Re: non-disruptive speech ?

[Paul Finkelman]

"Entitled" do it, and entitled to subject fellow student to the pressure are two different thing. The school setting does make a differene.  The KKK is entitled, under the First Amendment, to advocate that we "rid the world of  Jews."  So is the American Nazi Party.  I think it  would be quite reasonable to bas such speech in a public school.  As far as I know, Atheists to not campaign to rid the world of Christians nor harass them about it.  I have never heard of Christians being beaten up, harassed, ridiculed by school administraors, (or for that matter  lynched) by athiests.  

Paul Finkelman

Volokh, Eugene wrote:

    Christians are completely entitled, under the First Amendment, to try to "rid the world of all Jews" (in the sense of people who are Jews by religion) through the process of persuading the Jews (and others) to become Christians.  I think it's also a perfectly legitimate goal, though one I disagree with (not being a Christian).

 

    Atheists are likewise completely entitled, under the First Amendment, to try to "rid the world of all Christians" through the process of persuading the Christians (and others) to stop believing in Christianity.  That too is a perfectly legitimate goal.  Likewise, atheists are completely entitled to try to "rid the world of all Jews" (in the sense of people who are Jews by religion) through the process of persuading the Jews (and others) to become atheists.  It's called trying to change people's minds, and it's at the heart of what the First Amendment is about.

 

    I would hope that both Christians and atheists try to resist attempted browbeating by people who want to unfairly tar them with negative labels such as "anti-Semite," labels that acquired their rightful sting from actions far different from simply trying to persuade Jews of the truth of this or that theological belief. 

 

    I realize that people who strongly believe in some ideology -- whether it's Judaism, Christianity, atheism, liberalism, conservatism, or what have you -- might not want that ideology to become less popular, and might therefore lash out against those who are trying to persuade holders of that ideology to change views.  But that doesn't make the persuasion remotely improper; it just reflects the fact that people don't like their ideologies challenged.

 

    Eugene

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Paul Finkelman
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 12:15 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: non-disruptive speech ?

Rick  the difference is that you or your son could teach and learn to be tolerant about gay people, rather than campaign against them not having the same rights as you; you are after all, hardly harmed by someone else's marraige or even their faith.  To say that your son's views (or yours) are homo-phobic or even hateful, is not the same as saying that your are gong to go to hell or that all people who think like you MUST cease to exist.  However, the desire to convert Jews which is pushed on our children stems from a theological goal of entirely ridding the world of all Jews.  

---

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Rick Duncan
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 8:32 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: non-disruptive speech ?

If I understand Joel correctly, the next time a peer informs my son, a 3d Degree Black Belt, that it is "homophobic" to discriminate against same-sex "marriages," my son ought to kick the hateful speaker soundly with his best board-breaking side kicks. Hmmm. I think I would discipline him at home for such violent conduct.

Rick Duncan

Joe

-- 
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, OK   74104-3189

918-631-3706 (office)
918-631-2194 (fax)

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.