Here is yet another case where the First Amendment is abused, the
Establishment Clause is grossly misinterpreted, the rights of students of
faith are suppressed, and our Christian faith is legally forced out of the
American public school system once again.

Mr. Haynes is exactly right when he states that the over all objective of
these ungodly judges is, in his words, "to turn public schools into
religion-free zones". It is indeed hypocritical, and an outright deception,
when educators encourage students to think for themselves, and to express
themselves, and then turn around and slap them down when they try to do so.

Who says that the godless communist state is dead? It comes to America more
and more everyday.


Ruling Threatens Student Free Speech

By Charles C. Haynes

April 14, 2010


Just when I think religious liberty is alive and well in public schools, a
school district does something bizarre to give the First Amendment a bad
name.

The latest poster-case for misbegotten efforts to turn public schools into
religion-free zones comes out of Everett, Wash., where school officials
barred students from playing an instrumental version of "Ave Maria" at
graduation in 2006.

Although the senior members of the wind ensemble have been allowed each year
to choose what to play at graduation, this time they were told not to
perform "Ave Maria" because "musical selections for all
graduations within
the district should be purely secular in nature." Some audience members, the
school explained, might be offended by the religious connotations of "Ave
Maria" -- Latin for "Hail, Mary."

One student musician sued, charging the school with violating her freedom of
speech. First the district court and then the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals sided with the school district. According to the three-judge panel
of the appeals court, "it is reasonable for a school official to prohibit
the performance of an obviously religious piece."

Notice that the court's ruling doesn't say public schools must ban all
religious music from performances. Instead, the court defers to
administrators who worry that allowing such music might give the appearance
of school endorsement of religion in violation of the First Amendment's
establishment clause.

On March 22, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, Nurre v.
Whitehead, thus sending a message to school officials (at least in the
Western states covered by the 9th Circuit) that they have broad authority to
ban any and all student expression that touches on religion at school
events.

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., however, wrote a strong dissent, arguing that
"a decision with such potentially broad and troubling implications merits
our review." According to Alito, Supreme Court precedents make it clear that
"discrimination against religious, as opposed to secular, expression is
viewpoint discrimination."

Alito's First Amendment concern in this case wasn't with school endorsement
of religion, but rather with school suppression of free speech. "When a
public school purports to allow students to express themselves," he writes,
"it must respect the students' free speech rights."

Justification

School districts often justify censorship of student speech, as this one
did, on the grounds that someone in the audience might be offended. But as
Alito points out, the Supreme Court has rejected "the proposition that
speech may be censored simply because some in the audience may find that
speech distasteful."

The tricky part, of course, is figuring out where to draw the line on
student speech at a school-sponsored event, especially when students are
given choices about what they can say (or play, in this case). Alito would
no doubt agree that school officials need to retain some control in case the
student veers off into the realm of speech inappropriate for a school
setting, including speech that proselytizes or attempts to involve the
audience in a religious exercise.

But just because line-drawing is difficult doesn't mean the courts should
give school officials carte blanche to censor all student references to
religion at school events. Surely a way can be found to allow students to
express personal religious views -- or play instrumental music with
religious associations -- without sending a message of school endorsement of
religion.

Troubling

What's most troubling about this case is the sweeping nature of the 9th
Circuit's opinion in support of the school district. If schools have the
authority to bar student references to religion, then presumably they have
the power to ban any and all student speech that some member of the audience
might find offensive or controversial.

Despite significant progress in recent years toward a more balanced
application of the First Amendment in public schools -- including more study
about religion in the curriculum and greater protection for student
religious expression -- many religious Americans remain convinced that
public education is hostile to their faith. Unfortunately, some misguided
school officials appear determined to prove them right.

Charles C. Haynes is senior scholar at the First Amendment Center. Write to
him at chaynes{at}freedomforum.org.



Jeff Snyder, SysOp - Armageddon BBS  Visit us at endtimeprophecy.org port 23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Download Center 4 Mac BBS Software & Christian Files.  We Use Hermes II


--- Hermes Web Tosser 1.1