: Menard, Richard H.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday,
November 05, 2004 2:30 PM
To: 'Law & Religion issues for
Law Academics'
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
.:.
You raise a lot of good points. In response only to point
(5): The notion that proselytizing is more suspect
]
Subject: Re: Pamphlets at School
Marc Scarberry's civility point has
an appeal to it. But as the proposed cancellation of all clubs in Salt
Lake City schools, in order to avoid having to allow GLBT clubs, proved,
threatening to shut everyone down is easier than actually doing so.
A civ
The analogy is inapt. Jewish students were not targeting Jewish
students.
-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:21 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
What if a black stu
kh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:10 PM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
I think we ought to be careful in First Amendment cases -- even those
arising in government-run schools -- to find speech to be unprotected
b
the sensitivities of the targeted student audience. Cf.
Rowan.
- Original Message -
From:
Menard, Richard
H.
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law
Academics'
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 2:29
PM
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
.:.
You raise a l
In a message dated 11/5/2004 7:58:41 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anonymous students left pamphlets calling on students to accept Jesus on the
desks of Jewish public high school students and no other students. I have
been asked whether a school could ban religiously targete
Can a school teach respect for diversity and tolerance for difference
and teach civility and respect for others' beliefs without targeting
those who say everyone else is damned and seeking to quash such speech
on campus?
I fear that one of the problems is the desire for neat, clear,
bright-lin
m students to classmates?
Eugene
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Alan
Brownstein
Sent: Fri 11/5/2004 12:38 PM
To: marc stern; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc:
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
fundamental, more ingrained, more
personally constitutive, and more private, than our numerous other
"preferences" and personal characteristics.
- Original Message -
From:
marc
stern
To: 'Law & Religion issues for Law
Academi
Whoops -- accidentally sent this to CONLAWPROF instead of RELIGIONLAW; retransmitting
it here.
-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Fri 11/5/2004 1:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: Pamphlets at School
Marc Scarberry's civility point has an appeal to it. But as the proposed cancellation of all clubs in Salt Lake City schools, in order to avoid having to allow GLBT clubs, proved, threatening to shut everyone down is easier than actually doing so. A civility rule that requires students to refr
I think the real world practice of law in this area makes Marty's easy solution not nearly so easy in fact. Is a student discriminating against a Catholic if he gives her a pamphlet on why praying the rosary is a form of idol worship unless he also hands a copy of the pamphlet to the Orthodox Je
I will ask to see them. My contact described them in terms to general to be
helpful.
Marc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lupu
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 1:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: pamphlets at school
In answering the many
CTED]
-Original Message-From: Marty Lederman
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004
10:52 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Law & Religion issues for Law
AcademicsSubject: Re: Pamphlets at School
Marc's question was not whether the school could
prohibit
is done within the classroom?
Mark S. Scarberry
Pepperdine University School of Law
-Original Message-
From: Volokh, Eugene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 9:47 AM
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
It's inte
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Alan Brownstein
Sent: Fri 11/5/2004 12:38 PM
To: marc stern; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc:
Subject: RE: Pamphlets at School
Marc
is reasonable as well as genuine.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Robin Charlow
Sent: Fri 11/5/2004 11:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Subject: Re: Pamphlets at School
Isn't there something different about a targeted distribution?
ature to Jews or Christians only, could it?
>
> Marc Stern
>
>
>
> _
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
> Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 11:52 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Law & Religion issues for La
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Marty Lederman
Sent: Fri 11/5/2004 11:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Cc:
Subject: Re: Pamphlets at School
Marc's q
In a message dated 11/5/2004 11:54:51 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
a simple
prohibition on religious discrimination against students would do the
trick,
How would such a simple
prohibition work if the religion of those targeting Jewish students
requires
#x27;s veto could be justified, in the
absence of evidence that the feeling of intimidation is reasonable as well as genuine.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Robin Charlow
Sent: Fri 11/5/2004 11:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Su
Stern
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004
11:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
Subject: Re: Pamphlets at School
Marc's question was not whether the school could
Isn't there something different about a targeted distribution? It's not
simply speech that others might disagree with or find offensive, but
speech that could be intimidating precisely because of the targeting.
Perhaps intimidating speech would meet the standard of impinging on the
rights of othe
I would not advise a religion only ban if it was aimed at the subject matter
of the leaflets. The question I posed is whether a religion only
distribution only list can be prohibited. (The same question would arise if
students distributed literature only to one racial or ethnic group.) None of
the
Marc's question was not whether the school could
prohibit distribution of religious literature; as I understand it, it was
whether the school could prohibit literature distributors from targeting Jewish
students as the audience for the literature, regardless of its
content. I think the answ
25 matches
Mail list logo
