“Bong Hits for Jesus”
Critical Response Paper “Bong Hits For Jesus”
Critical Response Paper “Bong Hits For Jesus”
In my ruling, the illegal glorification of the drug culture “Bong hits for Jesus”. I feel the school had made a bad judgment call about having the banner. I feel it is not an attack on the saying “Bong hits for Jesus”. I feel that this is an attack on the student’s first amendment rights, just because the sign had something to do with marijuana. The school has an anti- drug program. I believe a non- disruptive pin, shirt, banner, etc. should not be taking from a student, for the shear fact that they oppose the anti-drug programs that the school offers. It is an attack on their first amendments rights. It was a 15-foot joke. The school dose has the right to not tolerate an interruption of a school sponsored anti-drug event. But this was not this kind of an event and the banner was not placed on school grounds. The banner was placed across the street from the school in a public open forum. One cannot be punished for holding of a banner not on school property. I feel that the principal was wrong to hastily take the banner down in the heat of the moment, but feel she should not pay punitive damages, for the banner was not worth much. Though the pride of the student’s who put the banner up was hurt a little I feel they should not be punished for expressing their first amendment rights, which they demonstrated non-violently, very conformed manner, and not on school property.
“Work Cited”
Critical Response Paper “Bong Hits For Jesus”
In my ruling, the illegal glorification of the drug culture “Bong hits for Jesus”. I feel the school had made a bad judgment call about having the banner. I feel it is not an attack on the saying “Bong hits for Jesus”. I feel that this is an attack on the student’s first amendment rights, just because the sign had something to do with marijuana. The school has an anti- drug program. I believe a non- disruptive pin, shirt, banner, etc. should not be taking from a student, for the shear fact that they oppose the anti-drug programs that the school offers. It is an attack on their first amendments rights. It was a 15-foot joke. The school dose has the right to not tolerate an interruption of a school sponsored anti-drug event. But this was not this kind of an event and the banner was not placed on school grounds. The banner was placed across the street from the school in a public open forum. One cannot be punished for holding of a banner not on school property. I feel that the principal was wrong to hastily take the banner down in the heat of the moment, but feel she should not pay punitive damages, for the banner was not worth much. Though the pride of the student’s who put the banner up was hurt a little I feel they should not be punished for expressing their first amendment rights, which they demonstrated non-violently, very conformed manner, and not on school property.
“Work Cited”
Cited: https://hub2.devry.edu/node/1247