Re: Supreme Court Decides Hein

[David W. New]

  - Original Message - 
  From: Friedman, Howard M. 
  To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu 
  Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 11:30 AM
  Subject: Supreme Court Decides Hein


  The Supreme Court this morning decided the Hein case, holding 5-4 that 
taxpayers lack standing to challenge expenditures and activities of Pres. 
Bush's Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives.  The majority did not 
overrule Flast-- though 2 justices wanted to.  Details and excerpts are on 
Religion Clause blog

  
http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2007/06/us-supreme-court-holds-taxpayers-lack.html

  Howard Friedman






--


  ___
  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.___
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.

Re: Appeals Court Bans Prayer 'in Jesus' name'

[Douglas Laycock]

Well actually, the court of appeals did not ban prayer in Jesus' name.  Nor did 
the City of Fredericksburg ban prayer in Jesus' name.  Prayer in Jesus' name is 
continuing all over the city.  The City said it would not sponsor prayer in 
Jesus' name; if anything was "banned," it was only at official city functions 
where the City controlled the agenda and thus controlled whether there would be 
a prayer at all. 

I agree that this is a very awkward decision.  But it is the inevitable result 
once we start down the path of allowing government-sponsored prayers.  Wrong 
answers is what the wrong questions beget, and when the answer is that the best 
solution is to restrict the religious content of prayers, the system has asked 
the wrong question.  The only way to fix this is to reconsider Marsh v. 
Chambers. 

Quoting Gordon James Klingenschmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Press release below.   Please forward widely.   Please call for interviews!
> In Jesus,
> Chaplain K.
> 
>
>   Appeals Court Bans Prayer 'In Jesus' Name'
>
> Contact: Chaplain Klingenschmitt, www.PrayInJesusName.org, 
> 719-360-5132 cell, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> WASHINGTON, July 23 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Fourth Circuit Court 
> of Appeals today ruled that the city council of Fredericksburg, 
> Virginia had proper authority to require "non-sectarian" prayer 
> content and exclude council-member Rev. Hashmel Turner from the 
> prayer rotation because he prayed "in Jesus' name."
>
> Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing the decision, said:
> "The restriction that prayers be nonsectarian in nature is designed 
> to make the prayers accessible to people who come from a variety of 
> backgrounds, not to exclude or disparage a particular faith."
>
> Ironically, she admitted Turner was excluded from participating 
> solely because of the Christian content of his prayer.
>
> A full text copy of the decision, with added commentary by Chaplain 
> Klingenschmitt is here: 
> www.PrayInJesusName.org/Frenzy13/AgainstOconnor.pdf
>
> Gordon James Klingenschmitt, the former Navy chaplain who faced 
> court-martial for praying "in Jesus name" in uniform (but won the 
> victory in Congress for other chaplains), defended Rev. Hashmel 
> Turner:
>
> "The Fredericksburg government violated everybody's rights by 
> establishing a non-sectarian religion, and requiring all prayers 
> conform, or face punishment of exclusion. Justice O'Connor showed her 
> liberal colors today, by declaring the word 'Jesus' as illegal 
> religious speech, which can be banned by any council who wishes to 
> ignore the First Amendment as she did. Councilman Rev. Hashmel Turner 
> should run for mayor, fire the other council-members, and re-write 
> the prayer policy. And if he appeals to the Supreme Court, I pray he 
> will win, in Jesus' name."
>
> For media interviews, call:
> Chaplain Klingenschmitt 719-360-5132 cell
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Web address: www.PrayInJesusName.org
>
>
>
> Source:
> http://christiannewswire.com/news/558917273.html[1]
>
>

Douglas Laycock
Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
  734-647-9713

Links:
--
[1] http://christiannewswire.com/news/558917273.html___
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.

Appeals Court Bans Prayer 'in Jesus' name'

[Gordon James Klingenschmitt]

Press release below.   Please forward widely.   Please call for interviews!
In Jesus,
Chaplain K.


  Appeals Court Bans Prayer 'In Jesus' Name'
   
Contact: Chaplain Klingenschmitt, www.PrayInJesusName.org, 719-360-5132 cell, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   
 
WASHINGTON, July 23 /Christian Newswire/ -- The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 
today ruled that the city council of Fredericksburg, Virginia had proper 
authority to require "non-sectarian" prayer content and exclude council-member 
Rev. Hashmel Turner from the prayer rotation because he prayed "in Jesus' 
name." 

Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, writing the decision, said: 
"The restriction that prayers be nonsectarian in nature is designed to make the 
prayers accessible to people who come from a variety of backgrounds, not to 
exclude or disparage a particular faith."

Ironically, she admitted Turner was excluded from participating solely because 
of the Christian content of his prayer. 

A full text copy of the decision, with added commentary by Chaplain 
Klingenschmitt is here: www.PrayInJesusName.org/Frenzy13/AgainstOconnor.pdf  

Gordon James Klingenschmitt, the former Navy chaplain who faced court-martial 
for praying "in Jesus name" in uniform (but won the victory in Congress for 
other chaplains), defended Rev. Hashmel Turner:

"The Fredericksburg government violated everybody's rights by establishing a 
non-sectarian religion, and requiring all prayers conform, or face punishment 
of exclusion. Justice O'Connor showed her liberal colors today, by declaring 
the word 'Jesus' as illegal religious speech, which can be banned by any 
council who wishes to ignore the First Amendment as she did. Councilman Rev. 
Hashmel Turner should run for mayor, fire the other council-members, and 
re-write the prayer policy. And if he appeals to the Supreme Court, I pray he 
will win, in Jesus' name." 

For media interviews, call:
Chaplain Klingenschmitt 719-360-5132 cell
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
Web address: www.PrayInJesusName.org 

 

Source: 
http://christiannewswire.com/news/558917273.html
   
   ___
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.

RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith- msnbc.com

[Paul Horwitz]

This whole discussion has reminded me of Richard Posner's review -- a classic, 
in my opinion -- of Gertrude Himmelfarb's book One Nation, Two Cultures.  You 
can find the whole review at this link: 
http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/12/19/reviews/991219.19posnert.html?_r=1&oref=slogin.
  It can also be found in modified form in his Public Intellectuals book.  But 
I can't resist quoting at length:

* * * * *

We live, [Himmelfarb] thinks, in a period of moral decay, but there is growing 
resistance to the cultural revolution -- resistance manifested in increased 
religiosity and in the recent improvement in social indicators like the number 
of abortions, births out of wedlock and crimes.

Most of ''One Nation, Two Cultures'' is devoted to describing our current 
fallen moral state and contrasting it with our former Edenic state, and 
Himmelfarb, drawing on her experience as a historian, enriches her narrative 
with pungent quotations from the 18th century to the present. The book is 
moderate in tone, buttressed by statistics and a good read.

But it is not convincing. Its major shortcoming is its uncritical conflation of 
social phenomena that have different causes, are differently amenable to 
correction and differ in gravity; they are thrown together, and the resulting 
stew is labeled a morally sick society. . . . .  

Next are those pathologies that are the inevitable byproducts of modernity; and 
here we must, I think, take the bad (as social conservatives conceive it to be) 
with the good. The advent of safe and effective contraception and of household 
labor-saving devices, advances in reproductive technology, the reduction in 
infant mortality to near zero and the transformation of the economy into a 
service economy in which little work requires masculine strength -- the 
interplay of these developments was bound to free (or, if you prefer, eject) 
women from their traditional role, and by doing so bring about a profound 
change in sexual behavior and family structure. Unless we want to go the way of 
Iran, we shall not be able to return to the era of premarital chastity, low 
divorce, stay-at-home moms, pornography-free media and the closeting of 
homosexuals and adulterers. . . . . 

She reads the signs of moral decay in ''the degradation of popular culture,'' 
as evidenced by ''vulgarity on TV,'' by ''confessional memoirs'' and by those 
television talk shows in which the ''participants proudly flaunt the most 
sordid details of their lives.'' But these are matters of taste, rather than 
''diseases, moral and cultural.'' Popular culture has always offended the 
fastidious. That of the 1950's was not as raunchy as today's, but today's 
popular culture does not ridicule obese people, ethnic minorities, stammerers 
and effeminate men, as the popular culture of the 1950's did, so it may be 
doubted whether there has actually been a net decline in the moral tone of 
popular culture.

The final ingredient in Himmelfarb's stew is the lunatic postmodernist left, 
represented here by a play in which Jesus Christ is a homosexual and has sexual 
relations with the apostles and by ''whiteness studies (which celebrate 'white 
trash' and expose the inherent racism in being white).'' That a tiny fringe 
group of bohemians, as they used to be called, poses a threat to the nation's 
value structure is preposterous. Actually, a paranoid might argue that the 
cultural left is subsidized by Opus Dei in order to galvanize the religious 
right.

The stew is garnished with what have become the cliches of cultural pessimism, 
like hand wringing over ''the loss of respect for authorities and 
institutions.'' Himmelfarb does not ask whether the authorities and 
institutions in question (they are not specified) deserve respect. She wants a 
deferential society, in which the common people are cosseted by religious, 
moral and customary norms, but she does not consider whether such a society 
could rise to the challenges of modernity. . . . . 

With anecdotes and statistics drawn from each of the domains that I have 
described, a superficial impression can easily be created of a nation on its 
moral uppers. But it would be more accurate to speak not of a cultural 
revolution but of a transformation in morals and manners resulting from diverse 
material factors that include changes in the nature of work, growing 
prosperity, advances in reproductive technology, increasing ethnic diversity 
and a communications revolution that has created a far better-informed 
population. The largest moral change that these developments have brought about 
is increased tolerance for people different from the norm, whether in race, 
religion, sex, sexual orientation or even physical and mental health (no more 
''moron'' jokes). This will strike most people, including, I assume, 
Himmelfarb, as moral progress. . . . . 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Subject: RE: Bible class rules set for Texas scho

11th Cir. student pledge of allegiance case

[Joel Sogol]

http://www.ca11. 
uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200614462.pdf

 

Joel L. Sogol

Attorney at Law

811 21st Ave.

Tuscaloosa, ALabama  35401

ph (205) 345-0966

fx (205) 345-0971

email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Ben Franklin observed that truth wins a fair fight - which is why we have
evidence rules in U.S. courts.

 

 

___
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.

Re: Colorado Christian University v. Weaver

[Christopher Lund]

I those may be PACER links, which some might not be able to access, so
here's a weblink to the opinion:
 
http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/07/07-1247.pdf 
 
Best,
Chris
 
 
Christopher C. Lund
Assistant Professor of Law
Mississippi College School of Law
151 E. Griffith St.
Jackson, MS  39201
(601) 925-7141 (office)
(601) 925-7113 (fax)

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7/23/2008 3:10 PM >>>


Tenth Circuit strikes down Colorado's exclusion of pervasively
sectarian colleges from state scholarship programs; distinguishing Locke
v. Davey.
I hope these links work; I'm not sure I can forward them.



Links:
--
[1]
https://ecf.ca10.uscourts.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=DocketReportFilter.jsp?caseId=53441&strJSPName=DocketReportFilter.jsp%3FcaseId=53441

[2]
https://ecf.ca10.uscourts.gov/docs1/01002768623&uid=a805f9f233bfa62c




 Douglas Laycock
Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
  734-647-9713
___
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.

Colorado Christian University v. Weaver

[Douglas Laycock]

Tenth Circuit strikes down Colorado's exclusion of pervasively sectarian 
colleges from state scholarship programs; distinguishing Locke v. Davey. 

I hope these links work; I'm not sure I can forward them.

Links:
--
[1] 
https://ecf.ca10.uscourts.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=DocketReportFilter.jsp?caseId=53441&strJSPName=DocketReportFilter.jsp%3FcaseId=53441[1]
[2] https://ecf.ca10.uscourts.gov/docs1/01002768623&uid=a805f9f233bfa62c[2]

Douglas Laycock
Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
University of Michigan Law School
625 S. State St.
Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
  734-647-9713

Links:
--
[1] 
https://ecf.ca10.uscourts.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=DocketReportFilter.jsp?caseId=53441&strJSPName=DocketReportFilter.jsp%3FcaseId=53441
[2] https://ecf.ca10.uscourts.gov/docs1/01002768623&uid=a805f9f233bfa62c
___
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.

RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith- msnbc.com

[Joel Sogol]

I guess parents and churches are either not doing their jobs or are just not
enough

 

Perhaps we should removal all children from their homes (since they are
obviously not getting the moral training they need) and lock them in schools
that have bible classes.  Surely that will stem the tide.

 

Joel L. Sogol

Attorney at Law

811 21st Ave.

Tuscaloosa, ALabama  35401

ph (205) 345-0966

fx (205) 345-0971

email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

Ben Franklin observed that truth wins a fair fight - which is why we have
evidence rules in U.S. courts.

 

  _  

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon James
Klingenschmitt
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:12 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith- msnbc.com

 

1) Brayton seems to be confusing "myth" with "statistical correlated fact,"
that when we stopped teaching Biblical morality, children stopped behaving
according to Biblical morality.  Nobody here disputes violent crime,
divorce, teen pregnancy, teen suicide, and single-parenthood have increased
since 1960.  If nobody here cares (as Ed supposes) about the social
consequences of radical interpretations, we truly have become a cold,
calloused, nation of selfish lawyers indeed.

2) Brayton's view that Bibles should be banned from schools remains on the
"atheist fringe" of constitutional legal scholars, including the U.S.
Supreme Court has held that public schools may teach students about the
Bible as long as such teaching is "presented objectively as part of a
secular program of education."  (6School District of Abington Twp v.
Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225 (1963). See Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 42
(1980) (per curiam)).

3) This permissive view Supreme Court view is endorsed by both liberal and
conservative legal scholars, in Charles' excellent document "The Bible and
Public Schools: A First Amendment Guide"
(http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?id=6261) including:  
American Association of School Administrators
American Federation of Teachers
American Jewish Committee
American Jewish Congress
Anti-Defamation League
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs
Christian Educators Association International
Christian Legal Society
Council on Islamic Education
National Association of Evangelicals
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.
National Council for the Social Studies
National Education Association
National School Boards Association
People for the American Way Foundation
Union of American Hebrew Congregations

4)  When Brayton places himself far left of People for the American Way, you
can tell he's on the fringe, and I'm in the mainstream.  But at least he's
"highly educated," unlike the rest of these organizations, who seem to agree
with me.

In Jesus,
Chaplain K.,


Ed Brayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


It seems to me, thanks to courts and judges that enforce state atheism and
Ed's social experiment upon our families and children, by taking Bibles and
prayer OUT of public schools, that...

"the result has already been very ugly and very expensive."  

In Jesus name,
Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt



Charles Haynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I agree that much more guidance is needed (along the lines suggested in the
consensus guidelines we issued in 2000 -- "The Bible and Public Schools: A
First Amendment Guide"
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?id=6261. What puzzles me,
however, is why the State Board fails to mention the requirements for
training as outlined in Section 21.549 of the Texas "Bible Bill." Perhaps
that is the next step... but there is no mention of it in the the board's
decision this week.
If the training requirements mandated by the bill are followed, then many of
the problems might be avoided... But with groups out there pushing
unconstitutional Bible materials (such as those at issue in the
recently-settled lawsuit in Odessa) it will be difficult to monitor what is
going on across the state. Charles Haynes


21.459. BIBLE COURSE TRAINING. (a) The commissioner 

shall develop and make available training materials and other 

teacher training resources for a school district to use in 

assisting teachers of elective Bible courses in developing:

(1) expertise in the appropriate Bible course 

curriculum;

(2) understanding of applicable supreme court rulings 

and current constitutional law regarding how Bible courses are to 

be taught in public schools objectively as a part of a secular 

program of education;

(3) understanding of how to present the Bible in an 

objective, academic manner that neither promotes nor disparages 

religion, nor is taught from a particular sectarian point of view;

(4) proficiency in instructional approaches that 

present course material in a manner that respects all faiths and 

religious traditions, while fav

RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith- msnbc.com

[Ed Brayton]

When Mr. Klingenschmidt says that "nobody here disputes violent crime,
divorce, teen pregnancy, teen suicide and single parenthood have increased
since 1960" he is being quite presumptuous. I certainly dispute it; so, I
suspect, do many on this list and so, unfortunately, does reality. On nearly
all of those measurements, we saw a steady increase in the first half of
that time period and a steady decrease in them over the last half. We can
argue until we are blue in the face about the innumerable factors that
contribute to such trends (economic factors, social factors, demographic
factors, etc) but I would suggest that it is entirely too simplistic and,
quite frankly, ridiculous to believe that the answer is as easy as "we took
the Bible out of schools and the world went to hell." 

 

When he writes that my view is on the "atheist fringe" I'm afraid he is
wrong on every possible facet of that claim. First, I'm not an atheist.
Secondly, it is not my view that Bibles should be banned from schools at
all. I certainly support the Supreme Court ruling banning mandatory Bible
reading, but that position is hardly on the "atheist fringe" of anything. I
am in fact a supporter of Bible as literature courses in public schools
provided they are taught, as the law requires, in a scholarly and objective
manner rather than in a proselytizing manner. Perhaps in the future before
discussing "Brayton's view," Mr. Klingenschmidt might take the time to find
out what that view actually is. It seems to me that is both the ethical and
the intellectually honest thing to do. 

 

Ed Brayton

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon James
Klingenschmitt
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:12 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith- msnbc.com

 

1) Brayton seems to be confusing "myth" with "statistical correlated fact,"
that when we stopped teaching Biblical morality, children stopped behaving
according to Biblical morality.  Nobody here disputes violent crime,
divorce, teen pregnancy, teen suicide, and single-parenthood have increased
since 1960.  If nobody here cares (as Ed supposes) about the social
consequences of radical interpretations, we truly have become a cold,
calloused, nation of selfish lawyers indeed.

2) Brayton's view that Bibles should be banned from schools remains on the
"atheist fringe" of constitutional legal scholars, including the U.S.
Supreme Court has held that public schools may teach students about the
Bible as long as such teaching is "presented objectively as part of a
secular program of education."  (6School District of Abington Twp v.
Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225 (1963). See Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 42
(1980) (per curiam)).

3) This permissive view Supreme Court view is endorsed by both liberal and
conservative legal scholars, in Charles' excellent document "The Bible and
Public Schools: A First Amendment Guide"
(http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?id=6261) including:  
American Association of School Administrators
American Federation of Teachers
American Jewish Committee
American Jewish Congress
Anti-Defamation League
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs
Christian Educators Association International
Christian Legal Society
Council on Islamic Education
National Association of Evangelicals
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.
National Council for the Social Studies
National Education Association
National School Boards Association
People for the American Way Foundation
Union of American Hebrew Congregations

4)  When Brayton places himself far left of People for the American Way, you
can tell he's on the fringe, and I'm in the mainstream.  But at least he's
"highly educated," unlike the rest of these organizations, who seem to agree
with me.

In Jesus,
Chaplain K.,


Ed Brayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


It seems to me, thanks to courts and judges that enforce state atheism and
Ed's social experiment upon our families and children, by taking Bibles and
prayer OUT of public schools, that...

"the result has already been very ugly and very expensive."  

In Jesus name,
Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt



Charles Haynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I agree that much more guidance is needed (along the lines suggested in the
consensus guidelines we issued in 2000 -- "The Bible and Public Schools: A
First Amendment Guide"
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?id=6261. What puzzles me,
however, is why the State Board fails to mention the requirements for
training as outlined in Section 21.549 of the Texas "Bible Bill." Perhaps
that is the next step... but there is no mention of it in the the board's
decision this week.
If the training requirements mandated by the bill are followed, then many of
the problems might be avoided... But with groups out there pushin

Re: Names and titles

[Paul Finkelman]

as "Eugene" signs his name as just "Eugene" --but hey, we all know him and love 
him and know is last name!

Paul Finkelman

Paul Finkelman
President William McKinley Distinguished Professor of Law
 and Public Policy
Albany Law School
80 New Scotland Avenue
Albany, New York   12208-3494

518-445-3386 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

>>> "Volokh, Eugene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 7/23/2008 3:24 PM >>>
Folks:  My sense is that it usually creates a nicer tone for people
to call each other by their full names, first names, or
title-plus-last-name, rather than just by last name alone.  It also
usually creates a nicer tone for people not to talk about others'
"peddl[ing]" their views (whether myths or otherwise) -- substantive
arguments are of course entirely proper, but argument by pejorative term
generally is not helpful, I think.
 
Eugene
 

___
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.

Names and titles

[Volokh, Eugene]

Folks:  My sense is that it usually creates a nicer tone for people
to call each other by their full names, first names, or
title-plus-last-name, rather than just by last name alone.  It also
usually creates a nicer tone for people not to talk about others'
"peddl[ing]" their views (whether myths or otherwise) -- substantive
arguments are of course entirely proper, but argument by pejorative term
generally is not helpful, I think.
 
Eugene
 
___
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.

RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith- msnbc.com

[Gordon James Klingenschmitt]

1) Brayton seems to be confusing "myth" with "statistical correlated fact," 
that when we stopped teaching Biblical morality, children stopped behaving 
according to Biblical morality.  Nobody here disputes violent crime, divorce, 
teen pregnancy, teen suicide, and single-parenthood have increased since 1960.  
If nobody here cares (as Ed supposes) about the social consequences of radical 
interpretations, we truly have become a cold, calloused, nation of selfish 
lawyers indeed.

2) Brayton's view that Bibles should be banned from schools remains on the 
"atheist fringe" of constitutional legal scholars, including the U.S. Supreme 
Court has held that public schools may teach students about the Bible as long 
as such teaching is “presented objectively as part of a secular program of 
education.”  (6School District of Abington Twp v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203, 225 
(1963). See Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39, 42 (1980) (per curiam)).

3) This permissive view Supreme Court view is endorsed by both liberal and 
conservative legal scholars, in Charles' excellent document "The Bible and 
Public Schools: A First Amendment Guide" 
(http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?id=6261) including:  
American Association of School Administrators
American Federation of Teachers
American Jewish Committee
American Jewish Congress
Anti-Defamation League
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs
Christian Educators Association International
Christian Legal Society
Council on Islamic Education
National Association of Evangelicals
National Association of Secondary School Principals
National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A.
National Council for the Social Studies
National Education Association
National School Boards Association
People for the American Way Foundation
Union of American Hebrew Congregations

4)  When Brayton places himself far left of People for the American Way, you 
can tell he's on the fringe, and I'm in the mainstream.  But at least he's 
"highly educated," unlike the rest of these organizations, who seem to agree 
with me.

In Jesus,
Chaplain K.,


Ed Brayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:This list is for 
discussion of the legal and constitutional issues, not for the imagined social 
consequences. I’m afraid you’ll have to peddle the myth that the country went 
to hell when we “kicked God out of schools” to a different (perhaps less 
educated) audience.
   
  Ed Brayton
   
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gordon James 
Klingenschmitt
 Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:53 PM
 To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
 Subject: RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith- msnbc.com
  
   
  Ed writes about teaching about the Bible (as an optional elective) in public 
schools, "the result is going to be very ugly and very expensive."  
 
 Yet leading cultural indicators show that since 1960 in America, violent crime 
has increased by 560 percent, illegitimate birth rates have increased more than 
400 percent, teen suicide is up over 200 percent, the divorce rate has more 
than doubled, and the percentage of families headed by a single parent has more 
than tripled.
 
 It seems to me, thanks to courts and judges that enforce state atheism and 
Ed's social experiment upon our families and children, by taking Bibles and 
prayer OUT of public schools, that...
 
 "the result has already been very ugly and very expensive."  
 
 In Jesus name,
 Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt
 
 
 
 Charles Haynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  I agree that much more guidance is needed (along the lines suggested in the 
consensus guidelines we issued in 2000 -- "The Bible and Public Schools: A 
First Amendment Guide" http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/about.aspx?id=6261. 
What puzzles me, however, is why the State Board fails to mention the 
requirements for training as outlined in Section 21.549 of the Texas "Bible 
Bill." Perhaps that is the next step... but there is no mention of it in the 
the board's decision this week.
 If the training requirements mandated by the bill are followed, then many of 
the problems might be avoided... But with groups out there pushing 
unconstitutional Bible materials (such as those at issue in the 
recently-settled lawsuit in Odessa) it will be difficult to monitor what is 
going on across the state. Charles Haynes
 
 
 21.459. BIBLE COURSE TRAINING. (a) The commissioner 
 
 shall develop and make available training materials and other 
 
 teacher training resources for a school district to use in 
 
 assisting teachers of elective Bible courses in developing:
 
 (1) expertise in the appropriate Bible course 
 
 curriculum;
 
 (2) understanding of applicable supreme court rulings 
 
 and current constitutional law regarding how Bible courses are to 
 
 be taught in public schools objectively as a part of a secular 
 
 program of education;
 
 (3) understanding of how to 

Re: A plea for keeping things precise (and providing citations whenever possible)

[Susan Freiman]

The decrease in crime is related to the prior increase in abortions - 
fewer potential criminals being born.
source:  Ian Ayres, _Super Crunchers_ (2008), p. 13, citing to Steven D. 
Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, _Freakonomics.


_Susan Freiman_
_
Volokh, Eugene wrote:
Folks:  Just a quick plug from the list custodian for maximum 
accuracy.  If you want to cite a statistic, please check it and cite 
the source (plus see whether the big picture is more complex than you 
describe).  For instance, a quick visit to the Bureau of Justice 
Statistics site 
(http://bjsdata.ojp.usdoj.gov/dataonline/Search/Crime/State/StatebyState.cfm) 
reveals that the crime rate as reported to the police rose from 
160.9/100,000 in 1960 to 473.5/100,000 in 2006, a 200% increase (or a 
tripling) -- bad enough, but not 560%.  (I realize that not all crimes 
are reported to the police, and the reporting rate changes over time, 
but I don't think the NCVS data goes back to the 1960; if you have 
better statistics, please let me know.)
 
What's more, the current violent crime rate is pretty much at the 
1974 level, and there was in fact a sharp decline from 1992 to 2003 -- 
not, I take it, because the nation or the educational system has 
somehow gotten less "atheistic."  Now I'm perfectly happy to 
acknowledge that various forms of social pathology have increased 
since 1960 (while some have declined); and it's possible, though in my 
view unproven, that this has something to do with the decline of 
religion in public education.
 
But I'd like to keep discussions on the list as accurate as 
possible, and a 560% increase is not the same as a 200% increase or 
even a 300% level; and a 1960-now comparison doesn't make such sense 
if the current numbers are at the 1974 level.  So please let's check 
any statistics we mention, and provide citations when possible.  Many 
thanks,
 
Eugene Volokh



*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Ed Darrell
*Sent:* Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:52 PM
*To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
*Subject:* RE: Bible class rules set for Texas schools - Faith-
msnbc.com

Yet leading cultural indicators show that since 1960 in America,
violent crime has increased by 560 percent, illegitimate birth
rates have increased more than 400 percent, teen suicide is up
over 200 percent, the divorce rate has more than doubled, and the
percentage of families headed by a single parent has more than
tripled.

It seems to me, thanks to courts and judges that enforce state
atheism and Ed's social experiment upon our families and children,
by taking Bibles and prayer OUT of public schools, that...

And that's with increased Bible instruction that violates the
law.  Ed Brayton is right to worry -- looks like more of the same,
maybe at an increased rate.

Why not study what it really says, study the real literature
components (as with every AP English course), the real effects on
history (as with every AP U.S. History and AP World History
course)?  Tougher academics can help -- Sunday school in the
public schools is, by Chaplian Klingenschmitt's tally, a grotesque
failure, doing the opposite of what it is intended. 


More seriously, pay very careful attention to Mark Chancey's
comments.  He's a very distinguished, and faithful, Bible
scholar.  What the Texas State School Board is working to
implement is contrary to most Christian faiths, let alone the
Constitution.  Incompetence, weak academics, bad religion -- it's
a bad brew.  When the state board ignores the state's leading
Bible scholars, the state's teachers and teacher organizations,
and even the sponsor of the Bill, there's evil afoot.

And when we try to increase the AP offerings, which feature
increased study of both Christianity and the Bible, these same
people complain.

Something's rotten in Texas.  There's prayer in the schools, but
sadly, that's all the students have.  No wonder crime, illicit sex
are up, and academic achievement is down.  The kids are following
the State School Board's examples, ignoring all authority, making
their own, unanchored moral decisions, ignoring the best
information, etc. 


By the way, I don't think the divorce rate has doubled.  I think
it's dropping, in fact. Anybody got a current statistic?

Ed Darrell
Working in Dallas to get the curriculum planned out for 2008-2009,
no thanks to the State School Board

*/Gordon James Klingenschmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote:

Ed writes about teaching about the Bible (as an optional
elective) in public schools, "the result is going to be very
ugly and very expensive." 


Yet leading cultural indicators show that since 1960 in
America