Trial to begin in English-only case / LJWorld.com

Archive for Tuesday, August 12, 2008

By Roxana Hegeman - Associated Press Writer

August 12, 2008

Wichita — A lawsuit filed by three Hispanic families against the Catholic Diocese of Wichita challenging a policy that requires students to speak only English while at school goes to trial in federal court today.

"What happened at that school constitutes race discrimination under federal anti-discrimination laws - that is why it is important. That needs to be stopped," said Christopher McHugh, the attorney representing three 12-year-old students named as plaintiffs in the civil litigation.

The lawsuit seeks an end to the policy and asks for an order barring similar policies at other Catholic schools in the Wichita diocese.

The plaintiffs are claiming the policy violates the Civil Rights Act and another federal statute by intentionally discriminating against the sixth-grade students and causing a hostile educational environment.

The diocese contended in court filings that the English-only rule is not discriminatory and did not cause a hostile environment. It contends the rule was implemented at St. Anne Catholic School as a legitimate response to inappropriate behavior by a few middle school students.

"This case is about a matter of discipline," Jay Fowler, the attorney representing the Catholic Diocese said Monday. "Catholic schools embrace all cultures."

The lawsuit also seeks the return of one student to the school who was allegedly kicked out for refusing to sign the "English only" pledge. And it asks for court and attorney costs and unspecified damages for discrimination and emotional suffering.

"We have seen it tried in public schools before," McHugh said. "The problem public schools have is that it is a First Amendment issue - so public schools haven't been very successful."

Fowler said this case is not a First Amendment issue.

"This is not a case that implicates constitutional or statutory rights, as no court has recognized a right to speak a foreign language at school," the defendants said in court documents.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

12 August 2008
at 6:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

Sure wish the 'inappropriate behavior' and discipline issues would have been explained. Anybody know what issue actually started all this?
12 August 2008
at 7:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

“What happened at that school constitutes race discrimination under federal anti-discrimination laws - that is why it is important. That needs to be stopped,”So race is determined by choice of language spoken?Isn't English the official language according to states and the nation? Why should schools be punished for upholding that?McHugh said. “The problem public schools have is that it is a First Amendment issue “First Ammendment? Free speech? So, would spray painting graffiti be free speech? How about using cell phones? Or racial slurs?
12 August 2008
at 7:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tanzer (Anonymous) says…

The teachers feared they were being cursed at in Spanish - if I recall correctly. Had they learned Spanish and disciplined accordingly they wouldn't have this problem - court hearing. It doesn't take long to learn a few curse words in another language. They could have disciplined based on current policy that targets all children regardless of home language.
12 August 2008
at 7:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

“targets all children “But doesn't this policy target all children?Or are you saying, targets all children regardless of curse words? Regardless of graffiti. Regardless of cell phones. Regardless of racial slurs. Regardless of ___________ (fill in and put on an emotional spin for whatever you want to permit such as “home language”).
12 August 2008
at 7:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

It's a frikkin' private school! Parents have to pay money to get their kids in there. If the school said the kids had to speak Latin, that's their right - those who don't want to speak English are free to avail themselves of the Wichita public school system, which I'm sure is wonderful.
12 August 2008
at 8:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

Thanks, tanzer. Kinda figured it had to be something along those lines.Seems like this is going a little far. Another question: is this 'English only' waiver everyone supposed to sign a comprehensive thing, like it means two Hispanic students aren't 'allowed' to converse in their native tongue in the hallway or something? I sure hope not.
12 August 2008
at 8:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Clickker (Anonymous) says…

“Hispanic students aren't 'allowed' to converse in their native tongue in the hallway or something? I sure hope not.”I sure hope so! They could be conspiring.

12 August 2008
at 8:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Yes, jaywalker, that's exactly what it means: even outside of class (in the hallway, at lunch) students are not allowed to speak any language other than English. Personally, I think it's a preposterous policy. I have no problem requiring English in the classrooms, but at lunch, on the playground, in the halls, children should be able to speak to their friends in whatever language they choose.
12 August 2008
at 8:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

stuckinthemiddle (Anonymous) says…

“Isn't English the official language according to states and the nation? Why should schools be punished for upholding that?”no… there is no “official language” in Kansas or the US…
12 August 2008
at 8:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

stuckinthemiddle (Anonymous) says…

check that… English is the official language of Kansas…go figure…
12 August 2008
at 8:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

storm (Anonymous) says…

There should have been a different way to disipline those few students at St. Anne's - especially for the safety of students that attend that school, instead of violating the Civil Rights Act to all other students attending Catholic schools in the Wichita Diocese.
12 August 2008
at 8:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Discipline them for what, storm? Speaking their native language? Ridiculous!!
12 August 2008
at 8:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

I'm with ya, informed. That's definitely taking it too far. Classroom - by all means. But suppressing dialect outside of class? This isn't China, is it? If two students want to practice their french or german at lunch would that be disciplined? Private school or not, that's extreme. What happened to 'embrace diversity' in this country? Besides, American students being exposed to alternative tongues would be beneficial and should be encouraged, I think.
12 August 2008
at 8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

Informed,I believe the 'discipline' referred to is for the students talking back to the teacher, if what tanzer reported is correct.
12 August 2008
at 8:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

I've always viewed Mexicans as generally happy people, so why on god's green earth would they want to come to America anyway, an increasingly depressing place to live?(I think I may hear the distant sound of George Soros playing “Taps” on his bugle)

12 August 2008
at 8:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

storm (Anonymous) says…

informed…Heavens no, not their native language…according to the Wichita Eagle Beacon - when the story first broke, the teachers feared for their safety because the students were disrespectful and unruly. It is that behavior that should have been disiplined, only.
12 August 2008
at 9:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

People, google the story and find out for yourself. The policy was put in place as an overreaction to a few middle school students. Here's the quote: “It contends the rule was implemented at St. Anne Catholic School as a legitimate response to inappropriate behavior by a few middle school students.” Nowhere in the current story is the diocese saying anything about teachers fearing for their safety. And, frankly, implementing policy like this based on the behavior of a few is overreaction!!I still contend that, outside of their classes, students should be allowed to speak whatever language they like. I often speak Spanish to a few colleagues who speak the language. (I am a native English speaker trying to improve my Spanish.) I often hear other colleagues speaking in their native tongues, whether Urdu, Tamil, Mandarin, or whatever. I've never felt threatened by it nor thought it created a hostile environment. I actually welcome the diversity it brings.Yes, storm, if students are disrespectful or unruly they should be disciplined, regardless of the language they speak.
12 August 2008
at 9:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…

Bogus
12 August 2008
at 9:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

“Bogus” — What on earth does that mean, Paul??? Please explain. Yes, I know what the word means. What are you trying to say by posting it?
12 August 2008
at 9:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Solomon (Anonymous) says…

It's a private school, and as such should be able to implement any policy it sees fit. Many private schools implement a policy of uniformity in dress, while, I believe, that has been deemed unlawful in a public school.As was pointed out earlier in the thread, if these students don't like the policy, leave the private school and attend a public school.
12 August 2008
at 9:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

beobachter (Anonymous) says…

90% of so-called Americans don't know how to speak proper English either, should they leave also?
12 August 2008
at 9:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Actually, Solomon, many public schools have implemented uniform policies. They have been met with great success, despite some initial resistance.
12 August 2008
at 9:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

Solomon is correct. It is a private school, so they can chose any rule the want. If you don't like the product, shop someplace else.

12 August 2008
at 10:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

jaywalker (Anonymous) says:”Thanks, tanzer. Kinda figured it had to be something along those lines. Seems like this is going a little far.”Who could ever imagine some of us going too far in regards to issues concerning our Spanish-speaking population? I'm skeptical of the private-school angle, too. Even a (gasp) privately held organization must be answerable to certain levels of equality and laws, at least how they are currently structured. I doubt they'd be able to actively discriminate against minorities in accepting students, they probably won't be able to inflict physical damage on the kids, etc etc. I find it highly unlikely that a private company anywhere in the states could get away with outlawing the use of foreign languages within their walls in such an absolute fashion. I imagine that this policy will be overturned soon. And then there will be many saying we are giving into the Mexicans, I bet.
12 August 2008
at 10:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

d_prowess (Anonymous) says…

If this policy is upheld, Pig Latin will be forgotten!!
12 August 2008
at 10:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

janeyb (Anonymous) says…

I wonder if this will end up like the Cessna employee who wanted job disability and turned out to be illegal and using a stolen SS#? A private school should be able to set its own rules regarding dress, speech etc. These kids need to go to public school where they can spend their days shut up with the English as a Second Language teacher.
12 August 2008
at 10:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

VTHawk (Anonymous) says…

I went to summer school where the only language was Chinese. If we spoke any other language, we would be expelled. If this lawsuit is successful, then kiss language training goodbye. Private schools should be able to require whatever they want, good idea or nay. Lets not forget that this policy doesn't discriminate uniquely against any ethnic group, merely requires that everyone communicate in a common language. If the rule was that only Mexicans must speak Spanish, then there would be some more severe issues…
12 August 2008
at 1:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

aeroscout17 (Anonymous) says…

These are private schools and they can set their own rules. They are not discriminating against race, sex, etc. There is nothing in our Constitution about language discrimination.I spent 5 summers teaching English in Eastern Europe. The students paid to be there and we required them to speak English 24/7 (although they were done by encouragement and rewards, not punishment). On the other hand, I did the best I could to speak the native country language when dealing with the locals. It is simply a matter of politeness and respect.As others have said, if the parents don't like the policy, take them to another school.English has been the de facto language of this country. That may eventually change, but if one is to be successful, one should speak English here.That being said, I wish I had taken Spanish instead of German for all of those school years! Not sure I want to learn a fourth language now, although it would be useful.
12 August 2008
at 1:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

Like I said, it is their school, they can do what they want and it is not even an issue for the court. But I would add, b3 and invictus's last post are the most balantly racist things I've read out of them in two days. I truly feel sorry for anyone as rampantly xenophobic. Hate and fear are so not cool.
12 August 2008
at 1:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Don't sweat it, autie. b3 and invictus are just posting that crap to get a reaction. Best choice is to not even bother responding. Except that now we both have. ;-)
12 August 2008
at 1:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

Sometimes it is interesting, Informed, to rattle the tree and see what falls out of the limbs….

12 August 2008
at 2:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

I don't even have a brian. but if I did, and it was one third the size of yours, I bet it would work 300% more efficiently. The only Brian I can think of is the guy at the butcher shop I go to.
12 August 2008
at 2:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

Sorry there, 'victus, but that statement of yours had nothing to do with 'showing concern', and everything to do with roiling the waters by throwing out racial innuendo.And I'll raise your 1/3 size brian with two sarah bellums.
12 August 2008
at 2:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

I know her. She worked at the special ed coop for awhile. we called her para bellum. does she have a twin?
12 August 2008
at 2:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jrg (Anonymous) says…

It is a private school. The parents and the student agree to the school's policies when the child is enrolled. If the school says English only, its English only. These families need to assimilate. The school does not have to accommodate. Families like these should quit balkanizing the United States in the name of diversity. If The parents and the students want to speak Spanish at school, there are many schools in Latin America. I hear its a wonderfully diverse culture south of the border.
12 August 2008
at 2:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

Usted blancos son tan estÃ°pidas. Ustedes saben que vamos a recuperar nuestra tierra de una manera u otra.
12 August 2008
at 2:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

Vamos a tener mÃ¡s de este paÃ-s y hacer nuestra propia! Ya hemos tenido mÃ¡s de sus prisiones! Nuestras bandas lentamente destruir tus ciudades! Â¡Viva Mexico!
12 August 2008
at 2:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

Su hospitales son muy limpio y las sillas en la sala de emergencia son muy cÃ³modos para sentarse in Me gusta llevar a mi familia a la sala de emergencia cuando estamos enfermos. Me gusta demasiado su casas. Ellos estÃ¡n muy bien construidos y me gusta mi familia a vivir en ellos. Conducir es divertido en este paÃ-s porque es muy grande y hay tantos caminos pavimentados. Es realmente agradable.
12 August 2008
at 3 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

Mi Mexico es un paÃ-s sucio y no hay trabajo. No se cÃ³mo o por que Mexico es tan sucio. Sin embargo, las aguas residuales proviene de alguna parte y un montÃ³n de personas viven en cajas de cartÃ³n en las ciudades. Una gran cantidad de personas que venden drogas o ejecutar las drogas a los Estados Unidos. Su buen dinero, pero quedarse fuera de la cÃ¡rcel. Cruce de mÃ¡s de la boarder es peligroso, pero una vez que entran en el paÃ-s nadie puede encontrarnos.

12 August 2008
at 3:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

jaywalker (Anonymous) says:”And I'll raise your 1/3 size brian with two sarah bellums.”Sherry Breel in Gore-Tex?
12 August 2008
at 3:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Well, barrypenders, I would argue that we whites aren't so stupid. We don't know that you are going to regain your land one way or another.How are you going to get more of this country and make it your own? Yes, I know you already have the prisons, but do you really think your gangs will slowly destroy our cities?I'm glad you think our hospitals are clean and that the chairs in the emergency room are comfortable. Are you really glad to leave your family in the waiting room when they are sick?Yes, I understand that you think our houses are well built and that your family likes to live in them.I'm glad you enjoy our paved roads and think that it's fun to drive in this country since the roads are so large (wide).blah, blah, blah.Was that supposed to be some sort of challenge?
12 August 2008
at 3:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shorttrees (Anonymous) says…

I knew Sarah (the para) Bellum. Her twin is Annie Bellum.
12 August 2008
at 3:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

Me siento orgulloso de ser de este paÃ-s y que necesita para dejar de hostigar a mÃ-. Me gusta aprender en este countrts las escuelas y hablar de los otros estudiantes. Se ven a mÃ- tan divertido cuando hablo.
12 August 2008
at 3:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

Sarah and Annie are cousins..no kidding. And yes they have an aunt…wait for it…Ante Bellum
12 August 2008
at 3:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Annie Bellum is my father's sister and I've always called her Auntie Bellum.
12 August 2008
at 3:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Sorry, autie, looks like we were both posting at the same time!Cheers!
12 August 2008
at 3:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

would that have been “post antebellum”?

12 August 2008
at 3:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

What happened to vicky? He went away after Brian.
12 August 2008
at 3:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

d_prowess (Anonymous) says…

I opehay atthay igpay atinlay evernay iesday!
12 August 2008
at 5:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

autie (Anonymous) says:”would that have been 'post antebellum'?”http://img323.imageshack.us/img323/3792/splodely6.jpg
12 August 2008
at 6:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

Thanks to jonas, autie, shorttrees, and informed for keepin' that goin'. Needed a chuckle today.
12 August 2008
at 7:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

The only way travesty's like this will be corrected are term limits. The American voter has the power to limit the term of Politicians but haven't figured it out yet.
12 August 2008
at 7:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

notajayhawk: “If the school said the kids had to speak Latin, that's their right….”Hmm… and what of the Latin liturgical rites in the English-only Catholic Diocese of Wichita?
12 August 2008
at 9:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

levotb (Anonymous) says…

Uninformed-Students speaking in another language to avoid being heard by a teacher CAN be disciplined! I was, in high school. I spoke Spanish with my Argentinian classmate in our French class, and caught hell from our French teacher for it. She put a stop to it right away. She probably understood everything we were whispering, anyway! As to whether it's “a right” or not, a school has rules. If the students who attend don't like the rules, they can drop out and attend another school where their behavior—in this case, speaking Spanish in the class—isn't considered “disruptive”. If schools can't enforce discipline, we might as well all bend over because the country (of which our schools are a big part) is finished. But that's exactly what this scumbag lawyer and other leftist miscreants want to have happen—the bringing down of the social fabric, the destruction of mores (not the eels—those are morays), the tearing down of traditions. It's the “Bring it all down, man!” crowd at it again. And sadly, some of the posters here seem to be part of that movement…
12 August 2008
at 9:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

notajayhawk (Anonymous) says…

jonas (Anonymous) says: “I find it highly unlikely that a private company anywhere in the states could get away with outlawing the use of foreign languages within their walls in such an absolute fashion. I imagine that this policy will be overturned soon.”Really?Can an American automobile manufacturer limit a certain employee parking lot or lots to domestically made cars?************************tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says: “Hmm: and what of the Latin liturgical rites in the English-only Catholic Diocese of Wichita?”Well, since the Liturgy hasn't been said in Latin for many years, I don't see that as being much of an issue. And you might have noticed I said “IF.” As the rule stands now, even Latin can't be spoken by the students while at school. And if they felt like changing that rule to Latin-only, then they'd be perfectly within their rights to say students can't speak English while at school. It's a private school - if you don't agree to the rules, go elsewhere.

12 August 2008
at 9:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Sorry, levotb. None of the stories on this subject that I could find said anything about the students speaking another language in class to avoid being heard by the teacher. If you have a different (credible) source, please link to it.I'm also sorry (for you) that your xenophobia is so advanced that you fear anyone speaking a language other than English will lead to “the bringing down of the social fabric, the destruction of mores, …the tearing down of traditions.” You really ought to get out more.Oh, and by the way, as I stated in another thread recently, I'm a very, very conservative Republican, not one of your feared “leftist miscreants.” Really, you need to get out more. Your xenophobia seems to be spiced with a generous dash of paranoia.Want to buy a tin foil hat? I think I just heard the black helicopters.
12 August 2008
at 10:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

notajayhawk: “… if you don't agree to the rules, go elsewhere.”,;-DIf you don't agree with the rules, *change* them.
12 August 2008
at 10:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

tange: “If you don't agree with the rules, *change* them.”… and if you can't change them… lingual disobedience!
12 August 2008
at 11:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

RETICENT_IRREVERENT (Anonymous) says…

“just like your brian is 1/3 the size of mine, it's science.” - invictus Why would some one name it Brian?I call mine Ronaldo AgustÃ-n Santiago Thiago Lautaro Valentin Ignacio Jr. .But my spousal unit just refers to it as “It”.
12 August 2008
at 11:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

,;-D( PS… I'd drop the “Jr.”… it's… *diminutive*. )
13 August 2008
at 7:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

“Diocese spokesman Fred Solis called the lawsuit unfortunate, saying the church has historically offered support and services to minorities and spoken out for immigrant rights.The diocese has said the school enacted the policy in response to four students who were using Spanish to bully others and to put down teachers and administrators”In another story the litigant's lawyers claim that the school asserted that full immersion into the English language would benefit the students and help them to assimilate. While that makes sense, I'd still have a problem with the policy if two Hispanic students could get expelled for speaking Spanish to each other at lunch. But my biggest problem with this whole thing is that they were able to make a 'federal case' out of this because the school recieves federal stipends in the form of lunch vouchers for the less fortunate students. On a side note, I'd like to be able to slap every lawyer who pins on the 'emotional suffering' charge for 'damages'.
13 August 2008
at 9:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

Private businesses are clearly required to abide by our federal constitution, which includes a number of anti-discriminatory provisions.Whether this situation is covered remains to be seen, of course, but it always surprises me that so many feel “It's a private…, they can do whatever they want.”Can a private landlord rent only to white tenants on principle?Can a private business owner sexually harass his employees?Can a private bar refuse to allow people in based on their race?Can a private club be for men only?If you answered yes to any of the above, I think you don't understand our constitution very well.
13 August 2008
at 9:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

can a private club require certain manners of dress on their golf course? can a restuarant require gentlemen to wear a jacket and tie?no shoes, no shirt, no service?

13 August 2008
at 9:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

vickibev (Anonymous) says…

This is our/my country. We speak English here. I believe that every school, every business owner has the right to insist that English be spoken while on the job. I do not think that the teachers, paras, etc. should have to learn Spanish so they can tell if a student is “making fun of them” in a foreign language. Those students should be using English. I hate how things have turned around so much in our country that we are “afraid” of offending so many people. Those people need to be here legally and they need to learn English. I'm not Catholic, but I say Kudos to a school who stands up for their policies and I say to the student who refused to sign a form that he would speak English while at school, should have been expelled. He or she can go to school south across the border.
13 August 2008
at 10:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

aeroscout17 (Anonymous) says…

Jafs, where in the Constitution does it say that you can't restrict what language is spoken on your property? All of the items you have discussed are covered in the document or in later court cases which expanded the Constitution.It is always good to demand your rights, even if you don't know what they are.
13 August 2008
at 4:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

You should re-read my post for the answer to your question.
13 August 2008
at 4:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

As I commented, it remains to be seen what the courts will have to say about this issue.But, just for the heck of it, how about the 1st amendment, which protects the right to free speech? I imagine it could be argued that by restricting language, one is restricting speech. It would have to be shown that there are extremely good reasons for doing so, e.g. “Fire” in a crowded theater.
13 August 2008
at 6:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tangential_reasoners_anonymous (Anonymous) says…

“… one student… who was allegedly kicked out for refusing to sign the “English only” pledge.”… and one has to wonder at his refusal, because, after all, isn't the *sign* for the “English only” pledge the one which requires but a single finger?
13 August 2008
at 6:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

autie (Anonymous) says…

and the country club can require a collar on your shirt to play golf..and the restaurant can require gentlemen to wear a tie…and no shirt,no shoes, no service…Quik Trip?
13 August 2008
at 7:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

justfornow (Anonymous) says…

Fight back by voting, stop giving our Country away and oh yea, “you stupid liberals”.
13 August 2008
at 8:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Informed (Anonymous) says…

Ja, ein bisschen.

14 August 2008
at 6:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

“how about the 1st amendment, which protects the right to free speech? I imagine it could be argued that by restricting language, one is restricting speech.”How about speaking out of turn in class?Or shouting out the answers during a test?Talking while someone else is giving a speech?Talking in any language during study time?
14 August 2008
at 2:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

Those are reasonable questions.We do restrict speech in various ways, but generally there have to be quite good reasons to do so, given the 1st amendment.Taking your questions one at a time:I don't think enforcing strict “turns” of speech important enough to justify restricting speech.Shouting out answers during a test seems to justify restriction.Whose speech is it and why is the person speaking out? We already have “free speech zones” so that people can't make their objections known to the president - that seems absurd to me.How disruptive is speaking during “study time” - why is there a special time for that?Trying to “control” students is not enough reason to violate their 1st amendment rights, in my opinion.I'd rather see teachers engage their students in productive dialogue and discourse than try to make them shut up.
14 August 2008
at 3:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…

I fear this is another indelible step toward the point where I will have to learn Spanish just to get by. I want to preface this by saying that I have no problem with immigration (at least legal immigration, but that's a whole different topic with a whole different debate.) But don't come to a country where the generally-used language, whether legally “official” or not, is English and then expect not to have to speak it on a regular basis. If that isn't satisfactory to you, don't come here. I didn't put a gun to your head, kidnap you, and bring you to America — you came voluntarily, because you wanted the benefits. Well, every benefit requires some sort of sacrifice, so I guess you'll just have to sacrifice and learn English.
14 August 2008
at 5:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dweezil222 (Anonymous) says…

Here's an idea: Parents of English-speaking-only students at the school, sue the school because it has discriminated against your children, because your kid sad something obscene in English and got suspended/disciplined for it, but the kid sitting behind him said the exact same thing in Spanish and was not disciplined (likely because the teacher couldn't understand it). It's exactly the same.I long for the days when whites are no longer a majority (2042, last I saw), so I can start playing the race card too. Not to mention reaping the benefits of affirmative action and suing the university my kid didn't get into because they didn't accept enough white students. Racist? You bet your ass. But no more so than what legions of minority organizations do now.
15 August 2008
at 6:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

logicsound, check out 12 August, 8:18, 8:19 a.m.Were you on vacation? Or at a grief management class?jafs, you admit there are times when speech should be restricted.Why is requiring English at an English speaking school out of line?
15 August 2008
at 8:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

I acknowledge that there are times when it is permissable to restrict speech, but that there must be very good reasons to do so, given the basic protection of free speech in the 1st amendment.What are the very good reasons in this case?If the teachers feel a little bit uncomfortable because they don't understand what students are saying, I'm not sure that's a good enough reason.
15 August 2008
at 9:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gr (Anonymous) says…

How about forget about not understanding it, but just because, “English is spoken here”.If someone went to Mexican schools, would you think it reasonable for them to not allow English?Or how about in Iraqi schools? Or Afghanistan?Is a good reason to restrict free speech to a certain language in order to prevent disruption of the class? Can speaking a foreign language cause disruption?
18 August 2008
at 8:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jafs (Anonymous) says…

“English is spoken here” is not a very good reason, in my opinion.I can't speak for other countries - I don't know what their Constitutions include, if they have them.Disruption of classes is an interesting issue - it can of course occur regardless of language. I favor creating an atmosphere in which learning can take place. It seems to me that our schools and many teachers are more focused on trying to control students.If schools have reasonable policies about disrupting classes, they can enforce them without banning certain languages, can't they?