squashed:

I like free speech. And I like legal protections for people to say outrageous things in public forums. I think that extends generally extends to schools, even if some student holds up a “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” sign. But then there’s this:

A handful of students were sent home from Florida schools this week after showing up in shirts proclaiming that “Islam is of the Devil,” part of a fiery church campaign to “expose” Islam as a religion of violence.

Well. That happened. Was it too much? I think so. But where is the line? Does it depend on other people’s reactions? And who gets to enforce it?

(Edit: I should probably clarify that you’re intersted in where you think the line should be. Under precedent, this is not at all protected speech.)

The dress code is poorly worded and probably is (or should be) a violation of free-speech protection. Who the heck gets to determine what “disrupts the learning process” or causes other students to be “offended or distracted”? If my arch nemesis’ dad is the CEO of Crest and I wear a Colgate t-shirt just to piss the kid off, and it “distracts” or “offends” him, is that a violation? How about if I wear a Michael Jackson shirt that makes the classroom burst into spontaneous moonwalking? Surely that’s a disruption. Make the dress-code about something other than politically correct, subjective determinations of offensiveness—and you’e covered your bases.

That being said, neither the parents nor the church should have encouraged this behavior; they’re all a bunch of asshats shooting themselves in the feet. But the school should not have singled them out.

Does anyone doubt that if the school ignored it, this would have blown over and the students would have gotten tired of it?