• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Valedictorian Defies School District and Recites Lord's Prayer [W:618]

Should the school have banned the reading of the prayer by the student?

  • Yes

    Votes: 24 27.3%
  • No

    Votes: 60 68.2%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 4 4.5%

  • Total voters
    88
We aren't discussing school rules. We are discussing whether or not the school should have disallowed the prayer portion of the speech to begin with. So I think we were talking about two different points.

Is there a point to be made about following authority, yes, however, this was not the issue being discussed.

You're just being unreasonable now. Do you remember being in school or at school sponsored events? Could you say whatever you wanted? No, you could not. Or least not without repercussions.
 
We are discussing school rules. The kid broke school rules by not submitting his final speech for approval.

You were discussing school rules, I, who started the thread, was discussing whether or not they should have censored.
 
It was limited to pedagogical related censorship. That does not cover a graduation speech.

100% wrong again

nice dodge though, you have no integrity and can never admit when you are wrong

t factually shows schools can limit speech are you denying this fact?
it factually shows why federal government and schools are differetn, are you denying this fact?

answer these question in the next post or it will simply further show how dishonest you are and little integrity you have.

now on to your failed argument, it most definitely can cover a graduation speech lol

pedagogical
: of, relating to, or befitting a teacher or education

focus on this statement "Supreme Court observed that "[a] school need not tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with 'its basic educational mission"
religion can EASILY be deemed not in the educational misson

sorry for you mistake

would you like further proof about speech at school that are all related and further explain?

another court case
Main article: Bethel School District v. Fraser

In Fraser, a high school student was disciplined following his speech to a school assembly at which he nominated a fellow student for a student elective office. The speech contained sexual innuendos, but not obscenity. The Supreme Court found that school officials could discipline the student. In doing so, it recognized that "[t]he process of educating our youth for citizenship in public schools is not confined to books, the curriculum, and the civics class; schools must teach by example the shared values of a civilized social order." Recognizing that one of the important purposes of public education is to inculcate the habits and manners of civility as valued conducive both to happiness and to the practice of self-government, the Supreme Court emphasized that: "Consciously or otherwise, teachers--and indeed the older students--demonstrate the appropriate form of civil discourse and political expression by their conduct and deportment in and out of class." [6] Under the Fraser standard, school officials look not merely to the reasonable risk of disruption—the Tinker standard—but would also balance the freedom of a student's speech rights against the school's interest in teaching students the boundaries of socially appropriate behavior. Schools have discretion to curtail not only obscene speech, but speech that is vulgar, lewd, indecent or plainly offensive.

again it most certainly can
 
I don't think that matters. It is counted as school still. If you are at any school sponsored events, the same rules apply as if you were in school. The parents of students also have to follow these rules, as do any visitors to the school or any guests at school sponsored public events. There are no exceptions. Sorry.

yu are right it doesnt matter and his OPINION is wrong anyway has i already proved.
 
You're just being unreasonable now. Do you remember being in school or at school sponsored events? Could you say whatever you wanted? No, you could not. Or least not without repercussions.

Actually I could pray without repercussions. In fact all students could until the 60's when the SCOTUS decided that the direction of the country should change after almost 200 years for whatever reason.
 
You were discussing school rules, I, who started the thread, was discussing whether or not they should have censored.

So I guess if I was a high school student who was scheduled to make a speech and at the last minute I changed my speech to include some profanities, that's perfectly fine because its all part of my free speech.

How about if I wanted to say what an asshole I thought the high school principal was or one of my teachers? Or what if I decided to start reciting the devil's prayer?
 
You were discussing school rules, I, who started the thread, was discussing whether or not they should have censored.

in your link i didnt see anything censored can you you qoute that?

also opinion of whether it should or not is just that

but the fact is they could
 
Actually I could pray without repercussions. In fact all students could until the 60's when the SCOTUS decided that the direction of the country should change after almost 200 years for whatever reason.

Because the country is changing and we have a lot more diversity than we used to. Come join us in the year 2013. It's not SO scary. I promise. :mrgreen:
 
Actually I could pray without repercussions. In fact all students could until the 60's when the SCOTUS decided that the direction of the country should change after almost 200 years for whatever reason.

you can still pray in school in fact schools have been made to have rooms to allow you to pray
i prayed in school many many times, nothing every happened
 
100% wrong again

nice dodge though, you have no integrity and can never admit when you are wrong

t factually shows schools can limit speech are you denying this fact?
it factually shows why federal government and schools are differetn, are you denying this fact?

answer these question in the next post or it will simply further show how dishonest you are and little integrity you have.

now on to your failed argument, it most definitely can cover a graduation speech lol

pedagogical
: of, relating to, or befitting a teacher or education

I never said that the case did not allow for censorship. I stated that it was specific as to the types of censorship. I never said it differentiated federal and school, I said that it stated when censorship could occur.

You then take part of the case law without the rest to prove your point, rather than look at the whole.

Your definition of Pedagogical, uncited by the way, doesn't cover a graduation speech as it is not part of the education process, nor is it related to a teacher.
 
you can still pray in school in fact schools have been made to have rooms to allow you to pray
i prayed in school many many times, nothing every happened

I was referring to public prayer.
 
1.)I never said that the case did not allow for censorship. I stated that it was specific as to the types of censorship. I never said it differentiated federal and school, I said that it stated when censorship could occur.

2.)You then take part of the case law without the rest to prove your point, rather than look at the whole.

3.)Your definition of Pedagogical, uncited by the way, doesn't cover a graduation speech as it is not part of the education process, nor is it related to a teacher.

1.)you asked why government and school is different
you said the school cant censor speech

why do you lie?

I knew you would be man enough to flat out answer the questions so ill ask again to further expose your dishonesty

it factually shows schools can limit speech are you denying this fact? yes or no
it factually shows why federal government and schools are differetn, are you denying this fact? yes or no

2.) actually the whole is exactly what im pointing out and proves you wrong lol

3.) Pedagogical - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
: of, relating to, or befitting a teacher or education

yes it does because its a school event LOL and please notice the word OR in the definition, it doesnt have to involve a teacher it involves education and that education covers all school events as proven by the WHOLE, please see the case laws 2 which i have posted.
heres a link for them all
School speech (First Amendment) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

you lose again, dude you seriously make it easy, why do you argue against facts?

let me know if theres anything else you need educated on
 
in your link i didnt see anything censored can you you qoute that?

also opinion of whether it should or not is just that

but the fact is they could

Seeing as I live near the school, and know people involved, I know he was told he could not include religion and then submitted his speech.
 
I never said that the case did not allow for censorship. I stated that it was specific as to the types of censorship. I never said it differentiated federal and school, I said that it stated when censorship could occur.

You then take part of the case law without the rest to prove your point, rather than look at the whole.

Your definition of Pedagogical, uncited by the way, doesn't cover a graduation speech as it is not part of the education process, nor is it related to a teacher.

If it is a school sponsored event, the school has the authority to censor speeches and other things that THEY feel may be offensive.

Jackpot!

FindLaw | Cases and Codes

(b) State officials here direct the performance of a formal religious exercise at secondary schools' promotional and graduation ceremonies. Lee's decision that prayers should be given and his selection of the religious participant are choices attributable to the State. Moreover, through the pamphlet and his advice that the prayers be nonsectarian, he directed and controlled the prayers' content. That the directions may have been given in a good-faith attempt to make the prayers acceptable to most persons does not resolve the dilemma caused by the school's involvement, since the government may not establish an official or civic religion as a means of avoiding the establishment of a religion with more specific creeds. Pp. 587-590.

Read it and weep buddy! :lol:
 
I was referring to public prayer.

ive prayed public many times, nothing happened and aslo as you aren't infringing on the rights of others this is still allowed

you must be talking about something very specific. Pleas detail your example.
 
Seeing as I live near the school, and know people involved, I know he was told he could not include religion and then submitted his speech.

so you have no links or proof to back this up? LMAO classic
 
Wrong. Post #691. Case law specifically addresses school-sponsored ceremonies.

The intent of the thread by the original author, who happens to be me, was for people to give their opinions. I think I would know.
 
You do know this whole thread IS about opinions right?


wrong again, no the WHOLE thread is not about opinion

but discussing opinion is fine when it is actually just opinion

you get in trouble when you do the following:

state an opinion and call it fact and it is not
state an opinion that is factually wrong
call posted facts not true

you do know you have been trying to challenge facts and claim facts to be opinion right? LOL

again the issues is yours, see my post 293 many many many pages ago
so many random postings in this thread im not sure what everybody is actually arguing so ill state some facts

The school has every right to censor, limit or not allow any speech that is given as a privileged to anybody at a school function.
The kid broke the rules.


now with that said people can debate thier opinions all they want about whether the kid did a good thing, bad thing etc but the facts wont change.

try not challenging facts and things will work out better for you
 
The intent of the thread by the original author, who happens to be me, was for people to give their opinions. I think I would know.

Okay, but according to case law, it really isn't a matter of opinion. The school has every right to monitor and limit what is said in speeches during graduation and any other school-sponsored events. Just want to be sure we are CLEAR on that matter.
 
The intent of the thread by the original author, who happens to be me, was for people to give their opinions. I think I would know.

wow, you HAVE to be very young, it doesnt work that way

there are facts being discussed within this thread and your OP doesnt change that lol

there are opinions being discussed also and thos are fine

YOU have challenged facts and lost
YOU have presented opinion that is factually false
YOU have presented opinion as fact and been proven wrong

these are all your issues if you just want to talk opinions :shrug:

if this is what you would like to do that fine, start now

post an actual OPINION

GO!
 
Last edited:
Look, you can argue the point all you want but the fact is you are wrong. Schools CAN and DO monitor and limit what students can and cannot say in speeches at school-sponsored events.

IF they didn't all hell would break lose. :roll:

I'm wrong? Why? Cuz you said so? :lamo You can :roll: all you want as well, like that means something? Heh, but there now two of us has handed out permission slips today...

If what a kid says is hate filled, if it incites violence, if it promotes illegal behavior than a school has every right to stifle him. Saying a prayer doesn't meet those qualifications. Schools who DO stifle their pupils, are abusing if not completely usurping authority not granted to them.

Now, anything short of you trying to convince people that by this young man saying the Lord's Prayer -- it was really a rallying cry for the 10th Crusade, the young man hiding his sword and dirk under the podium waiting for some infidel to meet his gaze, than all you're doing is trying to justify the egregious act of stripping people of there natural right because you don't like what they have to say.
 
Back
Top Bottom