In a message dated 12/17/2004 3:22:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I had a neighbor, who characterized himself as "a born again Christian." Knowing that I am Jewish, he one day presented me with literature from "Jews for Jesus." He explained to me his reasons for doing so,
In a message dated 12/16/2004 5:14:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
namely that teaching and proselytizing religion tend to go hand in hand.
Another very good reason for eliminating public schools, or as my liberal friends so often want to do, relying on the canadian
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 12/16/2004 7:22 PM
Subject: Re: Steven Williams Case - more factual information
In a message dated 12/16/2004 9:55:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you think that experience requires a different conclusion
In a message dated 12/17/2004 10:59:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim's
point is that persuasion with which one agrees istypically not labeled
"proselytizing". Rather, that term is reserved forpersuasion which is
thought to be improper--and such impropriety
On Friday, December 17, 2004, at 12:18 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The question of how much it is being used/abused I reflected on anecdotally from my experience litigating these cases for nearly twenty years. A very quick electronic search on Lexis, of Supreme Court briefs, reveals some 300
In a message dated 12/17/2004 12:20:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Its importance in communication is not subject to dispute. My
messages on this subject have been to the effect of its incalculable value in
steering the hearer from rational considerations of
yet.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004
12:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
Now you have made patent your
concern: proselytization. But you seem to agree
Academics
Subject: Re: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
I'm not sure that I understand the point here. Is it
that it is acceptable for public school teachers to teach religious beliefs
such as the resurrection of Jesus as historical fact?
Or is it that it is too burdensome
Now you have made patent your concern: proselytization. But you seem to agree that teaching about religion is something other than proselytization. (As an aside, I always wonder that those with whom we agree never proselyze, they only offer irrefutable arguments, while those whose views are
In a message dated 12/16/2004 11:54:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is not wrong to be concerned about stigma and exclusion, as some members of the Court have noted over the years.
But this is why education must including teaching about religion. Stigma and exclusion
In a message dated 12/16/04 5:25:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
if we leave it to other non-public institutions to teach about it.
Well, nongovernmental institutions anyway. I admit to a bit of concern regarding the use of the terms public and government interchangeably.
On Thursday, December 16, 2004, at 12:22 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(As an aside, I always wonder that those with whom we agree never proselyze, they only offer irrefutable arguments, while those whose views are disagreeable are readily described as proselytizing. There is, it seems, a
Steve,
I will not limit that remark to myself. In fact I do not make this use of the term. But in a constitutional law career nearing the twenty year mark, I no longer feel tentative about expressing what I think candor would require most to admit: proselyzing is the ugly term (even though it is
In a message dated 12/16/2004 9:20:48 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The word
is used loosely often, this I grant, but there is a difference between
teaching about and proselytization howsoever easily one can drift from one
to the other if unwary or if not
In a message dated 12/16/2004 9:55:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If you
think that experience requires a different conclusion, then you simply have
not read the opposing briefs of a variety of groups on the opposite side from
me in numerous constitutional
remains true.
Marc Stern
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Newsom Michael
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004
3:37 PM
To: Law Religion issues for
Law Academics
Subject: RE: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
Could you explain why liberals are wrong
In a message dated 12/15/2004 4:53:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No, that isnt the rub. There is nothing like the EC that speaks to either biology or oxygen.
Precisely. And there's nothing in the EC that speaks to teaching about religion.
Jim "Copies of the Constitution
for
Law Academics
Subject: RE: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
They are wrong be about
it being unconstitutional to teach religion because the Supreme Court-including
its most liberal and separationist justices have said so repeatedly
beginning no later than Schempp. It is also
leave it to other non-public institutions
to teach about it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2004
2:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
In a message dated 12/16/2004
Could you explain why liberals are wrong?
-Original Message-
From: Marc Stern
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004
1:12 PM
To: Law Religion issues for
Law Academics
Subject: RE: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
.
Liberals are sometimes
In a message dated 12/15/2004 3:47:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rather than saddling teachers with a burden, perhaps the better course of action is not to try to teach religion in the public schools at all.
Of course, one might try to teach biology without discussing
No, that isnt the rub. There is nothing
like the EC that speaks to either biology or oxygen.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004
3:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Steven Williams Case
- more factual
AcademicsSubject: RE: Steven Williams
Case - more factual information .:.
No, that isn't the
rub. There is nothing like the EC that speaks to either biology or
oxygen.
-Original
Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 15
I've said it before; I'll say it again: Don't cloud the issue with facts!
:)
NPR ran a story yesterday on the Williams case. The link is here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4224577. According to the story, the principal had received many complaints about Williams over
Even more interesting in that story, I think, are two things. First, a
spokesman for the school district points out that the 5th grade
textbook that Mr. Williams uses contains a full copy of the Declaration
of Independence. That alone shows that the ADF's press release titled
"Declaration of
In a message dated 12/10/2004 1:44:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seems to me that the only relevant question in terms of this lawsuit is whether any of those assignments are properly given by this teacher to his students, not whether they might hypothetically be okay
In California 5th grade is US history.
6th grade is from the beginning of history to the fall of Rome.
7th grade goes on from the fall of Rome. Some discussion of Islam is
appropriate for 7th grade.
My wife teaches 6th grade. For the Egypt part, they mummify chicken
legs. One year, those
I like Prof. Levinson's hypo. Here's another one:
Under Islam, Jesus is believed to have been born of the Virgin Mary and
is considered a holy prophet. Read the Koran and other Islamic
religion sources and contrast this view to the Christian view of Jesus
as Messiah.
On Friday, December 10,
In a message dated 12/10/2004 1:16:46 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I looked over each of these assignments and I am dumbfounded by the assertion that these assignments inculcate belief. They seem well crafted to guide a student into studying the tenets of, and learning
In a message dated 12/10/2004 4:50:07 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not sure that I understand the point here. Is it that it is acceptable for public school teachers to teach religious beliefs such as the resurrection of Jesus as historical fact?
Or is it that it is
In a message dated 12/10/2004 11:18:35 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes (about the assignment to study Easter):
*John Adams wrote, "Our constitution was made only for a moral and
religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any
other." He also wrote a paper
Wouldn't all of this balancing have to be prediated on showing that Jefferson
and (sometimes) Madison are representative of the founders' views? This is not
at all obvious, especially on the question of religion. As judges are
notoriously bad historians, I'm not sure that this is such an easy
Marc's humorous riposte provides, I suppose, all the analysis that he thinks the Williams' assignment justifies. Having doubts, after laboring in the woodshed from time to time, that such humorous but otherwise pointless posts add anything of substance to the discussion, I will ask those who
] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004
12:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
Marc's humorous riposte provides, I suppose, all the
analysis that he thinks the Williams' assignment justifies. Having
doubts, after
It is not an easy line to draw, but schools can teach about religion, about religious beliefs, about the roles of religion in history, and so on. But schools cannot teach the religion as truth. The school can teach that Muslims belief there is but one god and Mohammed is his prophet, but cannot
Robert K. Vischer wrote:
Lets focus
on the assignment to
interview a Christian family about Easter and present the findings, as
that
seems, at least in my view, to be the least egregious. If Williams had
given similar interview assignments covering other faith traditions at
Is it a sociology class? I think it depends a lot on purpose and presentation.
I also think that we as lawyers, having been trained in a certain kind of compartmentalization and detachment and objectivity (please don't ignore the certain kind and blast me for an assertion I am not making),
In a message dated 12/10/2004 1:55:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But would you care to lay odds on whether Mr. Williams had his students interview a Muslim family to find out how they celebrated Ramadan? I'd say they're probably slim to none. All of that will of course
ool of Law
-Original
Message-
From: Ed Brayton
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004
11:44 AM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Steven Williams Case
- more factual information
I think the folks in the
school district that you refer to would have ha
Student writes
"only a person of very low intelligence could believe this. The works
studied are less realistic than the Wizard of Oz and contemptible."
Onlythe worst form of moral monstr could believe that people who did
believe in him deserve to be damned forever." What grade. Does it
In a message dated 12/10/2004 4:28:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Student writes "only a person of very low intelligence could believe this. The works studied are less realistic than the Wizard of Oz and contemptible." Only the worst form of moral monstr could believe that
Sent: Fri 12/10/2004 2:16 PM
To: Law Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc:
Subject: RE: Steven Williams Case - more factual information
Imagine the following assignment by a Jewish teacher to his class in
World History two weeks before
On Friday, December 10, 2004, at 02:27 PM, Ed Brayton wrote:
Steven Jamar wrote:
Is it a sociology class? I think it depends a lot on purpose and
presentation.
Mr. Williams teaches 5th grade.
I should have been more clear -- I was responding to Henderson's
inquiry about could such an assignment
I think the folks in the school district that you refer to would have
had a pretty strong case that many of those assignments were
impermissable. Was there ever a lawsuit filed in that case, by the way?
At any rate, it has nothing to do with this situation. Let me ask you
directly, Jim: do you
In a message dated 12/10/2004 1:14:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
He teaches the resurrection as historical fact, even though it is a religious belief which I and millions of other Americans deny.
Marc raises an interesting point here. Because he has a belief about
I'm not sure that I understand the point here. Is it that it is
acceptable for public school teachers to teach religious beliefs such as
the resurrection of Jesus as historical fact?
Or is it that it is too burdensome for teachers to be saddled
with the responsibility of telling their students
46 matches
Mail list logo
