NationStates Jolt Archive

Before anything, I am NOT a Nazi or evil or anything like that. I just find interest in WWII. I put several pictures on my notebook for my chemistry class. The pictures were: one of Ty Cobb, one of Lee Harvey Oswald, one of Josef Stalin, FDR, and Winston Churchill, one of George Wallace, and one of Jack Ruby. I also had a picture of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Upon seeing this, my teacher told me to remove the picture. I refused and scribbled out the swastika on his arm, thinking that that was the problem. No, it wasn't. It seemed to have been the picture of him was the problem. My teacher took the picture away. I later asked if a picture of Mussolini was fine. The answer was yes. This raises two questions: Is this a breach of my first amendment rights? And, if a picture of Hitler is forbidden, why not Mussolini?

Before anything, I am NOT a Nazi or evil or anything like that. I just find interest in WWII. I put several pictures on my notebook for my chemistry class. The pictures were: one of Ty Cobb, one of Lee Harvey Oswald, one of Josef Stalin, FDR, and Winston Churchill, one of George Wallace, and one of Jack Ruby. I also had a picture of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Upon seeing this, my teacher told me to remove the picture. I refused and scribbled out the swastika on his arm, thinking that that was the problem. No, it wasn't. It seemed to have been the picture of him was the problem. My teacher took the picture away. I later asked if a picture of Mussolini was fine. The answer was yes. This raises two questions: Is this a breach of my first amendment rights? And, if a picture of Hitler is forbidden, why not Mussolini?

Mussolini was better at chemistry than Hitler.

This should teach you an important lesson, do your graffiiti in pen!

It certainly isn't fair. No diea why people think Hitler is so much worse than Mussolini, let alone Stalin.

Interesting choice of pictures . . . maybe he thinks you might be the type who would shoot up the school on Hitler's birthday.

Due to the context the picture was presented in I don't see a problem with it. It's not like you had a picture of Hitler surrounded by swastikas and "White Power" slogans.

The school sets the policy, and if they clearly state that you can't do it, then that's the law. I personally would have no problem, but the rules are the rules in schools. Damn rhyme.

However, I think you would have been better off if it was on a World Affairs or History binder. Chemistry's a bit of an odd choice to the teacher, and creates some "bomb-maker" suspicions in them I think.

Interesting choice of pictures . . . maybe he thinks you might be the type who would shoot up the school on Hitler's birthday.
That's already been done, man. Plus I'm a jock, so that's not my style.

I actually had a chemistry teacher named Ms. Hibler. Just one letter off.

And funny enough my nickname among a few close friends was Hitler for the longest time in high school. I'm not a nazi or nothing, but one friend of mine said I looked like him, plus I kinda sorta by complete accident ended up on the wrong side of a discussion regarding him... yea... so that's what they called me.

Is it fair? Nope, but I can see the point kind of. Letting you have a picture of Hitler could be seen as an affirmation through silence, plus a photo of Hitler could incite incidents.

It certainly isn't fair. No diea why people think Hitler is so much worse than Mussolini, let alone Stalin.
Because Hitler had bad PR people working for him.

That's already been done, man. Plus I'm a jock, so that's not my style.
Well, precedent has been established, and you never know with the young people of today.

Stalin was the worst of the three, then Hitler, finally Benito in third. If anything, he should've made you get rid of the Stalin picture.

Before anything, I am NOT a Nazi or evil or anything like that. I just find interest in WWII. I put several pictures on my notebook for my chemistry class. The pictures were: one of Ty Cobb, one of Lee Harvey Oswald, one of Josef Stalin, FDR, and Winston Churchill, one of George Wallace, and one of Jack Ruby. I also had a picture of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Upon seeing this, my teacher told me to remove the picture. I refused and scribbled out the swastika on his arm, thinking that that was the problem. No, it wasn't. It seemed to have been the picture of him was the problem. My teacher took the picture away. I later asked if a picture of Mussolini was fine. The answer was yes. This raises two questions: Is this a breach of my first amendment rights? And, if a picture of Hitler is forbidden, why not Mussolini?



The first law of school: You are in a dictatorship, not a democracy. You have no rights other than the right to life :D

It certainly isn't fair. No diea why people think Hitler is so much worse than Mussolini, let alone Stalin.

Yeah...If anything, Stalin was worse.

I'm not fully certain if this is a breech of your 1st Amendment rights, as some schools have a policy on "racist" materials. However, since you also had photos of people who can be discribed as Hitler's opposite (namely FDR), I find the idea that the photo had racist overtones to be moot.

I'd bring it up with your principal or guidance councilor.

The first law of school: You are in a dictatorship, not a democracy. You have no rights other than the right to life :D

That reminds me... that not all rights in the Constitution are given in school to the students...

Or it could've hindered somebody's learning process...

I'd call the ACLU, sounds like a case of personel discrimination to me.

The school may set the policy, but it can't overrule the law. I'm British and even I think your First Amendment rights were violated. And considering how highly Americans seem to rate that right, I think you'd have no problem being a typical American and suing somebody :D

The school may set the policy, but it can't overrule the law. I'm British and even I think your First Amendment rights were violated. And considering how highly Americans seem to rate that right, I think you'd have no problem being a typical American and suing somebody :D

The ninth is the best, but it is like a sword, having two sides. I said it funny because the phrase "like a dual bladed sword" and other versions make no sense as all swords have two blades.

I'd call the ACLU, sounds like a case of personel discrimination to me.

you're from iowa too,whereabouts?

The ninth is the best, but it is like a sword, having two sides. I said it funny because the phrase "like a dual bladed sword" and other versions make no sense as all swords have two blades.

Actually, they don't Some swords only have one blade - the other edge is blunt. Can still hurt if you get whacked over the head with it though.

Actually, they don't Some swords only have one blade - the other edge is blunt. Can still hurt if you get whacked over the head with it though.

No. Lets look at the knife/dagger/sword
Knife-Single Blade. ONLY ONE BLADE.
Dagger-Two blades. ONLY TWO BLADES.
Sword-A long dagger (there is no "cut off" point).

No. Lets look at the knife/dagger/sword
Knife-Single Blade. ONLY ONE BLADE.
Dagger-Two blades. ONLY TWO BLADES.
Sword-A long dagger (there is no "cut off" point).
A sabre or a Fillipino Golok (http://www.kriscutlery.com/sandata/Images/381b.jpg) are only sharp along one edge.

A sabre or a Fillipino Golok (http://www.kriscutlery.com/sandata/Images/381b.jpg) are only sharp along one edge.

Then they are knives.

I find it odd that your teacher didn't realize the context of Hitler's photo. If you had his photo and only his photo, then there'd be something weird. But you just clearly displayed interest in those involved in WWII. But he's a Chemistry teacher, maybe he didn't pay attention during his History classes. :)

Before anything, I am NOT a Nazi or evil or anything like that. I just find interest in WWII. I put several pictures on my notebook for my chemistry class. The pictures were: one of Ty Cobb, one of Lee Harvey Oswald, one of Josef Stalin, FDR, and Winston Churchill, one of George Wallace, and one of Jack Ruby. I also had a picture of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Upon seeing this, my teacher told me to remove the picture. I refused and scribbled out the swastika on his arm, thinking that that was the problem. No, it wasn't. It seemed to have been the picture of him was the problem. My teacher took the picture away. I later asked if a picture of Mussolini was fine. The answer was yes. This raises two questions: Is this a breach of my first amendment rights? And, if a picture of Hitler is forbidden, why not Mussolini?
Nope not fair, but then life isn't fair so just deal with it.

you're from iowa too,whereabouts?
NW corner, outside LeMars. Where you at?

Before anything, I am NOT a Nazi or evil or anything like that. I just find interest in WWII. I put several pictures on my notebook for my chemistry class. The pictures were: one of Ty Cobb, one of Lee Harvey Oswald, one of Josef Stalin, FDR, and Winston Churchill, one of George Wallace, and one of Jack Ruby. I also had a picture of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Upon seeing this, my teacher told me to remove the picture. I refused and scribbled out the swastika on his arm, thinking that that was the problem. No, it wasn't. It seemed to have been the picture of him was the problem. My teacher took the picture away. I later asked if a picture of Mussolini was fine. The answer was yes. This raises two questions: Is this a breach of my first amendment rights? And, if a picture of Hitler is forbidden, why not Mussolini?

No, it isn't fair. It's shit... But that's not abnormal for American schools. Remember, as a minor you have no rights...

Kida are so dangerous that way... :rolleyes:

great, it's all about swords now...

great, it's all about swords now...
Nope, some of its about knives

no its not fair but science teachers HATE history

cause something similar happened to me

Regardless of which of the three of them was worst, Hitler is by far the most recognizable. Who's to say the Chemistry teacher even recognized the pictures of Stalin or Mussolini?

Stalin was the worst of the three, then Hitler, finally Benito in third. If anything, he should've made you get rid of the Stalin picture.

Stalin was very bad but he didnt seek to destroy a whole group of people unlike hitler. Hitler also killed more then 16 million soviet civilians and 8 million jews and countless others. Stalin was very bad and i hate him but Hitler was just as bad and i believe even worse

Nope, some of its about knives
Oh, that's much better.

Everyone here, with your teacher included, is looking at this situation from a single aspect. Life is a matter of perception; there are two sides to every story.

Now, I do want to mention that I am not a Nazi; I don't share any of their views against any race or religion or whatnot. But when someone is forcibly denied their right to express their beliefs, then my sympathies go out to them. I understand that you are not a Nazi, and summarily do not necessarily agree with their views, but your situation presents a perfect example of the hypocritical failings of human nature. Your teacher denied you your right to exress yourself. Imagine for a moment that you were a Nazi, and that Hitler was an idol of yours. That's not to say that you're going to go out and commit xenocide; not all Nazi's are bad, just as not all Christians or Jews are good. But if someone took away your idol, it sends the message that your religion, as well as your beliefs are wrong, and not fit for society. What if it was a picture of Jesus that he had taken? I can guarantee that many more people would have responded that your rights to the First Amendment had been severely violated. The First Amendment protects your right to religion and expression. The fact that Hitler was a cruel man, in my opinion, does not change the fact that he represented a belief that many people still today share. He stands as a symbol to his followers, who view him in the same light that a Christian would see Jesus, or a Muslim would see Allah, or whoever it is they worship. As such a symbol, his image cannot be denied any more than Jesus' could.

Oh, that's much better.
and don't forget the daggers :D

Everyone here, with your teacher included, is looking at this situation from a single aspect.
...
but your situation presents a perfect example of the hypocritical failings of human nature. Your teacher denied you your right to exress yourself.
...
He stands as a symbol to his followers, who view him in the same light that a Christian would see Jesus
...

I don't quite understand why everyone gets so upset about not being able to express themselves. I had to wear a school uniform, despite being much more comfortable in an oversized t-shirt. I had to wear a tie, and I really hate having anything around my neck. Not such a big deal, though.

We need to accept limits on how far we can express ourself depending on the situation. If this was a history book, I'd have a different opinion. In fact, if you had a copy of Mein Kampf (sp?) and he took that away instead of telling you to put it in your bag, I'd be very aggravated. However, what happened was he felt that a picture you were displaying in his class was inappropriate, and as such, asked you to not display it. That seems reasonable to me.

The problem seems to be that you felt it was appropriate, and he felt it was inappropriate. I completely understand why you felt it was appropriate, and perhaps if you had explained about the other people he would have felt differently. Perhaps not. Either way, if *he* felt it was inappropriate who's to say that a jewish student wouldn't feel it is inappropriate, too. They can misunderstand you just as easily. Chemistry class is not the forum for those misunderstandings to be brought to light and resolved, so it seems reasonable for you to put away the picture.
That's not trampling on your right to express, that's just having a different opinion to you about what should be displayed in his classroom. If he visits your house, feel free to show him your proudly displayed WW2 posters, and to ask him not to discuss chemistry when nobody there is interested.

Before anything, I am NOT a Nazi or evil or anything like that. I just find interest in WWII. I put several pictures on my notebook for my chemistry class. The pictures were: one of Ty Cobb, one of Lee Harvey Oswald, one of Josef Stalin, FDR, and Winston Churchill, one of George Wallace, and one of Jack Ruby. I also had a picture of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Upon seeing this, my teacher told me to remove the picture. I refused and scribbled out the swastika on his arm, thinking that that was the problem. No, it wasn't. It seemed to have been the picture of him was the problem. My teacher took the picture away. I later asked if a picture of Mussolini was fine. The answer was yes. This raises two questions: Is this a breach of my first amendment rights? And, if a picture of Hitler is forbidden, why not Mussolini?I personally agree with your teacher. A notebook is not a history book, so I don't see why pictures of mass murderers should be on there.

I personally agree with your teacher. A notebook is not a history book, so I don't see why pictures of mass murderers should be on there.

On the other hand, a notebook is not a tv screen, but it's unlikely there would be a problem with having a picture of a cartoon character there.

I think the point is more that the pictures were considered inappropriate, rather than them being on a notebook.

Perhaps if they were on a history book they would be considered appropriate, and the problem would be resolved.

Then they are knives.
What'chyu'smokin'Willis?

This is one of the most idiotic Hijacks I've seen in a while (ever, really).

Is this a breach of my first amendment rights? And, if a picture of Hitler is forbidden, why not Mussolini?
The trains were on time.

sword n. A weapon consisting typically of a long, straight or slightly curved, pointed blade having one or two cutting edges and set into a hilt.

dagger n. A short pointed weapon with sharp edges.

knife n. A cutting instrument consisting of a sharp blade attached to a handle.

And yes this is an idiotic hijack, but I'm bored so.......

On the other hand, a notebook is not a tv screen, but it's unlikely there would be a problem with having a picture of a cartoon character there.

I think the point is more that the pictures were considered inappropriate, rather than them being on a notebook.

Perhaps if they were on a history book they would be considered appropriate, and the problem would be resolved.You see the difference? If said pictures are on a notebook, they bear a similarity to teenage girls notebooks covered in pictures of tv and movie stars. I personally don't think Mussolini or Stalin (or Churchill, but that's just me ;) ) should be depicted on a notebook like that. If it's really world war 2 that's the topic of interest, maybe pictures of soldiers marching or so would be more appropriate. It would take the focus of the "Führerkult" that was around at the time.

You see the difference? If said pictures are on a notebook, they bear a similarity to teenage girls notebooks covered in pictures of tv and movie stars. I personally don't think Mussolini or Stalin (or Churchill, but that's just me ;) ) should be depicted on a notebook like that. If it's really world war 2 that's the topic of interest, maybe pictures of soldiers marching or so would be more appropriate. It would take the focus of the "Führerkult" that was around at the time.

I do see the difference and, in my opinion, I think WW2 is just as much an interesting topic for pictures on notebooks as movie stars. More, but that's just me.
If WW2 is the topic, though, I see no problem with a picture of Hitler, he was a somewhat central figure, all things considered.

The problem isn't the WW2 theme, the problem is that the pictures can be misunderstood as worship or admiration of the portrayed people (as the movie stars probably are), and that admiration could cause offence to some.

You're still free to admire whoever you like, but not to openly display the admiration that will cause problems in an inappropriate setting.

And I think that's where the history notebook is different to the chemistry notebook. Out of context, the pictures look like the same action as putting movie stars on the notebook, in a history book it is easier to interpret the pictures as "historical pictures of an interesting period"

The problem isn't the WW2 theme, the problem is that the pictures can be misunderstood as worship or admiration of the portrayed people (as the movie stars probably are), and that admiration could cause offence to some.

You're still free to admire whoever you like, but not to openly display the admiration that will cause problems in an inappropriate setting.

Why is it a problem if a picture is taken as evidence of worship or admiration? If I saw someone with a picture of Jesus, I would automatically assume that that person does indeed admire and worship Jesus. Yet school administration doesn't dare force a student to remove all traces of Jesus because it would be seen as oppression of religion. This instance with Hitler's picture can be taken in the same light. The administration IS trying to opress all positive views of Hitler. But what about those who DO idolize him? Is it fair to them to have his picture taken away from them? Their ideas and the ideas that his image represents are being forcibly denied to them, which is a violation of the First Amendment.

And as for the argument that his picture would cause a disruption in school, consider this. Immigration today has pretty much guaranteed that Muslims and Buddhists and all sorts of foreign religions have entered the country. Many of them are children who by law have to attend school. Now, their beliefs clash violently with Christianity, as evidenced by the Crusades and other such Holy Wars. How is it seen that these are not disturbances, and yet a picture of Hitler is?

I don't think I worded that as well as I could have...but oh well.

Yep. definitely a violation of your first ammendment rights. I would menace to sue them, that usually scares the shit out of every public school.
But then again, if it was chemistry class, why don't you give it a try with photos of Mendeleiev, the Curies and so on? ;-D
And personally I think that there's no actual point in trying to establish wich one of the three was "the worst"... all three of them where total screwheads and bastards. But then again, so was Churchill (at least in my opinion...)
I think the bottom line here is the hipocracy of all the educational system. Let's put an example: I'm from Argentina, where our education is just about a disaster. But I find it hard to believe that if I were to display pictures of criminals on my folder (no, we don't have computers in our classrooms here) some teacher were to complaint. I could expect that from some of my idiotic classmates, but not from a teacher or a professor. So... we will continue to see this kind of behaviour as long as the historical facts aren't considered as such, and aren't analyzed seriously and openly in society. The demonization of historical players who ended up losing is just typical of the human beings, and it is my opinion that that's a thing that ought to change.
Hang in there, buddy!

I think that's ridiculous. You should be able to put pictures of whatever historical figures you want on your notebook. Fight it, don't just agree with what the teacher tells you to do.