Cheerleader Ordered To "Cheer for your attacker, or else!"

[Fat Man]

OK boys and girls!

This is the absolute living end! This sucks more than anything has ever sucked before!

Can it possibly get worse???

I don't know! You tell me!!!

http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/in ... 9_7_30_110

Cheer for your attacker, or else!
A court rules that a cheerleader's refusal to root for an athlete
accused of sexual assault is not protected speech

Friday, Sept 24, 2010 19:40 ET
By Tracy Clark-Flory



Cheerleading is often maligned as an illegitimate, unchallenging sport -- but you just try to imagine having to shake your pom-poms for an athlete accused of sexually assaulting you. An appeals court has ruled that a former high school cheerleader's refusal to root for a basketball player who she claims sexually assaulted her, and who pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of simple assault, is not protected under the First Amendment as free speech.

In 2008, the girl, dubbed H.S. in court documents, claimed that athletes Rakheem Bolton and Christian Rountree sexually assaulted her at a party when she was 16. A grand jury initially declined to indict the pair, and school officials "ordered her to cheer for Bolton when the other cheerleaders cheered or go home," reports First Amendment Center (FAC). H.S. agreed to go along with the routines, but refused to cheer for Bolton in particular, so she was cut from the squad. Her parents decided to sue the district attorney, the school district and the school's principal, alleging in part that H.S. "was punished because of her 'symbolic expression' not to cheer for Bolton," reports FAC. The suit was dismissed.

Months later, Bolton and Rountree were indicted and Bolton pleaded guilty to simple assault. Still, earlier this month, an appeals court upheld the original dismissal of the case, and its allegation of a First Amendment violation. A three-judge panel wrote that "in her capacity as cheerleader, H.S. served as a mouthpiece through which (the school district) could disseminate speech -- namely, support for its athletic teams." School officials "had no duty to promote H.S.'s message by allowing her to cheer or not cheer, as she saw fit."

I didn't think it was possible for cheerleading to look any less appealing to me -- but, thank you, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for proving me wrong.

OH WOW!

It just keeps on getting better and better all the time!

Some moronic jock rapes you, and then, in the school gymnasium you are ordered to jump up and down and cheer for the fucker because he can put a round ball through a metal hoop! Whooooooopeeeeeeeee!!!

Never mind that he's some low-life gutter-scum piece of dog excrement! No, you must cheer for him when he puts a ball through a hoop!

And if you refuse to cheer for the sorry son of a bitch, then your off the cheer leading squad Kiddo!

Oh yes indeed! It doesn't get any better than that!

Well, I for one, am not the least bit surprised.

We have the ACLU, American Civil Liberties Union fighting for NAMBLA, North American Man/Boy Love Association, both working together to get the age of consent laws lowered and eventually repealed so that rich old men who smell bad can have butt-sex with babies.

Also, they want to make it a "hate crime" for anybody to speak out against pedophiles! Now isn't that nice!!!

And now, a High school cheer leader is ordered to cheer for the sorry-ass bastard who raped her!

Yeah! Don't ya just love it!!!

Doesn't get better than that!

[Earl]

Amazing ... This shows just how cruel the sports crowd can be. I also find it to be rather interesting that news items of this sort are not circulated, if even reported at all, by the sports media. Do the sports columnists in your local newspaper ever make any comments about scandals of this sort?

For those members of this forum and visitors to this website who are fathers of daughters (as I am): How would you feel if it was your daughter?

(By the way, some, if not most, of the liberal members of the able2know forum have no problem with the ACLU defending NAMBLA. And to think that the ACLU defends them free of charge.)

[i_like_1981]

Dear God. And these are the sort of people pretty girls are actually attracted to? Maybe more of these cheerleaders should come and visit this site and see what happens when the jocks start to feel they're above the law, a feeling which is often reinforced by the inappropriately minor punishments they receive for their offences. Sorry to say this to all those girls out there who are "aiming high" in the world of male partners: jocks do not always make the protective, compassionate boyfriends you hope for! "Cheer for the team or go home?" Personally, I'd have gone for the latter if I were in her position, knowing what sort of scumbags "the team" contained.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[HugeFanOfBadReligion]

Oh my god, I don't know what to say. The school pretty much prioritized a perverted criminal who happens to be able to throw a ball around over a young girl who was sexually assaulted. And they say she doesn't have the right do not cheer for him? It'd be one thing to not let her speak against him, but to force her to cheer for someone who made her a victim? That's just pathetic, and the two criminals and the school staff responsible for not letting the girl speak out are messed up.

[Fat Man]

(By the way, some, if not most, of the liberal members of the able2know forum have no problem with the ACLU defending NAMBLA. And to think that the ACLU defends them free of charge.)

You know, I have always prided myself when it comes to being a liberal, that is, on most political, social, and economic issues.

But I have my limits!

For example: I have nothing against gays because I believe what consenting adults do is their own damn business.

NOTE: I say consenting ADULTS.

But I say NAMBLA should have absolutely no rights, because nobody should be granted a right to butt-bang little children!

I believe all the members of NAMBLA should be given the death penalty, and so should the ACLU for defending these scum-bags!

Sorry to say this to all those girls out there who are "aiming high" in the world of male partners: jocks do not always make the protective, compassionate boyfriends you hope for! "Cheer for the team or go home?" Personally, I'd have gone for the latter if I were in her position, knowing what sort of scumbags "the team" contained.

If it were my daughter, I would suggest that she quit her cheer leading squad, and I would have her encourage her fellow cheer leaders to to also protest by walking out on the game and refusing to cheer for the one who committed the rape.

Maybe if they had all protested, that would have made a statement.

They can't expel or suspend an entire cheer leading squad.

That should make those scum-dogs on the board of education stand up on their hind legs and take notice!

Oh my god, I don't know what to say. The school pretty much prioritized a perverted criminal who happens to be able to throw a ball around over a young girl who was sexually assaulted. And they say she doesn't have the right do not cheer for him? It'd be one thing to not let her speak against him, but to force her to cheer for someone who made her a victim? That's just pathetic, and the two criminals and the school staff responsible for not letting the girl speak out are messed up.

Yeah! Sports is all they care about.

We can't have our jocks getting suspended from school or going to jail. Now can we?

Otherwise, who's going to get that ball to go through the hoop?

Academics be damned! The safety of female students be damned!

We got to get that ball through the hoop!

YEAH RIGHT!!!

[The Imperialist]

Wow. This thing just makes me crack up for "YOU STUPID IDIOTS" and makes me sad for "She does not deserve this". Anothing though: Why is that sexual predator not locked up by now? (Age of criminal responsbility my arse, by the way)

[abitagirl]

Because if he was locked up, he wouldn't be able to throw a ball through a hoop and win the BIG GAME, that's why.

[Fat Man]

Because if he was locked up, he wouldn't be able to throw a ball through a hoop and win the BIG GAME, that's why.

Well, prisons do have basketball hoops, and some prisons even have basketball teams.

So, he will still be able to get a ball through a hoop.

Also, if I were a prison warden, I would have a hoop mounted on the wall of his cell in solitary confinement, and then, he can just bounce a basketball all he wants a put it through the hoop, and he can even do that for the rest of his life.

There! Now, do you see how generous I can be?

[i_like_1981]

I agree, we definitely do need to see some stricter punishments for these sports thugs. And when teams complain about losing one of their best players, and for some reason that allows them to be released far earlier than a normal person would for the same crime, well, that's interfering with the course of justice. Interfering with it for something as trivial and insignificant as one person less on a sports team. These people do have substitutes they can bring on, right? They can hardly be bad if they've made the team. So why the need to get some badass in their squad out of trouble? If they've done the crime, they should do the time. It's no wonder so many kids want to become professional sports players nowadays. They read about how much less punishment professional athletes get for their crimes than normal people, and of course, the ability to get all the beautiful ladies AND probably being able to cheat on them without any retribution, and think "I'm down with that!" Pathetic.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[Jerry McGuire]

The school pretty much prioritized a perverted criminal who happens to be able to throw a ball around over a young girl who was sexually assaulted.

What? The school had nothing to do with it. The article is very sloppily written; no mention of where this all takes place, the name of the school, nothing. And the two boys weren't even originally indicted by a grand jury. For all we know, the cheer coach or whomever is in charge had no idea they were connected in a criminal case. While it is a frivolous notion that one cannot show disdain for an attacker, as is plainly obvious, the website and author of the article is extremely biased towards women. Very few people even know what happened that night at the party. Assault is a dire matter, and one that should be taken seriously. However, not as sloppy as this journalist approached it.

[HugeFanOfBadReligion]

What? The school had nothing to do with it. The article is very sloppily written; no mention of where this all takes place, the name of the school, nothing. And the two boys weren't even originally indicted by a grand jury. For all we know, the cheer coach or whomever is in charge had no idea they were connected in a criminal case. While it is a frivolous notion that one cannot show disdain for an attacker, as is plainly obvious, the website and author of the article is extremely biased towards women. Very few people even know what happened that night at the party. Assault is a dire matter, and one that should be taken seriously. However, not as sloppy as this journalist approached it.

What? It says in the article that the school did not let the girl not cheer for her team. Of course the law had nothing to do with enforcing her to cheer for the athlete, she wasn't arrested, that would have been quite silly. So that means the school definitely had something to do with it. And I hope you are not serious when you said "the article is extremely biased towards women". We're talking about a victim of sexual assault here, and I think it's not an incorrect assumption to think that the article lied and she wasn't sexually assaulted. I'm sorry, but I have little respect for someone who thinks the sexual assault isn't as important as an articles bias on gender. I know that's not exactly what your saying, but they way I interpreted your statement, the gender bias seems to stand out to you more than the sexual assault.

[Jerry McGuire]

I was reffering to when you said the school had everything to do with it to protect the athlete's reputation. They did not "prioritize" him over her, but they cannot act without having all the facts. She was allowed to cheer for the team. The problem arose when she was asked to do a specific cheer that involved the said player. That's when she still did the routine but refused to cheer, and that's when she was cut from the team. What I said was that the coach might not necessarily known about the legal proceedings, especially if the athlete in question was a minor (it doesn't state his age or name, so I'm assuming he's underage). No, I'm not letting the obvious bias take precedence over the crime itself. However, you have to admit it's a poorly written article that is leaving out multiple facts. And I know this may not be the case, but let me be Devil's Advocate for a bit. How do we know for sure the assault even happened? It's not extremely rare for a teenage girl to go to a party, drink much too much, then accuse another of assault or rape.

[i_like_1981]

It's not extremely rare for a teenage girl to go to a party, drink much too much, then accuse another of assault or rape.

I suppose you've got a point there. After all, when you've had a lot to drink, you start to lose the ability to make the right choices and eventually make bad ones. And then when you've sobered up, you start to blame other people for your wrongdoings and manipulating you while you were drunk. But I'm convinced this assault did actually happen. There wouldn't have been a news article written about it if it hadn't definitely happened. And I believe the reason for the article's author keeping out the name of the school was to preserve that school's image. Perhaps they don't want all the students at that school being made to feel ashamed over what some people there have done, and having their place of learning defamed on a nationwide scale. But this is not the first time that "jocks" have manipulated females and seemingly got away with it. And a girl would have to be pretty damn stupid indeed to get a false assault story into the news, so, I'm sure this is a true story.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[Jerry McGuire]

And a girl would have to be pretty damn stupid indeed to get a false assault story into the news, so, I'm sure this is a true story.

http://news.duke.edu/lacrosseincident/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_rape_scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responses_ ... rosse_case

I don't know if you've heard of this, but here's the gist of it. Three players on the Lacrosse team at Duke University were charged with sexual assault and rape of a woman at a party. There was massive outrage all around the country and the media demonized these men. Protests by women's rights activists and female students calling for their expulsion were held on a regular basis. Major news outlets and publications reported on this such as ESPN, ABC, Rolling Stones, Time, etc. The coach was replaced, the team's season was suspended for the whole year, and the three students were kicked off the team. If I recall correctly, one or two of the men transferred from the school altogether. Most people were convinced that they were guilty. Even a large group of the school's faculty publicly acknowledged their guilt. However, it was later deemed that these accusations were false, the prosecuting attorney was disbarred and tried criminally. The lives of these young men were pretty much ruined forever.

This is a good read as well:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=4300383

[Fat Man]

And a girl would have to be pretty damn stupid indeed to get a false assault story into the news, so, I'm sure this is a true story.

http://news.duke.edu/lacrosseincident/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_rape_scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responses_ ... rosse_case

I don't know if you've heard of this, but here's the gist of it. Three players on the Lacrosse team at Duke University were charged with sexual assault and rape of a woman at a party. There was massive outrage all around the country and the media demonized these men. Protests by women's rights activists and female students calling for their expulsion were held on a regular basis. Major news outlets and publications reported on this such as ESPN, ABC, Rolling Stones, Time, etc. The coach was replaced, the team's season was suspended for the whole year, and the three students were kicked off the team. If I recall correctly, one or two of the men transferred from the school altogether. Most people were convinced that they were guilty. Even a large group of the school's faculty publicly acknowledged their guilt. However, it was later deemed that these accusations were false, the prosecuting attorney was disbarred and tried criminally. The lives of these young men were pretty much ruined forever.

This is a good read as well:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=4300383

Well, this is what is known as a BACKLASH!!!

I believe in the laws of Karma and I also believe . . . . .

WHAT GOES AROUND, COMES AROUND!

For years, for many many many years, jocks have committed crimes and have gotten away with it.

People are now getting sick and tired of it!

And so, now when a jock gets accused of a crime, people don't give a fuck anymore it he's innocent or guilty, the jury is going to vote guilty anyway.

Jocks now have a bad reputation, and after so many years, [neigh . . . decades!!!] of jocks getting away with all kinds of crimes, then . . . in the future, it's going to be much harder for a jock to get a fair trial and will more likely get convicted for something he didn't do.

That's called a backlash.

And of course, this is also just as wrong as what has been going on before.

A backlash goes like this. . . . .

1.) First, we have had many years of jocks committing crimes and getting away with it, and going unpunished.

2.) Then eventually, we have more and more people getting sick and tired of jocks getting away with crimes, and becoming more and more anxious to get convictions for jocks accused of crimes.

3.) The result is, it then becomes harder for jocks to get a fair trial, and are then more likely to get sentenced for crimes they didn't commit.

So, we appear to be going from one extreme to another, first with jocks getting away with all kinds of crimes to jocks not being able to get a fair trial anymore and getting wrongly accused and sentenced.

In either case, justice is is not served.

So, I don't what to see jocks getting away with all kinds of crimes and going unpunished as had been going on for so many years.

But at the same time . . . I don't want to see anybody getting falsely accused and wrongly convicted for crimes they didn't commit. NOT EVEN IF HE'S A STUPID JOCK!!!

I want to make damn sure a person is guilty, and I want to examine all evidence to make sure the right person is convicted.

Well, perhaps one good thing will come as a result of this backlash.

Perhaps in the future, sports will become less popular, now that jocks have to face the fact that they will be convicted for any crimes that they commit, and may also have to face the possibility of being falsely accused and wrongly convicted for crimes they didn't commit. This will make people think twice before pursuing a career in sports, and the popularity of sports will go into a decline because of it.

So, you know . . . . . I changed my mind.

I REALLY DON'T GIVE A FLYING FUCKING HOOTENANNY IN HELL IF SOME JOCK GETS WRONGLY SENTENCED FOR A CRIME HE DIDN'T COMMIT! I HOPE SOMEDAY SOME JOCK GOES TO THE CHAIR FOR A MURDER HE DIDN'T COMMIT! FUCK SPORTS AND FUCK ALL THE JOCKS!!

Hey! For centuries, smart intelligent people, good people, intellectuals got burned at the stake or persecuted and wrongly imprisoned or incarcerated by ignorant religious fanatics just for trying to bring more knowledge into the world.

Isn't the right Galileo!

These were people who have NEVER committed any crimes, good people who's ideas, theories, and discoveries eventually became a benefit to all humanity centuries after they had suffered and died.

So now, who gives a fuck, if some jocks, who will never do anything for humanity, who only get rich by chasing balls and will never do anything else in their insignificant and petty little lives that might have been a benefit to humanity . . . who in the flying fucking Hell gives a fuck if some of them get convicted or perhaps even die for something they didn't do.

Who gives a fuck???

Not I!!!

Therefore . . . . . As far as I'm concerned, some jock who's IQ is exceeded by his shoe-size going to the chair for a murder he didn't commit, to me, it is no more tragic than a stray dog getting run over by a car.

OK! OK! THAT WAS JUST A RANT! OK?

NO! I really don't want to see anybody getting falsely accused and wrongly sentenced for a crime he didn't commit, not even if he's a stupid jock! OK?

But I really do hope that this possible backlash in the future causes sports to lose it's popularity and go the way of corsets, hoop-skirts, and mustache-wax.

Sports is a dinosaur!

And so, I say to all sports fans out there.

TIME TO CURB YOUR DOGMA AND DRIVE YOUR KARMA.

Hey all you sports fans out there!

MY KARMA JUST RAN OVER YOUR DOGMA!!!