There are two major problems with Mathewson's line, the first being that Webb City officials do have the right to keep him from wearing his t-shirts, and second, the text of the lawsuit reveals Mathewson to be a rude, disrespectful young man, whose behavior probably should have merited a suspension, t-shirt or no t-shirt. And this is what the American Civil Liberties Union lawyers are telling us.
This is the Mathewson version of what happened, and mind you, this version leaves out the defense that Webb City officials will mount if this issue ever comes to court. The ACLU offers a "factual background" to the case.
"Plaintiff Brad Edward Mathewson is a 16-year-old junior enrolled at Webb City High School in Webb City, MO. Plaintiff is gay. He occasionally wears clothing that expresses his political support for the rights of people of various sexual orientations.
"On or about Oct. 20, 2004, (Mathewson) attended Webb City High School wearing a T-shirt that said, "Gay-Straight Alliance" on the front. The words "Make a Difference" appeared on the back with three pairs of symbols (two male symbols, two female symbols and a male and female, and a pink triangle, a well-known symbol of the gay rights movement.
"That morning, (Mathewson's) homeroom teacher, Ms. Gray, told him that the T-shirt was inappropriate and sent (him) to the office for disciplinary action. At Ms. Gray's direction, (Mathewson) met with the assistant principal, Jeff Thornsberry, who told (him) that the shirt was inappropriate, distracting, and offensive to other students. At no time did plaintiff's t-shirt provoke any outburst or disruption from his fellow classmates. In fact, he previously wore this same t-shirt at least six times without incident.
"When plaintiff questioned Thornsberry about why the t-shirt was considered inappropriate, distracting, and offensive to others, Thornsberry refused to explain his statements. When Plaintiff pointed out that other students' notebooks and backpacks bear negative messages about gay marriage, Thornsberry refused to reconsider, and claimed that the other students' expression was different. Thornsberry gave (Mathewson) the option of changing his shirt or turning it inside out. Faced with a direct order from Webb City High School's administration, Mathewson chose the latter option."
The lawsuit continues, "On the way to the bathroom to turn his shirt inside out, Mathewson met a friend in the hallway. His friend is heterosexual. He and his friend decided to switch shirts. Unlike Mathewson's experience, his friend wore the allegedly inappropriate, distracting and offensive shirt without incident. No teacher or administrator approached him about removing the shirt or turning it inside out.
"A second incident occurred on or about Oct. 27, 2004, when Mathewson wore a t-shirt with a rainbow, a star, and the words, "I'm gay and I'm proud." Similarly, one of his friends wore a t-shirt that declared, 'I love lesbians.'
"Thornsberry approached Mathewson and demanded that he change shirts or turn the shirt inside out. Thornsberry also demanded that plaintiff's friend change his shirt. Mathewson refused to change his shirt or hide its message. Upset, Mathewson left school early to talk to his mother about the incident.
According to the lawsuit, Mathewson and his mother met with Gollhofer, Thornsberry, and Assistant Principal Randy Richardson. The lawsuit indicates the officials tried to convince them they were trying to protect Mathewson from "other students who might be provoked to act out against (him) because he is gay and publicly supports gay rights." Gollhofer allegedly pointed out that Webb City is in the middle of the Bible Belt and said Mathewson was "flaunting" his homosexuality.
The problems continued the next day, according to the lawsuit. "During his homeroom period, Mathewson and his friend were discussing the two incidents related to Mathewson's political t-shirts. Ms. Gray, the homeroom teacher, told Mathewson and his friend in a raised tone of voice not to discuss the issue of Mathewson's t-shirts." The lawsuit indicates they did as she said "although other students in the same homeroom were having discussions, none were asked to be silent."
The lawsuit indicates Mathewson confronted Ms. Gray after the homeroom period and asked why he had been "singled out for discipline. Ms. Gray refused to answer the question." That didn't stop Mathewson, who kept pushing at her to give him an answer. She walked him to Gollhofer's office. After he talked with each of them individually, he told Mathewson he needed to "respect his teacher's in-class orders."
The lawsuit indicates Mathewson kept pushing the issue and said he had obeyed her orders and he again asked why he had been "singled out." As Mathewson kept trying to push the t-shirt issue and his freedom of expression rights, the conversation "escalated," the lawsuit said.
Mathewson told Gollhofer that the school officials were "narrow-minded" and said, "You people suck!"
The mindset of the defendant is revealed in the followup line to the "you people suck" statement. It was called "an expression Mr. Gollhofer considered to be offensive." Gollhofer called Mathewson's mother and asked her to come to the school to discuss the situation.
Not without our lawyer, she said.
On Nov. 2, the Mathewsons and Joplin lawyer Bill Fleischaker met with Lankford and Gollhofer. The Mathewsons were told Brad would not be allowed back in school unless he agreed to stop wearing the t-shirts, according to the lawsuit.
To throw a further inflammatory note into the lawsuit, it was noted that Mathewson saw a student wearing a t-shirt that said, "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve,' in an area of the school "where school officials were present."
The ACLU is asking for a preliminary injunction against the school district to allow Mathewson to wear his t-shirts while the case is being decided. As usual, when students' First Amendment rights are being discussed, the case of Tinker vs. Board of Education is cited. The Des Moines, Iowa, case involved high school students who wanted to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War in the '60s.
"While some students were unreceptive to the armbands and made some hostile remarks regarding them, the Court noted that there were no threats or acts of violence on school premises.
"In the end, the court found that the school officials' ban was an unconstitutional suppression of a particular opinion. 'Students in school may not be confined to the expression of those sentiments that are officially approved."
The ACLU argues that Mathewson's shirts are simply "Tinker 35 years later."
"Plaintiff's political T-shirts did not disrupt classwork or other school activities, nor is there any evidence that the shirts intrude upon the rights of others 'to be secure and to be let alone."
The lawsuit points out that students are allowed to wear t-shirts with religious messages on them, such as "What Would Jesus Do?" and "God's Army Recruit."
And students are "occasionally asked to share their political viewpoints during class. The argument is even made that since Mathewson's American government class discussed the 2004 presidential election, then why shouldn't gay rights be discussed.
The lawsuit said, "There is no question that some, but not all, Webb City High School students are permitted to engage in constitutionally protected personal expression every day. However, defendants have crossed the constitutional line by designating 'appropriate' viewpoints while forbidding student dialogue regarding 'non-conforming' viewpoints. Our Constitution and the Supreme Court simply do not permit this; the law in the United States is that students are permitted to express their point of view, no matter how controversial, no matter how unpopular without pre-approval by the school faculty or administration so long as the expression does not cause it disruption or disturbance."
Mathewson will suffer "irreparable injury" if a temporary injunction is not granted, the lawsuit said. He has "endured unnecessary stress in his daily life because of Defendants' violation of his constitutional right to personal expression."
***
The Mathewson case is a top story in today's edition of The New York Times. The Times, which apparently does not want to offend the influential gay community in New York, did not mention Mathewson's defiant and disrespectful attitude toward Gollhofer, Ms. Gray, and the other school officials.
It does quote Gollhofer, who naturally, is unable to comment much because of the lawsuit. Mrs. Mathewson told The Times, "All (my son) wants to do is to wear his t-shirts. He's a typical teenager, so he's angry that they're trying to tell him what he can and can't do. We had a meeting at the school to talk about it, but we didn't get anywhere with them. They talked, I listened and I got more and more mad. At the end, I just took him home with me."
Since the case has been filed by the Western Missouri ACLU chapter out of Kansas City, the story is quite naturally prominently featured in today's Kansas City Star. Again, Mathewson's attitude and disrespect were not mentioned, even though they are clearly featured in the ACLU lawsuit.
***
It is quite possible that a court will rule in favor of Mathewson, though I have known Dr. Lankford and Mr. Gollhofer for years and have no doubt that there is another, strong side to this case.
A decision in favor of Brad Mathewson would be wrong. This is not a Tinker case, no matter how hard Mathewson and the ACLU try to make it one. Rules against T-shirts with provocative messages on them, most of which are not political, are necessary and are used in schools throughout this country. The Webb City officials made a mistake by not noticing the anti-homosexual messages that were being displayed on t-shirts. Those t-shirts did not have any place at Webb City either and school officials have cracked down on them since the moment they were first made aware of them. It is almost impossible for school officials to catch all of the suggestive and potentially disruptive messages on t-shirts and other articles of clothing and there are many parents who don't care that their children are wearing such items to school.
Another dangerous message being sent by the ACLU that is students should be able to select discussion topics and that any and all topics should be permitted to be voiced in the classroom. If a judge rules that students can bring up subjects such as gay rights, abortion, and other push-button issues, then in all likelihood many teachers will simply forego the discussion technique and return to old-fashioned lectures.
Discussions are worthwhile for students, but the teachers need to be the ones who are in charge of them.
And, unfortunately, the Mathewson case brings out some of the biggest problems we have in American education today. We have more parents who are interested in coddling their children and being "supportive" of them, no matter who gets hurt in the process. There was a day when children who got in trouble at school would get in more trouble at home.
If a student told school officials "you guys suck," that student would be facing big-time discipline. Nowadays, the parents bring the lawyers automatically and don't even see the need to have their children apologize for treating adults with shocking disrespect.
Tinker was a principled high school student who thoroughly believed that the Vietnam War was wrong. He treated the Des Moines school officials with respect. Don't compare him to Brad Mathewson.
Comparisons have also been made with the civil rights movement. People like Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy were principled men who also treated the establishment with respect. Don't compare them to Brad Mathewson.
- Those people were giants. Brad Mathewson is a spoiled brat.
5 comments:
And your being disrespectful to him. Look, it comes down to whether other speech was permitted while his was not. Was it an accident that they missed the Adam and Steve shirt? You come to that conclusion rather quick I think. Maybe your bias? Maybe the very bias that caused them to miss the anti-gay displays that may have been missed for years.
My bias on this case comes from being a teacher. Our school also has a dress code, not quite as strict as Webb City's in some ways, but similar in its treatment of t-shirts with messages on them. Sometimes you don't notice the shirts at first and it is hard to tell which shirts might cause problems and which won't. Most of the problems are with sexually suggestive messages. You also run into the problem of generational differences. A message that might be understood by the younger generation and could cause problems would just slip right past an old geezer like me. And sometimes students are able to get away with wearing a shirt that violates a dress code for a day or two. A failure to notice someone speeding twice doesn't give the speeder carte blanche to do it a third time.
I also do have a bias against anyone who can't get across his message with something more intelligent than "you guys suck." Teachers and school officials deserve more respect.
I also have a bias against parents who immediately resort to the courts instead of making an effort to work through the system. I have always backed students who worked respectfully for change, even when I didn't agree with the change they wanted.
What test are we to use for what causes problems and what does not? I would imagine a God made adam and Eve shirt would get far less attention in SWMO than an I am gay and proud shirt. Both from teachers and students, most notably the ones that view homosexuality as a sin. The test for free speech should never be popularity.
I went to school here and can tell you that teachers are much more concerned about preventing students from talking about condoms than actually having a relationship with a youth they consider troubled. I can also tell you that part of the reason why trouble youth are having problems is this socially conservative authoritarian idea that uniformity should be achieved through coercion and fear of anything outside the status quo is the Christian thing to do. The environment they create is one of hostility and social exile for various minorities.
And what is this idea that when a gay person is gay in public that he/she is flaunting or being disruptive? Yet, the heteroseuxal couples can suck face on national television and it passes as part of the event/program.
“The framers of the Constitution knew, and we should not forget today, that there is no more effective practical guaranty against arbitrary and unreasonable government than to require that the principles of law which officials would impose upon a minority be imposed generally” ~Justice Jackson, Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York, 336 U.S. 106, 112—113 (1949) (concurring opinion).
Oh, and I am a married male to my wonderful wife.
Nothing in the record indicates that the parent "immediately" resorted to litigation.
The student could have been more respectful and adult, I agree. How did he get that way?
Was it really a coincidence that the school officials noticed his shirt first? Have you ever been a yellow man in a purple town?
hey guys names brad, the one that sued them....first of all the shirt was a G.S.A tshirt that was not even 6 months old...it said make a difference! there was nuthing in their dress code to prevent me wearing it. and if u actually read into my story u'd see that it wasnt just one shirt but many and bumper stickers all over the school, among other things. and i traded the shirt with a str8 guy whom they had no problem wearing it cuz he was a sports playin army boi 4 the school. So keep ur mouth shut unless u know what ur talkin bout pls k thnx. and so u know, i didnt want the attention, i didnt sue for money...i just wanted my credits bak that i earned that were taken unfairly and everything removed from my record, thats it!
Post a Comment