Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

School Threatens to Ruin Valedictorian’s Naval Academy Appt.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • School Threatens to Ruin Valedictorian’s Naval Academy Appt.

    By Todd Starnes
    A Texas high school principal threatened to sabotage a valedictorian’s appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy after the student delivered a speech that referenced God and the U.S. Constitution, Fox News has learned.

    Hiram Sasser, director of litigation with the Liberty Institute, said Joshua High School principal Mick Cochran threatened to write a letter to the U.S. Naval Academy disparaging the character of Remington Reimer.

    “It was intimidating having my high school principal threaten my future because I wanted to stand up for the Constitution and acknowledge my faith and not simply read a government approved speech, the teenager said.

    Sasser is now representing the teenager and is calling for the Joshua Independent School District to issue a public statement exonerating him of any wrongdoing.
    He said the speech was edited and reviewed by four different school officials – including an officer in the JROTC. Sasser said the censorship violated federal and state laws.

    “All he did was simply follow state law and Joshua ISD policy,” he said.

    Reimer, a senior at Joshua High School, made national headlines on June 6 when officials cut off his microphone in mid-speech after he strayed from pre-approved remarks and began talking about his relationship with Jesus Christ.
    Reimer, who has received an appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy, thanked God for “sending His only son to die for me and the rest of the world,” the Joshua Star reported.

    The following day the principal met with Reimer’s father and informed him “that he intended to punish Remington for his perceived misdeed.”
    “Specifically, he threatened to send a letter to the United States Naval Academy advising them that Remington has poor character or words to that effect,” Sasser told Fox News.

    After consulting with a school attorney, the principal temporarily retracted the threat, Sasser said.
    “The principal said he wanted to try to ruin him for what he did – for talking about the Constitution and his faith,” Sasser said. “I don’t know if he’s going to be able to continue to be the principal of that school.”

    Reimer, described by his classmates as quiet and soft-spoken, then talked about free speech and the Constitution and how “I was threatened with having the mic turned off.”

    And that point – the audio feed was cut – leaving those in the audience confused. But Reimer kept on talking.
    Following is a transcript of what the school district didn’t want graduates or their families to hear:

    “We are all fortunate to live in a country where we can express our beliefs, where our mics won’t be turned off, as I have been threatened to be if I veer away from the school-censored speech I have just finished,” he said according to the Star. “Just as Jesus spoke out against the authority of the Pharisees and Sadducees, who tried to silence him, I will not have my freedom of speech taken away from me. And I urge you all to do the same. Do not let anyone take away your religious or Constitutional rights from you.”

    Principal Mick Cochran defended the school’s decision to cut off the audio feed.

    “The district has reviewed the rules and policies regarding graduation speeches and has determined that the policy was followed last night,” he told the Star.
    The Joshua ISD issued a statement to MyFoxDFW noting, “student speakers were told that if their speeches deviated from the prior-reviewed material, the microphone would be turned off, regardless of content. When one student’s speech deviated from the prior-reviewed speech, the microphone was turned off, pursuant to District policy and procedure.”

    But Sasser said the school district violated state and federal laws by censoring Reimer’s speech. He said the law, along with local school policy, requires the school to distance itself from the valedictorian’s speech. That means not editing or drafting the speech.

    The school was also required to publish a message in the graduation program that read in part, “the content of each student-speaker’s message is the private expression of the individual student and does not reflect the endorsement, sponsorship, position or expression of the District.”
    Sasser said contrary to the law and its own policies the Joshua Independent School District failed to include the disclaimer and not only edited – but tried to control Reimer’s speech.

    “These school officials broke the rules and violated state and federal law and their own board policy,” Sasser said. “They should be held accountable for violating school board policy and causing needless embarrassment for Joshua ISD and the Joshua community.”

    I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

  • #2
    This article is misleading. He's trying to use the religion line just like those track team kids. People need to learn that religious freedom doesn't grant you the ability to do whatever the fuck you want if you can attribute it to your religion. I'd also like to read the law and school policy that "requires the school to distance itself from the valedictorian's speech."

    I'm not sure if I believe them on the whole ruining the appointment deal since the kid can't be trusted to stick to his speech.

    This whole article seems like it's a sensation piece designed to sway public opinion. I expect no less from Fox News.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by racrguy View Post
      This article is misleading. He's trying to use the religion line just like those track team kids. People need to learn that religious freedom doesn't grant you the ability to do whatever the fuck you want if you can attribute it to your religion. I'd also like to read the law and school policy that "requires the school to distance itself from the valedictorian's speech."

      I'm not sure if I believe them on the whole ruining the appointment deal since the kid can't be trusted to stick to his speech.

      This whole article seems like it's a sensation piece designed to sway public opinion. I expect no less from Fox News.
      If I remember correctly those track kids won in court, so he may have a point.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by sc281 View Post
        If I remember correctly those track kids won in court, so he may have a point.
        I haven't seen any news articles about a court case yet, and the disqualification happened the beginning of May.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by racrguy View Post
          I haven't seen any news articles about a court case yet, and the disqualification happened the beginning of May.
          You're right. I had them confused with the cheerleaders that won in court for religious signs.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by sc281 View Post
            You're right. I had them confused with the cheerleaders that won in court for religious signs.
            No problemo. There won't be any litigation on the runners case, either. Apparently when the ref warned him about his gesture he turned into an asshole which caused his DQ. Read more here: http://www.uiltexas.org/press-releas...track-decision

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by racrguy View Post
              This article is misleading. He's trying to use the religion line just like those track team kids. People need to learn that religious freedom doesn't grant you the ability to do whatever the fuck you want if you can attribute it to your religion. I'd also like to read the law and school policy that "requires the school to distance itself from the valedictorian's speech."

              I'm not sure if I believe them on the whole ruining the appointment deal since the kid can't be trusted to stick to his speech.

              This whole article seems like it's a sensation piece designed to sway public opinion. I expect no less from Fox News.


              I don't think this has anything to do with religion, really. It's the censorship of freedom of speech that you should be worried about. And this surprises me coming from Joshua ISD. That principal sounds like a grade a cocksucker. Of course, I'm not a fucking titty baby that cries foul every time I hear someone mention religion. Who really fucking cares? He was the Valedictorian. He earned the right to say what he wanted, as long as it wasn't offensive. And if you're offended by religion, cry me a fucking river.
              Originally posted by BradM
              But, just like condoms and women's rights, I don't believe in them.
              Originally posted by Leah
              In other news: Brent's meat melts in your mouth.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by racrguy View Post
                This article is misleading. He's trying to use the religion line just like those track team kids. People need to learn that religious freedom doesn't grant you the ability to do whatever the fuck you want if you can attribute it to your religion. I'd also like to read the law and school policy that "requires the school to distance itself from the valedictorian's speech."

                I'm not sure if I believe them on the whole ruining the appointment deal since the kid can't be trusted to stick to his speech.

                This whole article seems like it's a sensation piece designed to sway public opinion. I expect no less from Fox News.
                Really? So you'd be cool with your school principal ruining your career because you said something he doesn't like? Not a 1st amendment violation but BS and petty.
                I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bcoop View Post
                  I don't think this has anything to do with religion, really. It's the censorship of freedom of speech that you should be worried about. And this surprises me coming from Joshua ISD. That principal sounds like a grade a cocksucker. Of course, I'm not a fucking titty baby that cries foul every time I hear someone mention religion. Who really fucking cares? He was the Valedictorian. He earned the right to say what he wanted, as long as it wasn't offensive. And if you're offended by religion, cry me a fucking river.
                  Exactly
                  I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by bcoop View Post
                    I don't think this has anything to do with religion, really. It's the censorship of freedom of speech that you should be worried about. And this surprises me coming from Joshua ISD. That principal sounds like a grade a cocksucker. Of course, I'm not a fucking titty baby that cries foul every time I hear someone mention religion. Who really fucking cares? He was the Valedictorian. He earned the right to say what he wanted, as long as it wasn't offensive. And if you're offended by religion, cry me a fucking river.
                    I get what you're saying, but he was making a speech that the school sanctioned, there are laws regarding what schools can and cannot say/do. Also, the reason he was cut off wasn't because he brought up religion, it was because he deviated from his submitted speech. I also don't believe this has to do with censorship of freedom of speech. It was the school's event, in which he had to play by their rules. If he wanted to say anything he pleased about anything he pleased, he should set up his own event.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      You realize following your train of thought Racr, No one should be able to say anything in opposition to the majority wherever they are. Don't like that the city council prays before the meeting? Suck it up, it's their meeting. Don't like the nativity scene at the town square? Don't live there.
                      I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
                        Really? So you'd be cool with your school principal ruining your career because you said something he doesn't like? Not a 1st amendment violation but BS and petty.
                        So you're going to take the side of the person that has already proven they can't be trusted to do exactly what they say? They've got nothing in this article that has any substance regarding the "punishment." It's all accusations.

                        Fact: They shut his microphone off because he didn't stick to the agreed upon plan.
                        Fact: He was warned of this ahead of time.

                        Would you want someone making direct life or death decisions for you who can't be expected to stick to what they say?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by racrguy View Post
                          I get what you're saying, but he was making a speech that the school sanctioned, there are laws regarding what schools can and cannot say/do.
                          The bolded part is the key. He is not a school official. I don't see the problem. I don't want to get preached to anymore than anyone else, believe me. But seriously, a few sentences that took maybe 2 minutes tops isn't going to offend me, or ruin my day. People go far above and beyond that at funerals every day. While a funeral isn't really bound by law like a school is, I still hold the opinion that he is not a school official, thus it should not matter.


                          And all of that is ignoring that the cocksucker of a principal tried to bully him, and badmouth him to the Naval Academy. That in and of itself should get the principal fired, and banned from future adminstrative positions.
                          Originally posted by BradM
                          But, just like condoms and women's rights, I don't believe in them.
                          Originally posted by Leah
                          In other news: Brent's meat melts in your mouth.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Sounds about right for Joshua. I would have let him write the letter. Then I would have crucified him with it.
                            Originally posted by racrguy
                            What's your beef with NPR, because their listeners are typically more informed than others?
                            Originally posted by racrguy
                            Voting is a constitutional right, overthrowing the government isn't.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
                              You realize following your train of thought Racr, No one should be able to say anything in opposition to the majority wherever they are. Don't like that the city council prays before the meeting? Suck it up, it's their meeting. Don't like the nativity scene at the town square? Don't live there.
                              False. It's the government, and there are rules that specifically state they cannot do those things you mention. This has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with him deviating from a pre-approved plan. They expected his speech to be a certain amount of time. These things are choreographed, if you allow them to do what they want you can run over your allotted time. Some schools don't rent a venue for the day, but instead for a half day, or a certain number of hours.

                              Of course, I don't expect you to understand what I'm saying.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X