The leading case is Florey v. Sioux Falls School District, 619 F2d 1311(10th Cir.(1981). Marc Stern
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:25 AM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: Re: The Voters Speak I couldnt find the article in the Dallas morning news, but a quick search (actually not so quick as the news coverage was consistently dramatic but empty of substance) shows that the issue actually came up in the context of a live Christmas Show/Pageant. In this show the school allowed a display of a Menorah and a Kwanzaa banner, it also allowed Silent Night and other carols to be sung by the children (with its various references to Christ the Savior is born etc) but it did not allow a Live Nativity Scene to be reenacted by the Children. So far as I can tell from the news coverage, there was no reenactment of the Hanukah miracle etc. Admittedly the facts are murky (anyone have the facts easily available) and the whole issue does depend on them, but I would still think the school's counsel's advice was right, having Children reenact the Nativity in a Public School audiotorium is problematic under the establishment clause. Though I dont know if there are any cases out there that say this. >>From Doug Laycock's description, the Board did not allow the nativity > scene, but permitted a Menorah and a Kwanza display. I read that to > indicate that no other Christmas display was provided as a substitute for > the nativity scene. If that is what occurred, I consider it an error of > judgement. > > I don't have a problem with the Board's decision not to allow the > nativity scene. But if the Board is going to allow what are essentially > cultural and non-religious displays to reflect the diversity of faiths > represented in the community -- I would think there are lots of ways to > recognize the various faith communities that celebrate Christmas in a > display without a nativity scene. > > Alan Brownstein > UC Davis > > >> > >> >Which part of the School District's decision was dumb? Following > advice of cousel and not allowing the nativity scene or getting rid of > the old Board? I thought that the advice counsel gave to the board would > be seen as pretty standard, and I would have given the same. >> > >> > >> >> > ____________________________________________ >> >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 _______________________________________________ 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.
