It's matters little whether it's an outside Christian group or a group of students. Why is that relevant? Both groups retain the same constitutional protections.
H. -----Original Message----- From: BethF [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 8:44 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Religious Freedom Part II Except that its not allowing an outside xtian group to use a school - its having a group of students form a religious school club. --Beth, Pseudo usenet cop Merlin MTB, BikeE AT, RANS gliss, Trek R200, Kickbike Owned by Kavik (Samoyed Boy) and Toklat (Keeshond Boy) Anchorage, Alaska ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 8:38 PM Subject: RE: Religious Freedom Part II > To all who found the teacher's actions permissible, let me tell you why they > may not be. > > If you believe in an absolute separation of church and state, then I think > you're on a slippery slope to allow this teachers actions. > > One of the key issues would be, how did the teacher answer Moshe's question. > > She would be on safer ground if she said, "It's something very personal to > me," which is a neutral answer. If she said, "It's because I believe in > God," she potentially has a problem and all of her other actions can be > viewed with suspicion. > > It could be argued that the symbol and the book server mainly a primary > purpose of raising the question so that she has a chance to evangelize. > > In racial discrimination cases, the high court has ruled that you need not > you need not prove racist intent to find a practice, if its final result > discriminates against a race of people, violates the 14th Amendment. > > Extrapolating from that, it's not a stretch to say that you need not prove > an evangelical intent to say the teacher created an infringement. > > As we have discussed, kids are easily malleable. It is conceivable that a > teacher who even makes a minor display of faith could have an evangelical > effect on the children in her classroom, if not now, than years from now > when the student learns a little more about the world, etc. That idea could > very much be in the teachers mind. > > Personally, however, I think having the government micromanage these issues > is a little bit more of big brother than I really want in my life. > > So my point is, there must be some public accommodation of religion or we > reach a point of absurdity. > > And to come back to the issue of allowing a Christian group to meet in a > school room, after class, with a teacher supervisor -- it is absurd not to > allow it. It's so absurd that I've run out of words on the subject. > > > H. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 9:52 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Religious Freedom Part II > > > My first son (second child) is Moshe while the baby is Shemaryahu (not a > rare as you may think). Now your example person has not imposed their > views onto a captive audience but instead is answering a question put > forth. If the answer was "well, this is the book of my deity who says > all infidels are going to have to serve as waiters to me in the > afterlife for not believing in her", well its still a legitimate answer. > It might not be a nice answer but its the answer to a question put > forth. It's like asking for spam. If you ask for it, you deserve what > you get. > If on the other hand she got up in the front of the classroom and said > "class, now lets praise saffo, creator of the universe who gave us math > and then open your books to page 214 and divide the numbers" she has a > captive audience who can't leave and has to listen to something that > they don't want. Like unrequested spam. > So how do you want your spam today? > > > Let's change the religious practice of Mrs. Smith slightly. > > > > She's a rather quiet woman who is quite happy to just do her job and > teach > > the children. She never discusses her religion on school grounds. > > > > But, she does wear a small pin every day on her lapel. This pin is a > common > > symbol of her religion. > > > > She also keeps a copy of her religious book in the top drawer of her > desk. > > She never takes it out of the desk while students are in the room. She > only > > reads it while eating lunch in private. But students are able to see > the > > book when she opens the drawer at times when they are standing near > the > > desk. > > > > One day, Michael Dinowitz's son (sorry Mike, I don't know the names of > your > > kids), asks Mrs. Smith what the pin on her lapel is for, what it > means. > > > > Note, please, that I have been very careful not to label Mrs. Smith as > a > > member of any particular religion. For the purpose of this question, > her > > religion, whether it be any of the Big Three monotheists, wiccan, > Satanism > > or secular humanism, is irrelevant. What matters only, are the facts > as I've > > presented them. > > > > Here are the questions: > > > > 1) Can Mrs. Smith wear a religious symbol on her lapel while in the > > classroom with students present? > > > > 2) Can Mrs. Smith keep a copy of her religious book in her desk? > > > > 3) How should Mrs. Smith answer little Mike Jr.'s question? > > > > H. > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
