Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Student Banned From Prom Because Of Confederate Flag Dress

April 26, 2012 by  

Student Banned From Prom Because Of Confederate Flag Dress
FACEBOOK
Texanna Edwards was not allowed to attend her prom because of her fashion taste.

Texanna Edwards, a high school student in Dyer, Tenn., arrived at the prom but was told she could not enter because of her clothing.

Her dress resembled a Confederate flag.

Edwards, who says she helped make the dress, doesn’t understand why students are allowed to don the rebel flag on clothing during school, but she was not allowed in the door.

“We asked why they thought that, but they kept saying the same thing over and over. We kept asking people walking inside – black and white – and everyone said they loved it. Two black women even went off on the principal. They were upset with the principal. No one was upset with me,” said Edwards.

“Its heritage, not hate,” answered a black student when asked about the fashion statement.

Edwards wore a camouflage dress to a previous school function.

“That’s all I’ve ever wanted is rebel flag and camouflage, and I’m all about my horses,” the senior said in her defense.

Bryan Nash

Staff writer Bryan Nash has devoted much of his life to searching for the truth behind the lies that the masses never question. He is currently pursuing a Master's of Divinity and is the author of The Messiah's Misfits, Things Unseen and The Backpack Guide to Surviving the University. He has also been a regular contributor to the magazine Biblical Insights.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Student Banned From Prom Because Of Confederate Flag Dress”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Jeremy Leochner

    Since it sounds like confederate attire is allowed at school I disagree with her not being allowed to wear it at the prom. Though I do disagree with her wearing it.

  • s c

    So, tolerance and the pc mentality can’t live with “DIVERSITY.”
    Anybody detect a stench in this matter?

    • Sirian

      That stench is most definitely there – whewww!! Anyone that can’t smell it must have a major mental infection!

    • Jeremy Leochner

      We do have to bear in mind what the confederate flag represents. A revolt that killed more americans than all other american wars combined. Don’t have to be pc to dislike that.

      • Used2B

        I think that had something to do with the fedgov starting a war against states that had a right to secede from the union, and chose to do so. And those who forbade her attendance at the prom violated her 1st Amendment rights.

      • TIME

        JL,

        No these flag’s are really no differant than what the founding fathers would have used, Why do I say that?

        Due to – The real reason behind the break of the South from the Federal North was really the “Maddox Tax act,” of what took the TAX’S from 20% that the Federal North still had, yet to the Southern states their tax’s whet up to 48%.

        The Civil War had nothing at all to do with Slavery, if any of you care to look into it the Northern states also had mass amounts of SLAVES too.
        But since History has been rewritten to make the case that it was teh evil Southern states – 90% of the fools in this nation will still follow that boat load of rhetoric like a mad dog after a cat. Well its really quite clear as to how mindless Americans have become and no its not just the kids { we are all guilty! )

        Plus as this also shows that the 1st Amendment is as DEAD as a rock.
        So perhaps soon some of the people on the people farm may wake up to that fact.
        The very fact that we have not used the ” Original” Constitution nor the Bill of Rights from 1860 on, as well that YOU are not covered by either.
        Or that you are nothing more nor less than a small Corporation thats value is based on your income that you allow to be taken from you by the very Con artist you think have your best interest in mind, yea that as $10.00 will get you a cup of Joe at Starfarts.

        But then again I guess I expect some of you to wake up and really dig out the meat of real TRUTHS. But hey I may be just fooling myself that Americans will ever break the spell of this CON job where you all think your FREE. What ever.

        Peace and Love

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Actually Used2B the gov did not start the war. The south fired the first shots.
        Though I can agree her first amendment rights were violated.

      • Vigilant

        “The Civil War had nothing at all to do with Slavery,”

        As usual, TIME gets his history from a cereal box.

        Please refer to http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=432

        “Convention of South Carolina, December 20, 1860, DECLARATION OF THE IMMEDIATE CAUSES WHICH INDUCE AND JUSTIFY THE SECESSION OF SOUTH CAROLINA FROM THE FEDERAL UNION.”

        “Slavery,” “slaves” and “slaveholding” are only mentioned 18 times in the document.

        But, of course, “the Civil War had nothing at all to do with Slavery,”

      • Vigilant

        P.S. There’s no such thing as the “Maddox Tax act.”

      • Vigilant

        TIME prevaricates again when he says, ” if any of you care to look into it the Northern states also had mass amounts of SLAVES too.”

        Perhaps you’d “care to look into” the 1860 census figures at http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

        Your contention ain’t just a lie, it’s a damn lie.

  • cawmun cents

    Didnt we go through this last year when Mexican kids didnt want other kids flying the American flag,but chose to fly their Mexican flags……remember that?
    Tolerence only goes left.There is a sign that says,”no right turn”.
    Ebbuddy knows that.
    Cheers!
    -CC.

    • Jeremy Leochner

      I do not believe tolerance is confined to the left. Everyone has a right to their beliefs and their values. If people attack those who are on the right they are not the measure of those on the left.
      Also I believe the issue was not wanting to wave the American flag but rather wanting to fly the flag of their homeland and or ancestry.

  • Jeremy Leochner

    Time: The belief that slavery caused the civil war does not stem from rewritten history. In their own secession documents all the confederate states made reference to slavery as the chief issue over which they were separating. South Carolina,the state that started the secession movement, even painted the conflict as one between slave and free states. Its enemy was not the government or “the north”, it was the free states. States rights and other issues were brought up but it was slavery that fueled the fire. Without slavery being an issue the states would not have seceded and the war would not have happened.
    The first amendment is not dead time. If it was we would not be having this conversation.

    • Vigilant

      Jeremy, you are 100% correct.

      The revisionists on BOTH sides of the question have distorted history, but if one relies on the source documents of the times (speeches, letters, proclamations, newspaper accounts and the content of legislation), the evidence is incontrovertible: slavery was the proximate cause of secession and the Civil War.

      On May 1, 1833, Andrew Jackson wrote, “the tariff was only the pretext, and disunion and southern confederacy the real object. The next pretext will be the negro, or slavery question.”. That was 28 years before the war. Jackson was right.

    • Vigilant

      Jeremy, taking on TIME is a fruitless endeavor, as he is blinded by pseudohistory, revisionist lies and any conspiracy theory he can latch onto. Much of his nonsense is based on the premise that we are now USA, Inc., a ridiculous assertion that the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 supplanted the Constitution and made us a corporation.

      I’ve challenged him FOUR TIMES on this forum to cite ANYTHING in the words of the Act that purport to do what he claims, but he has NEVER responded with a citation to that effect. Why? Because it doesn’t exist.

      To borrow from Shakespeare, TIME’s assertions are tales told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.