1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Bong Hits Revisited

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by HeinekenMan, Jun 25, 2007.

  1. HeinekenMan

    HeinekenMan Active Member

    Today, the Supreme Court ruled against the Bong Hits 4 Jesus kid, so I'm sending out the apparent new language for our First Amendment.

    Bill of Rights
    Amendment I

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances; unless said person is a student who makes a joke that related to drug use.

    Feel free to update this in the future, as there are sure to be other exclusions to note.

    For the record, the kid that brought this suit is now a 24-year-old living in China, where he's teaching people who lack basic rights how to speak English. At least he hasn't given up on our society.
  2. alleyallen

    alleyallen Guest

    A link on this might help.
  3. farmerjerome

    farmerjerome Active Member

    I saw this on the news this morning.

    I think the court made the wrong decision, but I think it was just plain stupid to make a banner that said "Bong Hits 4 Jesus."
  4. Boognish

    Boognish Member


    On Monday morning (June 25), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against an Alaskan high school student suspended in 2002 for unfurling a 14-foot banner bearing the words "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" during a parade in support of the Winter Olympic Games. In its first major decision on student free-speech rights in two decades, the court determined that the student's rights had not been violated.

    According to The Associated Press, the court's conservative majority found that Juneau, Alaska, high school principal Deborah Morse did not, in fact, violate student Joseph Frederick's constitutional rights when she confiscated the banner and later decided to suspend him. The decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, means that students could face future limits on their rights to free speech, especially when said speech could be interpreted as promoting illegal drug use (see "Could 'Bong Hits 4 Jesus' Case Chill Free Speech In Schools?") ...


    Ckeee-rist. When I was in high school, a lot of kids (me) glorified puffing herb as much as possible. The REAL ISSUE for "the court's conservative majority" and for the millions of other uber-religious folks with absolutely no sense of humor wasn't the "Bong." It was mixing the "Bong" with "Jesus."

    If that kid's shirt said "Bong Hits for Jerry," it may not have been an issue. It certainly wouldn't have been one the Supreme Court had to discuss.
  5. ifilus

    ifilus Active Member

    What if it had read: "Bong Hits for Bush"?
  6. HeinekenMan

    HeinekenMan Active Member

    Boognish, I agree. In fact, I question whether the joke wasn't more related to religious zealots than anything else. In other words, I sort of took the statement to be, on its face, more of an expression of sarcasm than a literal attempt to encourage students to use drugs. But I don't know whether anyone made that case.

    And, in regard to the drug-related nature of the statement, who's to say that he can't campaign for the legalization of drugs. I mean, what if Bong Hits 4 Jesus is an organization that calls for the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes. It might be far-flung, but we're talking about free speech and laws that prohibit certain activities regardless of their nature.
  7. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

    I, clearly, have no understanding of law as interpreted by this court.

    Because this makes no sense.
  8. Boognish

    Boognish Member

    I was going to throw that one out there too. Sure, many of those folks don't have much of a sense of humor either. Still don't think it would have gone as far or turned out like the "Jesus" one did.

    Could not agree more. That kid would have been better off with you as his representative. Mr. HeinekenMan, Esq.
  9. NoOneLikesUs

    NoOneLikesUs Active Member

    Every single decision handed down to today just about puts the nail in the coffin on a "free" country.

    We're fucked.
  10. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    The voice of reason in this is Breyer, who wrote that the court just should have said the principal was within her rights to confiscate the banner (after all, it was unfurled at a school-sanctioned event, one that required permission slip), awarded no money to anyone, and told everyone to go home. Basically, his opinion boiled down to if you're going to make some sort of important First Amendement decision, it should be about something more important than a nonsensical message by a teen-aged yahoo.

    That's the reason all the hardcore religious groups were on the KID'S side -- no more wearing Jesus T-shirts to school anymore if the school deems them "disruptive," or even talking about your faith.
  11. Today's SCOTUS scorecard:

    Free Speech = unlimited money spent on political advertisements.
    Free speech does not equal sign that "seems to encourage" drug use, in the eys of nervous administrators.

    Thanks, Ralph.
  12. HeinekenMan

    HeinekenMan Active Member

    Good information here. What if the kid is a Rastafarian? I never gave that much thought, but I believe pot is part of their religion. Of course, I could be very wrong on this, as I haven't quite completed my thesis on Rasta men and Rasta women. I've been working really hard on it, but I keep ending up eating Cheeto's and watching reruns of Mash.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page