Id say more Racial but YMMV

Well said, Mario.

I can see a point there. The issues of face value here are the Principal's actions and the boy's actions. The former is the head of an institution thereby being a political structure and political issue. The latter being a possible racial issue but under the pretenses of the tensions I've pointed out also being of a political nature. Plus, notice that I highlighted Political Science. If we were discussing this topic in Poli Sci class is it not likely to be political?

Thanks Tom.

Oh by the way. Please always remember ladies and gents, :-) and do value your friendships and opinions.

I was a Poli Sci major in college Mario, and not every topic discussed in class automatically qualified as "political". I would say this thread so far has not become so in the sense of what we limit on CA, but obviously the definition is somewhat subjective. If it crosses a line, I am sure one of the other ToE will take note. :-)

This is true Tom. You guys always take care of this home of ours. Thank you TOE!:-)

They were not clearly trying to antagonize anyone.

As far as the reports, no one seems to think they were either.

And these reports came from where?

Your not just a grouchy Veteran Darrell:-) I agree with your opinion though. No one is going to tell me not to wear my Country's colors, on any day of the year.

This country has a rich history and the Flag is symbolic of that history. There have been times where people have disgraced it by wearing it like a common piece of clothing or disgracing it by burning it in public. Understand that many men and women died for what it represents and if anyone wears it to disparage it should be strung up. Some challenge those ideas with letters, with their protests and with them speaking their minds on a variety of subject matter associated with what they feel or where they think this country should be going. The Flag on the other hand is symbolic of those things that are sacred to those people who willingly gave up their lives to defend...freedoms we take for granted so many times.

I don't know the full scope of the real story but if these kids wore the flags to promote something negative they disgraced the real meaning of what it represents. If they wore them to support it's true meaning then I for one am proud of them and think that the person(s) who sent them home are a disgrace. Freedoms that we have can be abused and in a perfect world this should not happen. At the end of the day remember it was those freedoms you have that were purchased with the lives of those who were ready to make the ultimate sacrifice.

Lis Wiehl, a former federal prosecutor.

Eugene Volokh, a professor of law at the University of California-Los Angeles.

:-) No source huh? If your source was the news then I suggest you don't believe everything the news tells you. Do you honestly believe no ill will was involved here?

Edit: Okay, where is this report? What do they have to do with the incident? Is this source completely unbiased?

Again, I am fine to be in the minority and am not asking you to come to my way of thinking.... I could not care less if you agree or what the reports stated....

Not for one minute do I think these fashionistas were just wearing their flag shirts and bandannas as part of their school clothing rotation.... With that, I think their exact motive was to antagonize....

I just don't think there is a place for that at school.....

The kids were not actually "wearing" the Flag itself, just to clear things up. Here is an example, and I think some were thinking the opposite.
Image

There is a source in the OP. And it is unbiased.

I do beleive there was ill involved here. The party being the school.

Also, like Tom said, Im sure we can all keep this NON-political:-)

I'm just glad I live in Arizona :-)

According to news reports there were five of them sitting together at the same table, two wearing bandanas as well. Sounds like a statement to me and to the principal who was actually there. I was watching the news a while ago and saw one of the shirts and it was way louder than the one portrayed in your image.

As far as your sources go, I did a quick search. The lady works for FOX or something so is biased. News stations generally try to blow up stories and will often favor the majority in these instances. As far as the guy goes, it seems that his expertise is in law. First Amendment law at that. I'm sure the boys actions are protected under such laws but so are those of Neo Nazi's and the KKK. Not that I'm comparing this to them but there is a time and a place for everything. How on Earth can the report you claim that came from these two "experts" on law show that there was no antagonization involved here? If that issue is to be addressed it should be addressed by experts of a related field such as a gang unit, hate specialist, psychologist, etc. Not a couple of lawyers.

Like I said about intent being lost in the symbolism of the flag...if they were not being antagonistic, then they really, really ignorant of their surroundings and that funny little thing called a calendar. Again, was the decision by the vice-principal the best one? It may or may not have been. That is something that all of the people at the school should have more insight on than any of us or others reporting on it so far. Many variables could be involved in this. Maybe, just maybe, their is more to this than what it seems on the surface, from afar.

Neo Nazis= violence
kkk= violence

I don't think they would have very much protected under the First Amendment.

Also, I think that if the school actually had violence because of the kids wearing the shirts, then it would be a different story. I don't think there was any violence that day.

I think more info surfacing will help.

Also, another thing to think about: This school in Cali, how many of them are Americans? You would think that they would be fine with the American Flag also present, no? I mean, it is America after all, and it is an American school.