Skip to main content

Home/ Government Diigo/ Group items tagged Share

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Bryan Pregon

Georgia high school to host first integrated prom - 4 views

  •  
    "Students at one south Georgia high school share classrooms and sports fields; but, they don't share the same prom." Welcome to 2013. How far have we come in fighting segregation... not far enough.
  • ...12 more comments...
  •  
    This is just wrong. The students are being segregated because of their race and color. Shouldn't racism be illegal? especially in schools!
  •  
    I think having separate dances based on color is just wrong. If they can attend the same school, games and classes, then they should also be allowed to attend the dances with their friends, no matter their color.
  •  
    I can't believe to this day that there are people separating blacks from whites in some kind of activity. They share the same class rooms and everything else. Why can't they attend the same prom together? It amazes me how people think that they need to separate prom by the color of their skin.
  •  
    I can't believe there is a school that integrated but yet they separate dances for the students? I think what the girls are trying to do is a good idea cause there isn't a good enough reason for the school to have separate dances.
  •  
    I didn´t know segregation still was a problem.. This is annoying they have seperate proms for the races. It blows my mind how one can dislike and discourage people of a different color and race. We are all human beings.
  •  
    I think the fact that there is still segregation at all means the government isn't doing its job. They need to crack down on stuff like this.
  •  
    Even now there's still a problem segregation. Having two different proms for whites and colored kids is crazy.
  •  
    I didn't know schools were still allowed to do this. I don't understand why they can play sports together but not go to dances together.
  •  
    I thought segregation was no more but guess I was wrong. It doesn't make sense that they can play sports and attend other activities but they cant attend prom together. This isn't right!
  •  
    They shouldn't be able to do that. Th government ordered desegregation for schools in the 50's with the rights movement.
  •  
    Oh gosh, I'm pretty sure it feels like a slap in the face to the people who can't go to the "white" prom because they are black. I didn't even know they still did that. Or the fact that they were allowed too. It doesn't make any sense to me that they can have sports together but not dances?! Boggles my mind.
  •  
    Its sad how their are still people out their that believe this is the right thing to do. I mean come on its a school dance they have these students do everything else together whats the point in separating them for a dance.
  •  
    I can't believe this stuff still exist. The football team is segregated but the prom isn't? What took so long?
  •  
    Is this even legal?
melloney keller

apple - 13 views

  •  
    It is fun to look at the graph of Apple's stocks, you can see where new products were announced and other major events like the passing of Steve Jobs. But reaching $500 a stock is amazing, then you compare it to Microsoft's stock of $32ish and you laugh at that company.
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    i agree with brice, thats a crazy differential between companies where most people think they are similar
  •  
    No matter what apple will go up.
  •  
    Apple is a large distributer f products that are used today, so it will go up sooner than later.
  •  
    You have to look at the number of shares not the value. While Microsoft is only $32 a share, there are far more shares. By Microsoft splitting stock they can give more people the power to buy in. So in response to Brice stock price isn't important, it's stock history. I will admit Microsoft isn't as solid as Apple currently is but the $32 to $500 isn't a true reflection of the companies.
  •  
    Even though Microsoft isn't that big and does not have that much money in shares, I would still go for Apple because if you have shares with Apple you can get a huge amount of money.
Joey Ruckman

Best content in ALHS Gov | Diigo - Groups - 1 views

  •  
    Studying Government in the textbook is fine to get the basic ideas, but to really understand what is happening around us takes more work. Use this forum to share interesting content that you find. I ask that we try and keep our links related to government topics and stay within the code of conduct.
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    Studying Government in the textbook is fine to get the basic ideas, but to really understand what is happening around us takes more work. Use this forum to share interesting content that you find. I ask that we try and keep our links related to government topics and stay within the code of conduct.
  •  
    Studying Government in the textbook is fine to get the basic ideas, but to really understand what is happening around us takes more work. Use this forum to share interesting content that you find. I ask that we try and keep our links related to government topics and stay within the code of conduct.
  •  
    Studying Government in the textbook is fine to get the basic ideas, but to really understand what is happening around us takes more work. Use this forum to share interesting content that you find. I ask that we try and keep our links related to government topics and stay within the code of conduct.
Raj Dhaliwal

Helping Hands for Drivers: Ride Share and Taxi Driver Support in Calgary - 0 views

If you're a driver in Calgary working with Uber, Lyft, or a traditional taxi company, you’ve probably noticed things aren’t as easy as they used to be. High gas prices, low fares, and t...

Ride Share and in Calgary Councillor Raj Dhaliwal taxi driver support

started by Raj Dhaliwal on 25 Jun 25 no follow-up yet
Madison Clark

Girl "Raped" at After Game Parties.. Should Boys be Charged? - 1 views

  •  
    The eye witness admitted to sharing a bottle of vodka with the girl. If she allowed herself to get so sloppy drunk, especially at the age of 16, then how are people suppose to feel bad for her? I mean i'm not saying that getting "raped" is ever okay but I'm sure the boys were impaired as well and neither parties really knew what was going on. Another thing I would like to point out is, how does this girl just happen to show up at MULTIPLE parties with these guys?
  • ...13 more comments...
  •  
    To me, the boys definitely should have to face the consequences of their actions, for taking advantage of a girl the way they did, but she had every intention to go to that party to drink. How do you not expect to be taken advantage of at a party when you're a drunk teenage girl? Going to the party in the first place was irresponsible and not safe on her part, because anyone will take advantage of a girl too drunk to say no. Her "friend" should have made sure she did not go to the house with those two boys anyway.
  •  
    The guys who did that should be charged, maybe 90 + but the girls "victim" should also be charged for drinking under age. The person who gave her the vodka should be charged for distributing to minors
  •  
    Those two guys should have to serve time in prison, rape is a serious crime. They were super cruel!!!
  •  
    To me it seems like she is saying she was raped to help her image. She might not of wanted to do what she did when she was sober, but since she was drunk her mindset could have changed completely
  •  
    I think all three of them should be punished. They were all drinking way too much and did it to themselves. Although I do think the boys should be in more trouble than the girl because rape is worse than drinking.
  •  
    I feel that this case is a good reminder that there are "natural consequences" for our behavior. These are separate from the legal consequences that so many people argue over. I think that anyone should expect bad things to happen when they put themselves in these situations, but that doesn't mean they "deserve it". In my eyes the legal consequences are clear; anytime you have sex with a person who doesn't know what's happening, you are committing rape. Period.
  •  
    It was her fault that she was drinking, and if it was a "rape" at a party. Someone would have heard or saw i think she just did something she regretted and now shes saying that she got raped.
  •  
    I think that it was partially her fault for putting herself in that situation, but if she shared a bottle of vodka and was that so drunk, than how does she actually know if she was raped? Plus she showed up at other parties with these boys when they all knew what would happen at each party when they drank. This is why there is an age limit to drinking, and minors should not drink.
  •  
    Multiple people should be charged for different crimes
  •  
    They should be punished. But the girl should also receive a punishment for she was drinking underage and she should have been conscious of how much she drank. None of them should really be considered "victims" in my opinion
  •  
    well my opinion is that the boy shouldnt be the only charged with a crime. Multiple people should be charged for different crimes.
  •  
    Okay, here's my perspective on this. The girl obviously decided to party with them at multiple parties with them multiple times. if she chose to drink that much alcohol and get drunk to where she didn't know what was going on, then that's her own fault. But they boys also should not have taken advantage of the girl. But her choice had bad consequences.
  •  
    Even more people may end up being charged with this crime: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/03/18/steubenville-rape-investigation-isnt-finished
  •  
    If the girl has party with the boys before, and probably then, got stupid drunk, then what would urge the oys to "take advantage" of her this time, as opposed to all the other times? It does not make sense. Plus, she is only sixteen, so it is more her fault that she even allowed herself to go to parties, knowing everything that could, or may happen.
Bryan Pregon

Reddit, Craigslist and 30,000 Other Websites Oppose CISPA - 1 views

  •  
    "Reddit, Craigslist and more than 30,000 other websites are flying the flag of opposition to the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, a controversial cybersecurity bill that was recently reintroduced in Congress."
  •  
    I don't think the government should be able to see that kind of information. Makes you think twice about what you put online.
Bryan Pregon

Obama administration defends $222,000 file-sharing verdict | Ars Technica - 0 views

  •  
    "The Supreme Court accepts only a fraction of the appeals submitted to it, and in May it declined to review the case of Joel Tenenbaum, who like Thomas-Rasset is still fighting the recording industry in court."
  •  
    i did the math so over the company lost over 9000 customers if the song cost was 24$
  •  
    When we use something from the school like a uniform or a book and it isn't returned we are fined the price of the item. I lose my basketball uniform, I pay $40. How come when this women takes something that is worth 24$ she must pay 10,000x what it is worth to the owner?
nlarsen15

Obamacare Personal Information Leaked - 0 views

  •  
    Isn't this lovely? In California, some folks in California who signed up for Obamacare got their personal information (name, phone #, etc.) shared with insurance agents and people like that WITHOUT their consent... Isn't this a breach of privacy? Let's hear what y'all think!
  •  
    This whole Obamacare crap Is driving me even more insane. When will It finally end!?
mya_doty

90-year-old Florida man charged for feeding homeless people - 28 views

shared by mya_doty on 05 Nov 14 - No Cached
  •  
    (CNN) -- Arnold Abbott handed out four plates of food to homeless people in a South Florida park. Then police stopped the 90-year-old from serving up another bite. "An officer said, 'Drop that plate right now -- like I had a weapon,'" Abbott said.
  • ...24 more comments...
  •  
    Whats wrong with that.
  •  
    I think that's awful and definitely shouldn't be against the law. Providing the homeless with a meal doesn't necessarily keep them on the street, rather them starving and not having any energy to even try to turn their lives around is.
  •  
    Instead of it be against the law, they should be encouraging more people to feed them. If we just let them sit there and starve they will die, I would rather have homeless people living, then a bunch of dead bodies laying around the city. Maybe all they need to get the motivation to get up and get a job, is by other people showing that care about them, and want them to live a healthy a life.
  •  
    I think this is absolutely ridiculous. How could the government of Fort Lauderdale be so ignorant and selfish? Granted, some people are homeless because they've made bad decisions to get to that point but some are homeless because they honestly can't help it. Who knows? But I think it should be okay for people to feed the homeless. It should be comforting knowing that people have caring hearts and are willing to give the less-unfortunate people food. I hope the banning of giving food to the homeless never becomes illegal in the state of Iowa because I have given homeless people food countless of times and I will not stop.
  •  
    I don't think it should be against the law, its just help. Just because someone fed one person doesn't mean everyones going to go and be homeless.
  •  
    Reading this story upsets me because no one should be charged for feeding the homeless. That is the same as arresting and charging a man/woman for donating to charity. I do believe that some people are homeless because they got themselves there from their life decisions and choices, however others have no other way out. For example, a veteran could be very ill after coming back home and maybe having PTSD and feel helpless and lost. They do not know where to go or who to ask for help. Helping the homeless lets them know that someone cares and wants to help, and I feel this act of kindness might just be the motivation they need to get themselves together and fix their life. This helps them know they are not alone. Florida is ridiculous for charging that man. Instead of it being a bad thing, let us encourage it.
  •  
    People should be able to help whoever they please. I think the man shouldn't get in trouble because he is helping them by giving them meals. This could also help them save money and eventually buy/ rent a house in the future.
  •  
    Every town has some sort of poverty and not feeding the homeless isn't going to get rid of them.
  •  
    Feeding the homeless should not be a crime. It is helping someone in need which is what citizens of a community should be doing is helping people in need and getting the back on there feet.
  •  
    I don't believe that Abott should be arrested just because he was doing a good deed. I understand the views of the policeman and how they're just doing their job but it's not fair to Abott that he was just trying to be a good person. There is no reason why he should be arrested and think it's crazy that people are getting upset for helping the homeless. They should just leave him alone because it doesn't affect their lives in a big way.
  •  
    I do think that feeding them food -may- keep them in that cycle. MAY. I highly doubt it does though, because those homeless people probably have nowhere else to go at this point. And how are they suppose to "break" the cycle if they have nowhere to go? No job? If Florida isn't letting these people feed homeless people, then how about THEY do something about it rather than just giving everyone fines and acting without thinking.
  •  
    I think the city had made this a law in order to give the homeless an incentive to get a job. Which I personally believe is a terrible idea. No one likes living homeless, everyone needs a helping hand sometimes. I would think the officers of the city would have enough morals and ethics to not enforce this law. To be ignored and simply done away with in a few months. It's a sad day when helping becomes illegal.
  •  
    i don't get why feeding the homeless is against the law, whats wrong with it? your helping a person maybe even saving their life.
  •  
    I think the law against public food sharing is ridiculous. These kind of rules don't encourage the homeless to start getting back on their feet. Yes, they rely on the food given to them but all the law is doing is pushing the homeless out of Fort Lauderdale, to other areas. Rather then enforcing this new law they should come up with program that provide the homeless with job training and experience so they can really start off productively on their own.
  •  
    To put it lightly the banning of public food sharing is a stupid, stupid law. Credit, however, to Seiler for saying, "Providing them with a meal and keeping them in that cycle on the street is not productive." He made a valid point, yes, but a homeless person is just the same as a person who owns four houses, they just don't have as much luxury. I think homeless shelters, or even what Arnold Abbot does, feeding the people in need on a beach, that's their luxury. How are you going to take away something like that, for most, it might keep them hopeful. It shouldn't be up to the law who we as people want to help.
  •  
    this is a joke, how can you not feed another human being??
  •  
    To me this is not just and feeding the homeless isn't against the law. My assumption is that the cop had hard feelings against the homeless guy and was enforcing illegally.
  •  
    I don't think that this should be an actual law, what's the harm in feeding the poorest of the poor people? Cops are cracking down way too hard on the wrong "laws". There are criminals out there killing people, dealing drugs, stealing, and we're giving them jail time with possible probation, but feeding a homeless man is a serious crime? Think again.
  •  
    I think this is ridiculous. We give our police too much power. Feeding the homeless is not a crime and it never should be. We have soup kitchens and things for them. How is it any different? The cops are pretty much taking away our rights and telling us not to be nice? Totally wrong.
  •  
    I think Abbott has a right to feed the homeless. They don't have anything so we don't just want them to die in the street for starvation that's inhumane. They're just homeless people that are trying to eat the police should have their attention on things that are more important crimes. Besides feeding homeless people isn't a crime.
  •  
    This sound unbelievable to me and I hope it does it to many other people too. We have to find sympathy to those people and don't think they are some other kind of thing, They are also humans with feelings.
  •  
    I don't understand what is so wrong with feeding the homeless. I'd do the same exact thing if I could. Police officers are suppose to protect and that means everyone, even the homeless. If a police officer became homeless, losing his job, house, family, etc. I'm sure his friends and past co-workers would feed him too. So what makes him any different than the "random homeless guy on the street." ? I don't think Abbott should get charged.
  •  
    his sound unbelievable to me and I hope it does it to many other people too. We have to find sympathy to those people and don't think they are some other kind of thing, They are also humans with feelings.
  •  
    I don't see what is wrong with feeding the homeless. These people are at the lowest point in their lives and need all the help they can get and they fact that the city just want's to look the other way while these people suffer and hope that they go away is heartbreaking. People should help the homeless, help them get back on track and get their lives in order not treat them like a rat. There are actually criminals that get to go free and an old man who was helping the homeless gets put in jail? That's ridiculous.
  •  
    There is nothing wrong with feeding those who don't have food. But I also believe at some point these people should have done something to prevent themselves from getting to the point that they can't afford food. Everybody gets a chance to try to find a place where they can support themselves. But I also believe it is wrong to prevent someone from trying to help them along, all they are trying to do is make their lives a little bit easier. There is no reason this man should be put in jail, he has done no wrong.
  •  
    I don't see anything wrong with giving to the homeless, but instead of giving an giving I would try and get them a job or help them
lmakram

Trump defends 'absolute right' to share 'facts' with Russia - 2 views

  •  
    US President Donald Trump has defended his "absolute right" to share information with Russia, following a row over classified material.
Breanna Schmitt

Trump's bizarre Russia tweetstorm digs his hole deeper - 6 views

  •  
    "As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining ...to terrorism and airline flight safety. Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism." (Trump) I feel like this just shows us that he is willing to admit that he is in/ has power and sharing about what his discussion is going to encounter, but if he is willing to go public with this then what else will he tell other leaders ?
Bryan Pregon

It's now illegal in Russia to share an image of Putin as a gay clown - The Washington Post - 11 views

  •  
    "Russia has banned a picture depicting President Vladimir Putin as a potentially gay clown."
  • ...7 more comments...
  •  
    best headline
  •  
    I don't understand why Putin is making a big deal of this, if it was anyone else he probably wouldn't mind and might even laugh behind closed doors. But because it's him it's a big issue?
  •  
    I think Putin is definitely making a big deal out of one picture, if he doesn't want people to make fun of him or say what they want about him he shouldn't put himself in the spotlight.
  •  
    Freedom of speech isn't much of a right in Russia, but clearly Putin has some insecurities if he went this far.
  •  
    Why is this surprising at all? He is one of the most powerful rulers in the world why would he allow his people to mock him with pictures? Especially pictures depicting him as a gay clown. Not only is it disrespectful it is just dumb in my opinion.
  •  
    Putin is taking this to the extreme. It was just people protesting what they believe in and he got so upset about it that he decided to put people in jail for it.
  •  
    I think that this is being over dramatics. The picture is not harming anyone, people should not be put in jail over a stupid picture.
  •  
    As a public figure, like any, Putin should accept the pros and cons of being in his position, this included.
  •  
    I dont think they should have went that far and banned any images of vladimir because he should know that being at such a high power people are going to be making photos and comments that arent so pleasing.
Bryan Pregon

Donald Trump Jr schooled on Twitter after Halloween 'socialism' tweet | US news | The G... - 2 views

  •  
    "Donald Trump Jr got a lesson in sharing from social media on Tuesday, after tweeting a picture of his daughter Chloe with her Halloween candy haul, and threatening to take half of it away to "teach her about socialism"."
  •  
    This was hilarious
Bryan Pregon

An Analysis of Net Neutrality Activism on Reddit - Upvoted - 12 views

  •  
    "The FCC's vote on net neutrality is scheduled for this Thursday, December 14th. There is still time to tell them why they should reconsider. Go here to share your story of how the repeal of net neutrality rules would personally affect you. And go to www.battleforthenet.com to tell your member of Congress why he or she should call on Chairman Pai to reconsider his plan."
Bryan Pregon

Know Your Rights: Photography in Public - 3 views

  •  
    I like knowing that the police and the owner can't take it unless they have a court order.
  • ...5 more comments...
  •  
    I really like this article. I found it true and very knowledgeable. But some of the content, i found absolutely absurd. The fact that we can't take pictures in Court houses and places like that makes me think that the Government is hiding something from us that we aren't aloud to see. My opinion on that is as an American Citizen, they shouldn't be keeping secrets from us. They should tell us the truth whether it is good or bad. We have a right to know. But the whole Trespassing thing is just wow too because what if there is a place that is not clearly marked off.? You can get in so much trouble with out even knowing.
  •  
    this issue has come up recently in some cities passing laws against recording police specifically. I thought some of the comments on the original article were thought provoking as well.
  •  
    I agree with Eric I think the Government should let the public take pictures in those government buildings because we as people pay for those government buildings and I just think that's fair. I do also understand the law because somethings need to be private.
  •  
    I don't want to call anyone out or attack someones beliefs, but I believe that the government needs to keep secrets. If we release every detail, there would be major national security implications to deal with. While some secrets are ludicrous, sometimes a secret is better off not being shared.
  •  
    But if they shared everything with us, maybe we wouldn't be in such a crisis. Like if they told us where the heck all of our money is going... I just think it is completely absurd that they keep secrets from us.. this is supposed to be the land of they free. is it really free if they aren't telling us information that we want to know? I think not.
  •  
    i agree with alex i believe if they told us everything we would have more to worry about then knowing nothing
  •  
    Well have you ever thought that maybe that would be better for our Country? To Actually think.....?
blakewilladsen

harrassers claim hoax in newtown shooting - 0 views

  •  
    interesting back and forth regarding free speech
  • ...1 more comment...
  •  
    Wow... sure, there are inconsistencies in the coverage of the Newtown massacre, but there are inconsistencies in any news story that is reported on by more than one individual. To claim that the massacre may not have happened at all - and the professor is the only person who says this - is extremely disrespectful.
  •  
    I would blame the media for starting this "conspiracy" in the first place. Once one person makes an assumption based on an event they didn't even witness, and they share it with some sort of media, it explodes into a big "conspiracy" against the government? I really do feel bad for the families who lost their children in such a tragic incident, and I feel even worse that they have to put up with these nonsense hate messages and such from people. It's very disrespectful.
  •  
    I think the intensity of media coverage of an event such as this can be both good and harmful. When you over expose every detail and interview every last person related to the issue at hand there is bound to be inconsistencies in reporting. However when the media is able to really tell the story of such a tragedy it enlightens the public to some very serious issues. it makes it much easier for legislation to be brought to the table.
Mallory Huggins

Hobby Lobby: The First Martyr Under Obamacare? - 0 views

  •  
    Someone posted this, but it wasn't possible to comment
  •  
    First point: I fail to see how denying a single cell the chance to go through mitosis is abortion. It's no more aware than bacteria. Also, the author is referencing the morning-after pill. For some reason there's a lot of confusion about how the morning after pill actually works. It prevents the egg from joining the sperm, or depending on where the woman is in her cycle, prevents the ovaries from releasing eggs. Contrary to what pro-life proponents apparently believe, conception does not happen immediately after having sex. If using the morning-after pill is abortion, we may as well call abstinence abortion. Secondly, "the mandate requires private citizens who are also employers to purchase private goods (health insurance services) with private money from non-government companies." This is clearly written by a sensationalist. What it really means is that a company has to use its own money to provide healthcare. (And everyone seems to be forgetting that employees don't just receive healthcare plans for free). There is a difference between being a private citizen and being an employer. Owning a public company and employing people is about as far from private as you can get. "Requiring private citizens to pay for abortifacients is more akin to requiring the Amish to use their own money to purchase weapons from a private gun dealer or be forced into bankruptcy. Or kind of like forcing anti-pornography legal scholar Catharine MacKinnon to buy pornography for her law students." This is simply ludicrous and shows that the author clearly doesn't understand what a business is. It's a corporation, it employees people, it isn't a private citizen. I will admit that if Hobby Lobby employed only people who were in complete agreement with the beliefs of the owners I would support them in their case. However, the reality is that many of Hobby Lobby's employees don't share the exact same beliefs as the owner. And it would in fact be illegal for Hobby Lobby to choose their employ
  •  
    ees because of their beliefs. And the last time I checked, in America we don't make people follow certain religions or beliefs. In fact, the law isn't supposed to be based in religion. I know it sounds shocking, but it actually isn't okay to force a religion on people, or to make everyone live in accordance with one belief system, which is exactly what Hobby Lobby, and everyone who argues against this provision in the new health care law, is trying to do. Lastly, the author says repeatedly that this law essentially discriminates against Christians, which is a complete lie. Christians is a broad term. There are Christians who believe in all kinds of birth control and then there are those who think all birth control should be outlawed. There are even Christians who get abortions. So, and this is a message to anyone who writes articles of this kind, stop saying just saying Christians. Tell the truth and call yourself a Fundamentalist. Saying Christians make it seem like the majority of people who believe in Jesus Christ agree with you, and they don't. You're a minority, and you need to accept that. And maybe read a little about how our government works. It's a majority rules system.
kadenroen

Judge rules in favor of GOP in Obamacare suit - 2 views

shared by kadenroen on 12 May 16 - No Cached
  •  
    At issue is the "cost sharing" provision in the law that requires insurance companies offering health plans through the law to reduce out-of-pocket costs for policy holders who qualify. The government offsets the added costs to insurance companies by reimbursing them. But lawyers for the House argued that Congress did not properly approve the money for those reimbursements.
  •  
    This suit represents the first time in our nation's history that Congress has been permitted to sue executive branch over a disagreement about how to interpret a statute," Earnest said during his daily briefing. "These are the kinds of political disputes that characterize a democracy. It's unfortunate that Republicans have resorted to a taxpayer-funded lawsuit to re-fight a political fight they keep losing.
Bryan Pregon

Virginia Students Suspended After Protesting Confederate Flag Ban - NBC News - 22 views

  •  
    "More than 20 students at a southwestern Virginia high school were suspended Thursday after wearing clothing bearing the Confederate flag in protest of school policy."
  • ...22 more comments...
  •  
    I think that most of these students have as little or no knowledge of the flags origin and are just doing it to get attention and publicity.
  •  
    I agree with zayne
  •  
    I agree with zayne when he says they don't have that much knowledge about the flag because they said it wasn't about hate
  •  
    I think they are trying to just get attention from the school and social media they don't really know what the flag means or stands for.
  •  
    I think this whole situation is kind of blown out of proportion, Instead of expelling these students I think they should have dealt with the situation a little differently.
  •  
    I don't believe that it would disrupt their school. I also don't believe that the reason that they are wearing, flying, or painting the flag is racist. Like in Hannah's case she is using the flag to support her brother who served. When it is wrongly used I believe it can be racist but in this case it's not.
  •  
    I think that the school did the right thing banning the flag
  •  
    This is a touchy subject, however, i think it's unjust that they were suspended for showing their opinion. I disagree with the symbolism of the confederate flag because it is a racist symbol that encourages a war to keep slavery. But the first amendment protects our opinions and the ability to share and express them in speech, clothing, or whatever else. So according to the first amendment they are allowed and cannot be punished for showing this flag no matter how much others disagree with the meaning and symbolism.
  •  
    I agree with Zayne because they probably don't know much about it
  •  
    In the article I wanted to hear an actual explanation of what the flag means to them if they are just ignoring the history and origin of the flag, but there was none. They just said, "Welp I say it's not racist so..." and that was it. If they want people to respect them and want to be able to wear the flag they have to at least try to explain or persuade people that it's not racist and causing a problem.
  •  
    These people were not defending their right to free expression, as it was causing danger (the fights leading to the ban) so they shouldn't break the rules as they are constitutional. I agree w/ zayned
  •  
    I think that if they want to wear this flag on their clothes or whatever that's fine but they should also respect their school rules.
  •  
    i think anyone should be able to have the flag, wear the flag on clothing, etc, if its used for a good/right reason then i think it should not be banned.
  •  
    I think this is ridiculous and they should be able to wear it or display it if they want to. They shouldn't be stopped from expressing themselves just because some people interpret it the wrong way. Being from deep Missouri I've seen plenty of them and heard a fair amount of reasoning from it (most of it coming from heritage) and whether I disagree with it or not, they should be able to do what they want with it.
  •  
    They have the right to do wear what they want. school does not need to get involved with it. Its there right that is why we got the bill of rights so the GOVERNMENT or in this case the SCHOOL does not mess up with those peoples rights or anyone's right. The people who dont like it boo hoo they will have to deal with it. Its a right get over it period.
  •  
    This whole incident has some students result to threats and other violent ways, I think the school had a right to ban the flag because the student's behavior got out of hand and it is a matter of others safety.
  •  
    They shouldn't have banned their freedom of speech, because this sort of tells us that we don't have the right to have our own opinion.
  •  
    I think that many of the students should know the real meaning but they do those things to attract the attention of others and that way they publicize what they do. But they can also be badly informed and that way they do it without any idea of what it is really.
  •  
    I think that they had the right to have that flag on there shirts and cars because they are not using it for anything wrong, they are wearing it to show their family and to support people.
  •  
    I do not agree with the school banning the flag.
  •  
    I feel like if the kids have a legit reason to have the flag they should be able to have it. But if its just for hate they shouldn't.
  •  
    Though it would be nice why they would explain why its racist, but they never did, but overall I believe these people are making this a bigger deal just for attention.
  •  
    The students who are representing the flag may represent it for their own reason but if it offends other people because it's known widely for the racism coming from it in history.
  •  
    The flag was created to show the support for slavery, it was the face of the southern states, the reason they flew it high and proudly was to fight FOR slavery, not just to show pride. It was offensive then, it's offensive now.
1 - 20 of 44 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page