Kids Are Americans Too

by Bill O'Reilly

  But Sean, who by the way has an A-minus average, thought he knew. Vacations should be “downtime,” he politely argued to the school’s principal. What Sean wanted was elimination of all homework assignments during vacation, but the school prides itself on getting kids ready to compete for the country’s best colleges.

  The result? Compromise. The principal agreed to encourage teachers to lighten the homework assignments for vacation periods. One teacher had a very creative response, assigning a paper for vacation but allowing it to be turned in beforehand.

  So, Sean’s sensible approach to a problem—without confrontation—led to a balanced compromise. Remember Sean as we go forward. When you think you have the right to something—in this case, a worry-free vacation for relaxing—the first step should not be screaming your head off. Think. Be rational. Discuss the issue with respect.

  Perhaps, like Sean, you, too, will be able to enjoy “the pursuit of happiness,” a phrase we’ll talk more about a little later. Go, Sean!

  No pinhead, he!

  2

  A BLAST FROM THE PAST

  Let’s go back a bit…

  These Founding Father guys got together in Philadelphia in 1787…

  Wait, wait! Don’t let your eyes glaze over. It’s a fascinating story—it really is!—and I hope you read all about it someday, if you haven’t already. (Yes, I know from letters and e-mails to the Factor that some of you are just amazingly knowledgeable about history and politics, and I don’t forget that.)

  But I’m not going to tell that story in these pages.

  What I want you to think about—and it’s SAD how many adults forget this basic fact—is that your rights were written down more than two centuries ago.

  Not only were there no iPods then, there were no…Well, you name it: Look around your room, or your house, or the shopping mall. Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and the rest of the guys would be stunned if you somehow zipped them through time to our world today.

  And it’s not just the gadgets, look at the people. Every census shows remarkable changes in age, national heritage, language, and so forth among the Americans around you.

  This is not 1787. Back then Americans ate parsnips. Had any of those lately? Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would not believe what we are eating today! Have a taco, boys. How about some sushi? Pizza with mozzarella?

  The point is, times have really changed in just about every way. Except, that is, for our rights. But even those are subject to new rulings based upon the modern age. And that fact can make your life confusing. New technology means kids have more access to “stuff” than any other kids in history.

  But the most important difference for you and your rights is that IDEAS have changed since 1787.

  You know some of the obvious ones. Back then, the creators of the Constitution—again, the basis for all American rights, the supreme law of the land—did not set down for women a right to vote. They also did not set down guarantees for full citizenship for African-Americans. They even allowed slavery. Not good. And the entire country paid the price later in the bloody Civil War.

  INTERLUDE OF RANTING: Hey, why should I respect the U.S. Constitution if it disrespects me? Huh? Am I included if I’m a woman? No way. Or if I’m African-American? No, no, no! Or if I’m not a property owner? What can that old rag mean to me in my life today?

  Okay, so that’s the puzzle right there.

  How does this old set of rules keep working?

  And does it really?

  If you watch my TV program or listen to my radio program, you know that people are arguing about that question all over the country.

  So let’s join in…

  UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

  Has your American-history teacher ever told you that dinosaurs were given a berth on Noah’s Ark during the Great Flood described in the Old Testament? Did he or she ever tell you that you belong in hell if you don’t believe in the message of Jesus?

  You are amazed by my questions. “Has O’Reilly lost his mind at last?” you ask (to yourself, I hope).

  Well, in a high school in New Jersey, an American-history teacher said these things and many more that, you would think, have nothing to do with the official class subject. Moreover, you could say that these statements are pretty good evidence of religious fanaticism.

  How do we know for sure that the teacher said these things? Because sixteen-year-old Matthew LaClair taped these remarks in class (thereby becoming a part of American history himself). He thought it was his right to be taught American history, not fundamentalist Christian ideas.

  Can you guess what happened next? I couldn’t have. The teacher was replaced by another but assigned to teach the same subject to a new group of students. The school board banned taping in all classes without prior permission from the teacher. Some of Matthew’s classmates got angry that the tapes appeared on the Internet and on TV, in effect airing their voices without their permission. Matthew alleges that the school did not step in to keep other kids from harassing him. He received a death threat.

  There’s more, but that’s enough. Matthew’s family is now suing the local board of education, and the beat goes on.

  Is this a case of one courageous kid standing up for his rights to free speech? The “free speech” in this case, of course, is going public about the teacher’s comments. Is this (also?) a case of one boy defending freedom of religion, meaning that he doesn’t have to listen in school to material that is associated with Christian fundamentalism?

  Maybe it started out that way, but now it’s one heck of a mess. New rules, lawyers on both sides, angry quotes in the press, kids choosing up sides. To me, the lesson is pretty clear. The teacher was way over the line, but Matthew’s unusual action stoked the fire. His classmates may be acting badly, but they felt they were dragged into something they didn’t want to become involved in. School officials may talk the talk about keeping religion out of the classroom, but they are steaming because the whole thing got so much public attention. (And this book is another example of that!)

  As I’ve said before, sometimes it’s better all around—better for your friends and your school and your community—if you try tact first. Matthew said the recordings were necessary because, otherwise, officials would not believe him. Maybe he’s right. We’ll never know. Maybe the officials would have covered the behind of the teacher, a fourteen-year-veteran. Again, we’ll never know.

  What we do know is that a lot of people are angry, and it looks as if neither side, so far, is happy with the outcome. Matthew’s a kid like you, and he’ll learn a lot from this. I hope he learns only good things. And I hope you learn that conflict like this should be thoughtfully, skillfully avoided.

  In my opinion, Matt should have kept his tapes private, using them as notes. He should have stated his objections clearly and calmly to school administrators, and if they did not believe him, then he should have let them hear the taped remarks in private.

  Going public with the tapes should have been the very last resort. If Matthew had taken the steps I suggest, I believe he would have won an early victory.

  * * *

  !THIS JUST IN!

  Months later, there was a final (one hopes) footnote to all of this.

  In a settlement between the LaClair family and the town board of education—one of those agreements, by the way, in which no one admits any “wrongdoing” in the matter under debate—Matthew won two points.

  The board decided to ask the state’s chapter of the Anti-Defamation League to begin teaching both students and their teachers about the need for public schools to keep ideas of church and state separate.

  Also, the board offered to praise publicly Matthew’s “courage and integrity” while the kid’s parents in turn agreed to applaud that body for its actions.

  After all of this was over, the boy himself felt that he had learned “how hard it can be sometimes to go against the grain, and that a lot of times, even though things may be tough, you still hav
e to go through with it and finish it.”

  Sounds good. I’m okay with that. But I still recommend cool heads over hot words, whenever that’s possible. When two sides have to agree to commend each other in public, that’s ridiculous.

  * * *

  3

  WHAT IS YOUR FREEDOM ALL ABOUT?

  For openers, the Constitution guarantees all of us, in a famous phrase, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

  Fair enough. Who could argue with that? I want to live, and I bet you do, too. I want to be free; so do you. We both want to “pursue happiness”…

  Uh-oh. Just what the heck does that mean? Well, let’s say we’re both taking a train (after all, I do live in the New York City area): Is it okay for you to “pursue happiness” by shouting into your cell phone while I’m trying to read? Your happiness, in that case, causes me unhappiness. And the reverse. My happiness—seeing to it that you shut the heck up—would cause you unhappiness.

  To put it simply, a great deal of the Constitution and everything based upon it in American law is an attempt—constantly changing and constantly challenged—to figure out how we can both be happy.

  And there are only two of us in that scenario! What about the other three hundred million Americans?

  The key to resolving our differences on the train involves asking this question: What policy is best for the majority of the people riding the railroad? Is it allowing everybody to shout? Of course not. That would create chaos.

  So the train company has the right to make rules that override your right to shout into your phone. The train company has an obligation to think about the “greater good” of its passengers and to provide public satisfaction and safety. The train company is in business to make a profit, and your screaming will not further that cause.

  Get it? Your right to free and loud speech is trumped by the train company’s rights because you chose to get on the train. Once you make that choice, you sacrifice some personal freedom. If you don’t like it, start your own train company. Call it the Screaming Eagle.

  As you read, America is adding thousands of new citizens every day. Does each one of us get our own set of rights to make certain that we’re always happy?

  Of course not.

  Then how does it work?

  Let’s look at the quick answer.

  The Constitution does not exactly list all of your rights. Instead, it sets up the process for doing that and serves as a general reminder in all situations that your rights leave off at the spot where mine begin, and vice versa. But what does that mean?

  I’m going to explain in one pithy paragraph something definitely worth knowing…something that many too many adults don’t understand, and something that is really very simple!

  The Constitution sets down basic guidelines,

  but it also opens the door for additions in

  response to specific changes in our country.

  Remember, every time a new invention

  appears in stores, it brings with it new questions

  about “rights.” Seven-hundred-watt car stereo

  amps did not exist in 1789. And loud music played

  by you can violate the rights of someone else.

  Right? I mean, who wants to hear 50 Cent at

  midnight being blared throughout the neighborhood

  streets? Give us a break, please.

  Back in 1789, the Philadelphia gang themselves added ten ideas, or amendments, that we know as the Bill of Rights. (How many adults know the phrase, but don’t really know what it means? Plenty, let me tell you from my experiences on the air.)

  The truth is, most of your rights as a kid today are based upon those first ten amendments. That’s the first thing to know here.

  Second, the Philadelphia guys made it possible for the states to add (or deny) new changes, or amendments, to the original ten. Among other things, these amendments have given women the right to vote and have established full citizenship for members of racial minorities.

  That’s why, 220 years later, we’re still coming up with new ideas about rights, still arguing with one another. Like, should there be an amendment guaranteeing equal rights between men and women in all things? Like, should there be an amendment denying gays the right to marry? (That would be the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment.)

  See, an amendment to the Constitution is a valuable, powerful instrument in national law. It should not be treated as just another ornament on the Christmas tree, especially when new laws passed by Congress or the state houses can address and remedy (we can hope) an issue more speedily and efficiently than yet another constitutional amendment. (Right now, for the record, there are twenty-seven of them.)

  So, summing up: You have rights, but so do other Americans. When your rights clash with theirs, a decision has to be made as to who wins.

  Sometimes parents, teachers, or police make the decisions; sometimes the whole mess has to go to court. That’s why lawyers make money.

  Anyway, read on…The more you know about “rights,” the better off your life will be. In every way.

  * * *

  Handy Rights Check

  Before you wage a big battle over what you think is a denial of your rights, ask yourself the following questions:

  Does getting my right…

  Get in someone else’s way?

  [ ] Yes [ ] No

  Cause me more trouble than it’s worth?

  [ ] Yes [ ] No

  Require a long, drawn-out lawsuit?

  [ ] Yes [ ] No

  Matter, really, all that much?

  [ ] Yes [ ] No

  * * *

  There’s a simple but wise phrase I like a lot: “Don’t sweat the small stuff.” This rights business is for the big stuff. Let go of minor annoyances, like the things you squabble with your brother or sister about and instead fight over the issues that really matter to you.

  ASK O’REILLY! (A Special Feature)

  You: How old do I have to be to use a gun when I go hunting with my father?

  O’Reilly: I dunno.

  You: You, uh, dunno?

  O’Reilly: No, I don’t.

  You: (after a pause) But you just got me to read this book about my rights. Isn’t that a right?

  O’Reilly: Could be. Probably is.

  You: (mumbling) What a crock…

  O’Reilly: Could you speak up?

  You: What a crock!

  O’Reilly: Not at all.

  You: But, but—

  O’Reilly: Okay, we’re at a really important place here. Follow me closely. Number one, there are a gazillion different kinds of rights and nonrights because there are a gazillion different laws. (Well, maybe not quite that many.)

  You: Then how can I learn them all?

  O’Reilly: You can’t. What you learn is, how to find out what they are, and how they work. But there’s something else…Number two, those Founding Father guys in Philadelphia were very suspicious of a big government (like today’s government in Washington). They believed that a lot of laws—a lot of rights—should be decided by the individual state, or even the individual county or city.

  You: But I want to go hunting with my father, and I’m only eleven years old.

  O’Reilly: Then you better live in a state where the state’s lawmakers have decided that you and your dad have that right. There are fifty states, and each one makes its own laws on many issues that affect you. I’m sure you know from kid gossip that driver’s licenses and drinking laws are handled differently in different states. No book is going to list all of those laws; the length of that list would be about the equivalent of a hundred Harry Potters. Besides, you don’t need to know the hunting laws in Hawaii if you want to go deer hunting in upstate New York.

  You: So that’s why you “dunno.”

  O’Reilly: You got it. As I said, this is very important to understand. Some laws, like kidnapping laws, are the same for every state; they’re determined by the U.S. Congress in Washington. Many,
many more are decided by the lawmakers in state capitals, county courthouses, and city halls.

  You: What a mess.

  O’Reilly: Can be. But once you understand that point, you’re on your way to understanding where rights come from and just how they work.

  I hope you enjoyed the special feature above; there will be more as we go along.

  Oh, and one more thing: To know your rights, you have to ask the “right” questions. In your school library there should be books about what the laws are in your state. Want to go hunting? Look up the law. (You can do this on the Internet as well.) Be proactive! That means, be curious and find out what you are legally entitled to do.

  One good source is Teen Rights: A Legal Guide for Teens and the Adults in Their Lives, by attorney Traci Truly. In an appendix she lists several basic laws for each of the fifty states, such as the right to have an abortion, minimum age for marriage, and child labor restrictions. I think you’ll be surprised at the differences between the states in regard to such issues.

  Anyway, if you research the basic laws affecting young people in your state, you’ll be the smartest kid around!

  And despite what some pinheads might say, smart kids are usually admired and respected.