Good to know. You should have no problem with David Irving teaching that the holocaust didn't happen then, if 'no learning is ever inappropriate'.No it isn't. Its tantamount to saying that stamping on all the flags of the United Nations, might be incredibly offensive - or just inappropriate for the school curriculum.And? No one was stopping her in political dissent.As a hard-won right, dissing the flag is a valid form of political dissent.
She could have done it in the corridors, in her break, any pretty much anywhere in school grounds.
But the school board didn't want stepping on the flag to be a part of their school curriculum, and obviously they weren't consulted about this addition.
That might be harsh in your opinion, but that's how bureaucracy works.
-- and that's tantamount to not wanting, say, Indian genocide to be part of the school curriculum. Or deciding, "let's teach World War II without the Holocaust, 'cause it's nasty and somebody might be offended".
Are you advocating treading over the German flag, the Indian flag, and the flag of Israel?
Because that won't teach us anything about WW2 or the holocaust.
No learning is ever "inappropriate". In a school or anywhere else.
To repeat the bolded above ---- Appeal to Emotion (that's a fallacy by the way) has no place here. How anybody feels about a fetish is irrelevant to the point of free speech.
That wouldn't be learning, that would be the opposite -- ignorance.