Good article.

Why doesn't the author mention that he does occasional guest commentary on the Michael Savage radio show?

Selwyn -- RE: For how long will we continue to respect the rule of law when that law is handed down by those who believe in the law of their rule?

Gee, I don't know. Bush and Cheney regularly delcare that they are above the law, outside the law, in an undisclosed secure location hiding from the law, and yet Republican true believers continue to passively accept the Bush Administration's desecration of the Constitution. Apparently, these people, like you, believe that blind obedience to "just hierarchies" and "authority figures" supersedes democracy and representative government. Strangely, although I think I might be able to find a discussion of why some people desperately need to subjugate their own autonomy to authority figures in the section of a psychology textbook discussing aberrant psychology and defective ego formation, there is absolutely nothing anywhere in the constitution that citizens -- or even students or children -- are supposed to take their place in a hierarchy, just or otherwise.

There are questions, practical, moral, and otherwise, about the degree to which the natural rights of minors should be respected, but the idea that minors are their parents' chattel property is absurd.

RE: Writing for the majority in a five to four decision in favor of the school, Chief Justice John Roberts reasoned that the First Amendment should not be applied in this case because the student was encouraging drug use.

Roberts' reasoning was flawed here on a number of levels. He appears to be arguing for a particularly literal and stupid kind of prior restraint here, suggesting that students have First Amendment rights as long as they espouse ideas that are acceptable to a principal or a community. So while "Bong Hits for Jesus" is prohibited, presumably "Ritalin Doses for Jesus" would be acceptable.

RE: Writing in his concurrence, Justice Clarence Thomas drove to the heart of the matter in saying,
". . . it cannot seriously be suggested that the First Amendment 'freedom of speech' encompasses a student's right to speak in public schools."

Typical Thomas, and typical right-wing looniness, and like Roberts, Thomas does not seem to understand the internal logic of his own position. The question, of course, is does a minor have a right to speech anywhere. And while both Thomas and Roberts can reasonably argue that there can be restrictions on a student's right to free speech, if they think that this right does not exist at all, they have to put forth an affirmative argument, and offer something much more substantive than an appeal to hierarchy and authority.


RE: The fact is that we don't ascribe to minors an adult set of rights. Minors may not buy alcohol or cigarettes, drive before a certain age, join the military, get married or enter into other kinds of legal contracts.

Actually, minors, that is people under the age of 21 can join the military and drive cars. Minors can certainly bear arms. Growing up in the South, I would regularly go hunting with my .22 caliber rifle, from about age 12. In most states, the age of consent as well as the age that a person can get married is not in sync with the age at which a minor can enter into a legal contract, and even here there is often the concept of an "emancipated minor" which allows people under the age of 21 to be recognized as adults for most legal and social purposes.

You stumble badly here. Obviously, society does not impose a hard bright line separating a legal minor from an adult. Heck, a 21 year old cannot run for president.

As for the founders not recognizing a right of children to be sassy brats, Ben Franklin wrote a newspaper column using the pseudonym "Mrs. Silence Dogood" when he was 15, and Alexander Hamilton wrote a series of pamphlets attacking the Tory position when he was 16 or 18. The Tories, by the way, were big believers in hierarchy and authority.

Why doesn't the author mention that he does occasional guest commentary on the Michael Savage radio show?

Perhaps because even Selwyn is embarrassed by Michael Savage?

Should Selwyn be investigated for his enthusiastic promotion of drug use? After all, he boldly said "B*ng h*ts for jesus" (which I've delicately bowdlerized to protect children).

Minors can't buy cigarettes now...but they surely could when I was a kid. My mother used to send me to the store all the time for smokes and no one ever said a word about it.

And in most other countries the drinking age is lower than here in the states. Hell, it was 18 when I was 18!

Just because the govt decides to regulate every freaking thing in the country doesn't mean squat anyway. Pots been illegal for what...60 or 70 years in this country...and why, because some bureaucratic moron said that's the way it should be...not for any other reason. I mean come on! You can't even grow hemp in the states!!! How dumb is that?

The govt needs to stay the hell out of all of our lives. Seat belt laws...helmet laws...they're trying to make it a law in NJ that you can get ticketed for smoking in your car with kids in the car...yeah, smoking in an enclosed space with kids present is dumb...but hell, I've seen parents do much dumber things with their kids. I mean. as far as I'm concerned parents that let their kids throw temper tantrums in the middle of the supermarket should be ticketed...and smacked in the head too...but that's another story...

I just wonder what would have happened back in the day, as they say, if someone in my HS...the catholic one...would have held up a sign like that...I'll tell you...some nun woulda beat the crap out of him and sent him home so his parents could repeat the process. That's how the hierarchal system that you speak of is supposed to work...at least when you're 15 anyway!

Have a nice day!

US drinking laws are crazy. Last time I was there, I had to produce my ID in several bars and I was in my late 30s at the time!

The story of the banning of Marijuana is far more sinister than just the actions of some bureaucratic moron. It was directly targeted by chemical companies like DuPont and people like William Randolph Hearst as the many products that can be made from Hemp directly threatened their businesses...

Chris,

I can understand why DuPont would want hemp banned, but why Hearst?

BTW, did you know that the federal government actively grew hemp (in Tennessee, I believe) during WW II for the production of rope for the war effort?

One of the things I learned in my younger, wilder years...

You speak with wisdom Mr Marsh. Thank you.

Clavos: I lifted that from Wikipedia's Legal History of Marijuana in the United States article. Maybe something to do with paper?

If you want to get into the story in more detail, Jack Herer has more info than you could ever want, although a simple Google search will turn up even more; this from Illuminati News is quite fun if you can get past the semi-hysterical tone of the site!

Chris had to produce his ID in several bars because he is underage--exactly what I have been saying on this site.

As for the topic of student free speech: Education is prohibited in the schools, so why shouldn't everything else be prohibited as well?

Selwyn

Why are you looking at this as a partisan issue. Do you think that parents who are Democrats want kids to be able to say whatever they want to teachers?

Also, what was your real point? You seemed to be all over the place. Do you dislike judges? Are you just now realising that people are just people regardless of position? Do you feel powerless and under accomplished as a man and just want to spew negativity to make yourself seem more relevant? What is your logic or motivation?

Selwyn,

I am printing this out for my 17 year old son. He turns 18 on 9/11 and thinks he will have all sorts of new privileges granted by the Constitution. I have tried to explain that he is free to do whatever the hell he wants in his house. In my house he must obey my laws no matter what the Constitution says.

Thanks for a great article!

Maurice

Selwyn is a White supremacist....

Maurice,

"In my house he must obey my laws no matter what the Constitution says."

If more parents had had your attitude over the last 40 years, we'd have a lot fewer problems with crime and scofflaws in this country.

The guy who started it all was Benjamin Spock, MD.

Zedd - what makes you say that? Pretty inflamatory.. Is it because of this?

Clavos - I mentioned that I have had some family problems this past year. It is trouble with my last 2 boys. They have both been in and out of Juvenile Detention. I don't think I am going to make father of the year. My youngest is in a rehab for the next 3 months so I have high hopes there.

Thanks for your kind words anyway. Maurice J

Maurice,

I'm glad I got your attention. I would not typically make such a blatant statement. It is rather potent but I meant it to be to get your attention before you forward that man's garbage to your son.

I read that post, if I remember you commented on that article when he posted it on BC and no that is not the one that convinced me of that.

His statements and articles have a consistent flair, an ideology which promotes White supremacy. While he uses coded, watered down language there is a thread which ties his blogs that is dangerous. His subtle approach makes him dangerous to people like yourself who go out of their way to prove their impartiality. You will find yourself supporting a Hitler my brother without knowing it.

On his last couple of articles a few of us refused to give him a platform and decided to have our own very unrelated conversation as a sort of protest to his racist spewing. I have to say the conversations were quite fun but moreover, it was nice to have several gents from different parts of the world and walks of life to come together in such a silly yet significant way.

I would read more stuff from this guy before letting my kid think he is someone to admire.

Hey Maurice, your son is going to be going to college soon. I wonder if he will remain a conservative throughout his education. :o)

"The guy who started it all was Benjamin Spock, MD."

Naw, it was John Kerry. Anybody who can make a speech that leads to a certain behavior five years BEFORE he spoke has to be responsible.

yeah, you're right.

In fact, Kerry's responsible for slavery and the Civil War too.

Somebody oughta plug the bastard.

Zedd,

read what you wrote. Will take your advice.

LOL about your last sentence. He is not a conservative. He is a teenager. He changes his positions everyday. Lately he has been very much into 'personal freedoms'. We held him back one year so he will be a senior this year and go to college next.