Fayetteville, NC History Teacher Stomps on U.S. Flag in Classroom

You have an example of a student being expelled for having a confederate flag on their car?

I never said that anyone had been expelled for it, but "Pitchfork Nation" is quick to be outraged and call for justice when they feel someone is politically insensitive to someone else's culture. In my experience, rarely do I see that same outrage when someone is politically incorrect or insensitive to the things that I might find sacred.

Again, I'm not calling for his head, or even his suspension or termination, but you cannot have it both ways.

20 Students Suspended for wearing confederate flag clothing

Student suspended for displaying confederate flag on truck

School threatens student with expulsion over ‘gang symbol’ — the Confederate flag
 
I never said that anyone had been expelled for it, but "Pitchfork Nation" is quick to be outraged and call for justice when they feel someone is politically insensitive to someone else's culture. In my experience, rarely do I see that same outrage when someone is politically incorrect or insensitive to the things that I might find sacred.

Again, I'm not calling for his head, or even his suspension or termination, but you cannot have it both ways.

20 Students Suspended for wearing confederate flag clothing

Student suspended for displaying confederate flag on truck

School threatens student with expulsion over ‘gang symbol’ — the Confederate flag

I absolutely agree that those instances are total BS.
 
North Carolina Gen. Stat. Ch. 14, Art. 52, § 14-381 - Desecration of State and United States flag.

'It shall be unlawful for any person willfully and knowingly to cast contempt upon any flag of the United States or upon any flag of North Carolina by public acts of physical contact including, but not limited to, mutilation, defiling, defacing or trampling. Any person violating this section shall be deemed guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.'

I haven't yet found evidence of the above being repealed or modified. I do admit that it is possible Mr. Francis was acting against his will in his own class room, but would be surprised if this were the case.

Hunh.
 
If there's a law against it, he needs to be charged and tried. If he thinks the law is garbage, that's why we have an appeals process.

Without the law though...there's a real problem here. His BS with the flag is just asshole behavior through and through. This wasn't a big deal in the past though because people weren't a bunch of look-at-me-dickfucks and had some respect and decency to them. There are a metric shit ton of ways to protest and some were used successfully in the past, but this guy needed his 15 min. That brings me to the next point: the media's a pack of vermin. This isn't newsworthy and only feeds the dirtbags, fueling their hunt for another 15 min.

This isn't a flag problem or 1st Amendment problem, this is a societal problem with no end in sight.

I wonder if our children will hate us for the world we're leaving them.
 
"Yeah freedom of speech, the constitution, 2A, beer titties AMERICA"

Someone does something you don't like...

"He isn't American for it standing for the National Anthem"

"He should go to fucking somalia if he thinks it's bad here"

"All lives matter"

"Coward"

""Pussy ass bitch id fucking beat his ass, I fought for his freedom,blah blah blah..."

I'm not sure why he needed to do this. But goddamnit it isn't the end of the fucking world. I don't have a blind patriotism to any object. America is about ideas and the freedom to express them. He was demonstrating that in a fucking lecture about the first amendment and its ability to protect from exactly what happened to him... why are we upset? He proved his own point...

In my opinion the outrage caused here is no different than the intellectual dishonesty so many here claim to hate when it comes to "safe spaces" and micro-aggressions.

It's two sides of the same coin. Yes, the 1st Amendment protects this act of expression. But it also protects the backlash of comments the act generates. Both are protected, and as long as it remains words, then it's all good. At the end of the day, if you don't want to deal with the responses then don't open the conversation.

Interestingly, I just had a very respectful and dignified conversation with another educated gentleman (I'm not being facetious) about this issue. The 1st Amendment exists to protect unpopular speech.
 
Last edited:
I'll defend your right to stomp on the flag...but don't do it on my fucking tax money in front of my kids in an environment they are not free to walk out on without possible disciplinary consequences. You want to stomp on the flag, go ahead. But not when parents are paying your fucking salary.

I would also argue that this teacher knew very well that his act would bring publicity and that may have been his entire motive. He is, after all, a politician.
 
Last edited:
The guy is a douchebag and is exhibiting douchebag behavior. Your reaction shouldn't be "but that's his constitutionally protected right". It should be: What a dickhead.
 
If there's a law against it, he needs to be charged and tried. If he thinks the law is garbage, that's why we have an appeals process.

Without the law though...there's a real problem here. His BS with the flag is just asshole behavior through and through. This wasn't a big deal in the past though because people weren't a bunch of look-at-me-dickfucks and had some respect and decency to them. There are a metric shit ton of ways to protest and some were used successfully in the past, but this guy needed his 15 min. That brings me to the next point: the media's a pack of vermin. This isn't newsworthy and only feeds the dirtbags, fueling their hunt for another 15 min.

This isn't a flag problem or 1st Amendment problem, this is a societal problem with no end in sight.

I wonder if our children will hate us for the world we're leaving them.

We have a law in PA.

18 PA C.S. § 2102. Desecration of flag.
(a) Offense defined.--A person is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree if, in any manner, he:
(1) for exhibition or display places any marks, writing
or design of any nature or any advertisement upon any flag;
(2) exposes to public view any such marked or defiled
flag;
(3) manufactures, sells, exposes for sale, gives away,
or has in his possession for any of such purposes any article
which uses the flag for the purposes of advertisement, sale
or trade; or
(4) publicly or privately mutilates, defaces, defiles,
or tramples upon, or casts contempt in any manner upon any flag.
(b) Exception.--Subsection (a) of this section does not
apply:
(1) To any act permitted by the statutes of the United
States, or by the regulations of the armed forces of the
United States.
(2) In a case where the government of the United States
has granted the use of such flag, standard, color, or ensign
as a trademark.
(3) To any writing or instrument, or stationery for use
in correspondence on any of which shall be printed, painted, or placed said flag, disconnected from any advertisement for the purpose of sale or trade.
(4) To any patriotic or political demonstration or
decorations.
(c) Definition.--As used in this section the word "flag"
shall include any flag, standard, color, ensign or any picture
or representation of any thereof, made of any substance or
represented on any substance and of any size, purporting to be a flag, standard, color or ensign of the United States or of the
Commonwealth, or a picture or a representation of any thereof, upon which shall be shown the colors or any color, or any combination of colors, or either the stars or the stripes, or
the stars and the stripes, in any number of either thereof, or
anything which the person seeing the same, may reasonably
believe the same to represent the flag, colors, standard or
ensign of the United States or of the Commonwealth.

That said, I believe any prosecution would fail. I'm doubtful the DA would even approve the charge.

In any case, one could argue that charging them gives them another public forum to spout their garbage.
 
Captive audience, state government employee. I'd be willing to bet that his class is more indoctrination session than history class.
 
I think a lot of posters are misunderstanding the meaning, and the importance of meaning, in this news story. Mr. Francis, in an attempt to illustrate the extent of first amendment protections, decided to do a physical demonstration. It wasn't a protest. He wasn't taking a shit on America or anything. He was demonstrating how the Supreme Court interprets protected speech in a very visceral way.

So what is the difference between a protester stepping on an American flag and Mr. Francis stepping on an American flag? Superficially, they're the exact same act - put the flag on the ground, put your foot on it. What differentiates the two, however, is the intent and meaning behind the act. While one person is expressing displeasure with the United States for whatever reason, the other is illustrating a salient point about the nature of free speech. Needless to say that Mr. Francis' students probably won't forget about Texas v. Johnson any time soon.

Let's look at a similar situation involving flag burning:

What is the difference between a protester burning the flag
CAKnxQo.jpg


And the proper disposal of an old flag via burning?
flag-retirement-fire.jpg


Again, superficially they're the same act: you're taking a flag and setting it on fire. But I doubt that any one of you would take issue with the disposal of a United States flag because you understand that meaning behind the act is completely different. Now, we know that the meaning behind Mr. Francis' act was to teach high school children about free speech, even if it superficially resembled an act of protest. Why, then, are so many of you upset about it?
 
Not only meaning, but purpose. Disposal of a flag is a somber event and point of pride to render final honors to our nation's colors, after they have served out their lifetime as such.

The simple fact is that while it falls under protected speech, it's still disrepect and offensive to the vast majority of people. There are multiple other ways that the point could have been made without disrepect to OUR colors.

Considering I chewed out then departed never to return, the american history teacher in my HS for covering the two whopping paragraphs encompassing the Vietnam war by bragging about how he fled to Canada, I can safely say that the flag would not have touched the ground and there would have been choice words said on my part.

Did the teacher in fact even OWN that flag himself? I'm prone to believe it wasn't even his to perform such acts with.....standard classroom issue does not confer ownership...
 
I remember being at a military schoool once, where a flag was treated poorly. A lot of good guys got pretty upset. The teaching point was "why?" It has helped keep me pretty even keeled in response to things like this ever since.
 
I remember being at a military schoool once, where a flag was treated poorly. A lot of good guys got pretty upset. The teaching point was "why?" It has helped keep me pretty even keeled in response to things like this ever since.

Really? How so?
 
Back
Top