Mexican-American Studies program, the Arizona legislature passed HB 2281 — a law banning courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, foster racial resentment, are designed for students of a particular ethnic group or that advocate ethnic solidarity.

Sound familiar?

A Federal Court upheld the law.

So we see that the schools may legally and within the First Amendment control the speech of students in any school related setting. And the schools do not have a right to teach anything they want, especially if it subverts young minds against America – which the 9/11 video clearly does.

And the left loves to redefine and misstate the objections of those who oppose their views. They accuse others of censorship when it is they who are often guilty of censorship by teaching only the radical left viewpoint and considering that to be  “both sides” with little or no time spent on the views they oppose.

There are plenty of videos out there that can fairly and accurately show both views. This joint interview by Megyn Kelly of Dinesh D’Souza, filmmaker and Conservative activist and Ward Churchill, the left wing radical college professor who blames America for 9/11.

I created this tongue in cheek video below to show the way Hanover Schools are headed. But is this even the future?

 

 

About Tom White

Tom is a US Navy Veteran, owns an Insurance Agency and is currently an IT Manager for a Virginia Distributor. He has been published in American Thinker, currently writes for the Richmond Examiner as well as Virginia Right! Blog.Tom lives in Hanover County, Va and is involved in politics at every level and is a Recovering Republican who has finally had enough of the War on Conservatives in progress with the Leadership of the GOP on a National Level.

13 Responses to “The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools”

  1. Green Jeans says:

    Hanover voters and citizens have an opportunity in 2015 to change the school board, which is appointed by the Hanover County Board of Supervisors- It’s called Voting – in the ELECTIONS.

    If you don’t like the School Board in Hanover County then Vote to Remove all 7 Hanover Board of Supervisors- they appointed this LEFTIST school board.

    The Hanover County Supervisors- all 7 of them- ran as Republicans- maybe voters should stop going to the polls and voting for the R candidate and actually ask the candiates questions during the campaigns about their values and those of the school board appointments.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. […] VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  2. […] VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  3. […] VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  4. […] VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  5. […] VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  6. […] VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  7. […] Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  8. […] Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  9. […] Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  10. […] Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  11. […] VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]

  12. […] Seventh place *t* with 1/3 vote –VA Right! – The Courts Side With the Removal of the 9/11 Video From Hanover Schools […]


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge

Tom White Says:

Nothing is more conservative than a republican wanting to get their majority back. And nothing is more liberal than a republican WITH a majority.

Check out NewsMax!

Sign up for Virginia Right Once Daily Email Digest

No Spam - ever! We send a daily email with the posts of the previous day. Unsubscribe at any time.
* = required field

Submit a Blog Post!

Submit a Blog Post for our 'Boots on the Ground' feature

Click Here for Instructions on How to Submit a Post

Google Ad

Google Ad

Follow Us Anywhere!

Google Ad

Archives

Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
%d bloggers like this: