• 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
ChrisL said:
The school is still liable for all school sponsored events. They set the rules and the guidelines for their events. :shrug: That's life.
Click to expand...

They cannot set any rule which violates the Constitution's "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"...
 
JC Callender said:
Evening Jack....would you feel uncomfortable if it were an acquaintances graduation and the valedictorian recited a Muslim prayer?
Click to expand...

A Muslim prayer was once recited at one of our children's graduation. What's the issue?:cool:
 
Okay, I thought for a second and here's what I came up with: Not offensive to who....anyone? You don't think that could offend someone who doesn't believe in his God? Would you be comfortable with a Muslim prayer.

Mathematician said:
Think for a second. I'm saying to let the valedictorian say what they want. That is, that rule shouldn't be there or should be more lenient. What the student wanted to say should not be reasonably deemed offensive.
Click to expand...
 
clownboy said:
Liabilty is not an issue here, nothing was done that would trigger the school being liable for anything.
Click to expand...

The school has a right to set rules and guidelines at their own events. That is the point. It doesn't matter if you personally don't agree with them.

The school is not violating any rights by saying all speeches must be preapproved at one of their events.
 
ChrisL said:
SOME people would consider a Christian prayer to be offensive. That is something you need to realize.
Click to expand...

And still others would find offensive the most benign statements by valedictorians or commencement speaker. You have no right to guard against being offended. In fact, in most cases you have a right to speak that which you know will offend some of the people listening.
 
Jack Hays said:
Except when their rules violate the Constitution.

The issue of school speech as it relates to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is one that has been of much debate and the subject of much litigation since the mid-20th century. The First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech applies to students in the public schools: In the landmark decision Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court formally recognized that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."[1]

The core principles of Tinker remain unaltered, but are tempered by several important decisions -- Bethel School District v. Fraser, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, and Morse v. Frederick.[2] Despite respect for the legitimate educational interests of school officials, the Supreme Court has not abandoned Tinker; it continues to recognize the basis precept of Tinker that viewpoint-specific speech restrictions are an egregious violation of the First Amendment.[2] In Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, the Supreme Court declared: "Discrimination against speech because of its message is presumed to be unconstitutional." Rosenberger held that denial of funds to a student organization on the sole basis that the funds were used to publish a religiously oriented student newspaper was an unconstitutional violation of the right of free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, for other speech, that is, on-campus speech which is neither obscene, vulgar, lewd, indecent or plainly offensive under Fraser nor school-sponsored under Hazelwood nor advocating illegal drugs at a school-sponsored event under Frederick, Tinker applies limiting the authority of schools to regulate the speech, whether on or off-campus, unless it would materially and substantially disrupt classwork and discipline in the school.:cool:
Click to expand...

Might we summarize this earth shattering event as " Christians gittin' all feisty and all, y'all" ?...................
 
You have no right to guard against being offended.....what?

clownboy said:
And still others would find offensive the most benign statements by valedictorians or commencement speaker. You have no right to guard against being offended. In fact, in most cases you have a right to speak that which you know will offend some of the people listening.
Click to expand...
 
clownboy said:
And still others would find offensive the most benign statements by valedictorians or commencement speaker. You have no right to guard against being offended. In fact, in most cases you have a right to speak that which you know will offend some of the people listening.
Click to expand...

Damn, I'm finding my self in agreement with some of your thoughts this evening...
 
From my link I posted earlier.

Student religious expression may, however, raise Establishment Clause concerns when such expression takes place before a captive audience in a classroom or at a school-sponsored event. Students have the right to pray alone or in groups or to discuss their faith with classmates, as long as they aren't disruptive or coercive. And they may express their religious views in class assignments or discussions, as long as it is relevant to the subject under consideration and meets the requirements of the assignment.2 But students don’t have a right to force a captive audience to participate in religious exercises.
Click to expand...

faqs
 
ChrisL said:
The school has a right to set rules and guidelines at their own events. That is the point. It doesn't matter if you personally don't agree with them.

The school is not violating any rights by saying all speeches must be preapproved at one of their events.
Click to expand...

Again, they cannot set rules that go against the state of federal constitution. Oh, they can, but there's nothing they can do about those who break those rules. Such is the case here. As I have shown with the SCOTUS ruling on the subject.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but you have it wrong.

The issue of school speech as it relates to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is one that has been of much debate and the subject of much litigation since the mid-20th century. The First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech applies to students in the public schools: In the landmark decision Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court formally recognized that students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."[1]

The core principles of Tinker remain unaltered, but are tempered by several important decisions -- Bethel School District v. Fraser, Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, and Morse v. Frederick.[2] Despite respect for the legitimate educational interests of school officials, the Supreme Court has not abandoned Tinker; it continues to recognize the basis precept of Tinker that viewpoint-specific speech restrictions are an egregious violation of the First Amendment.[2] In Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, the Supreme Court declared: "Discrimination against speech because of its message is presumed to be unconstitutional." Rosenberger held that denial of funds to a student organization on the sole basis that the funds were used to publish a religiously oriented student newspaper was an unconstitutional violation of the right of free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, for other speech, that is, on-campus speech which is neither obscene, vulgar, lewd, indecent or plainly offensive under Fraser nor school-sponsored under Hazelwood nor advocating illegal drugs at a school-sponsored event under Frederick, Tinker applies limiting the authority of schools to regulate the speech, whether on or off-campus, unless it would materially and substantially disrupt classwork and discipline in the school.

Is this a great country, or what?:2usflag:
Click to expand...

who said they give up their 1st amendment rights? not me and please notice the part where it refers to all the things that CAN be censored, thanks
we arent talkign about DISCRIMINATION against speech allowing one and not allowing another

my statements is in fact true, schools can in fact censor, limit or ban speech :shrug:
you assume i meant any and all speech, i did not

also from hazelwood that you mentioned

Hazelwood
Main article: Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier

The Hazelwood School District case applies the principles set forth in Fraser to curricular matters. In Hazelwood, the Supreme Court upheld a school's decision to censor certain articles in the school newspaper which was produced as part of the school's journalism curriculum. Echoing Fraser, the Supreme Court observed that "[a] school need not tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with 'its basic educational mission' ... even though the government could not censor similar speech outside the school." School authorities and educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.[7]

sorry i got nothign wrong
 
Jack Hays said:
Lucky you! Good evening, Polgara.:2wave:
Click to expand...

Good evening, Jack :2wave:

Reminds me of a true story I read a while back where a valedictorian wanted to include God in his speech, so he got the class together and stated that he would sneeze during his speech...and they would respond as a class "God bless you!" Went off without a hitch! :thumbs:
 
clownboy said:
And still others would find offensive the most benign statements by valedictorians or commencement speaker. You have no right to guard against being offended. In fact, in most cases you have a right to speak that which you know will offend some of the people listening.
Click to expand...

This is about the school setting guidelines and rules regarding speeches made at school sponsored events, not about me being offended. I'm not offended by the prayer at all, but I can understand how others might not want to be subjected to an unexpected sermon, and I can understand how the school wants to keep things like this from being a thorn in their sides.
 
ChrisL said:
SOME people would consider a Christian prayer to be offensive. That is something you need to realize.
Click to expand...

I don't like seeing the black kids walking around with their *sses hanging out of their pants. Oh well. I accept the fact that it won't do any more harm than annoying me. The same goes for someone hearing a prayer when they don't believe in the religion of it. If the valedictorian is a Muslim they can say "Allah Akbar" for all I care, they earned it.
 
AGENT J said:
who said they give up their 1st amendment rights? not me and please notice the part where it refers to all the things that CAN be censored, thanks
we arent talkign about DISCRIMINATION against speech allowing one and not allowing another

my statements is in fact true, schools can in fact censor, limit or ban speech :shrug:
you assume i meant any and all speech, i did not
Click to expand...

As they say in Congress, I note that you have clarified and extended your remarks. Fair enough, but the valedictorian's speech was clearly in the protected category.:mrgreen:
 
davidtaylorjr said:
It's not a member situation. This is a state-run school, making a rule about free speech and limiting it. That is a violation of the Constitution.
Click to expand...
We do NOT have unlimited freedom of speech.
To cite the Constitution when they are so vague about things , makes no sense...
What we do need is respect and civility, two more things not in the Constitution...
 
polgara said:
Good evening, Jack :2wave:

Reminds me of a true story I read a while back where a valedictorian wanted to include God in his speech, so he got the class together and stated that he would sneeze during his speech...and they would respond as a class "God bless you!" Went off without a hitch! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Clever lad!:mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom