Plano(TX) families reject schools' censorship deal-religious pens

[liveoaktx]

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/rssstory.mpl/metropolitan/3145102

Four families that sued a North Texas school district accusing officials of religious censorship rejected a settlement offer Wednesday, saying their civil rights are not for sale.

Earlier this month, the Plano Independent School District offered each family $100 and agreed to pay all attorneys' fees to end the case, which began when a third-grader was prohibited from handing out candy cane pens with a religious message attached at a class "winter party."

At the same time, the district adopted a new policy that would allow students to exchange religious materials under certain circumstances during school hours.

In announcing the district's offer, Superintendent Doug Otto denied any liability or wrongdoing and said Plano simply wanted to "take the first step in restoring trust in those, however few, who have come to view the district with suspicion."

[davidinalameda]

1. you have to admit $400 is a bit cheap

I would reject it too

[saigon68]

36. MONEY MEANS NOTHING to Hateful Fundamentalist Whack-Jobs

Religion is what runs these Nut-Jobs.

They love the spotlight and want to convert everyone to JayZeus.

They are despicable malefactors and miscreants.

[wallwriter]

46. I agree with you except for the money part

What do you think makes Frist, Falwell and DeLay operate? $$$

[More Than A Feeling]

2. This is a tough one.

It seems to me, that if the school wasn't sanctioning it, and it wasn't disrupting the learning process, and it was a child doing it and not adults...

Given the facts of the case as stated above, I would have to agree with the students. The school went overboard.
Can anyone give me a reason why the school would have been right to ban the student from doing this?

[Kagemusha]

3. Because it's aiding religious evangelism.

The problem is you have people who think converting others is appropriate in a school setting and others don't.

[More Than A Feeling]

8. But can you abridge free speech like that (and possibly free exercise?)

The child who receives the message is perfectly able and free to get rid of it if they don't want it. It isn't disrupting school operation. The government isn't sanctioning it. No one is being discriminated against. You and I may not agree with what the child did, but that doesn't mean we have the right to make them stop through government (in the form of the school authorities)

[WillParkinson]

26. I find it amusing...

Children aren't old enough to form some decisions but in this case we're saying it was the childs choice. Do we know this? Did the child buy these to hand out or were they given by the parents?

I don't bring my science into their churches. I would prefer they don't bring their churches into my schools. I believe that is a simple enough compromise.

[More Than A Feeling]

30. When the issue is constitutional rights

and we aren't talking "fire" in crowded theater (ie, the exceptions that are created on a case by case basis by the supreme court) there shouldn't be compromise.

The constitution is clear on this matter (congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise thereof), and there is precedent for the protection of controversial actions on the part of students so long as they aren't disruptive (Tinker v Des Moines that I cited below as the case I would choose)

I don't want my constitutional rights compromised away, I imagine you wouldn't either, so why should we so cavalierly give away others' rights, even though we disagree with the action because of the politics behind it.

Just because most of the time the religious rightists' make stuff up as examples of "persecution", doesn't mean that is always the case.

Meanwhile, how about a little humor?

ACLU Defends Neo-Nazi Group's Right to Burn Down Its Headquarters
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/onion_acludefends.html

(This is from The Onion, which rocks)

[One_Life_To_Give]

32. Ever had someone try to SAVE you?

Granted I don't see a problem with giving out candy canes with messages written on them. (small messages) But this is also a tactic used to try and Convert/Save/Evangelize. Being required to attend school should not include being required to sit and listen to to someone trying to save your soul everyday.

[More Than A Feeling]

34. My cousin is a pentecostal preacher

so the answer is yes, I have.

[Book Lover]

12. The legality depends on who is speaking

Students speaking to students is protected speech, Teachers, administrators, and staff are prohibited from this kind of speech because of the authority of their positions. All else being equal (and I don't know the particulars. obviously) if my child were on the receiving end of one of these pens, I would complain to the other child's parents, not the school itself. And I *would* complain.

[mpyle27]

4. I agree. This is silly!

Heaven and Earth has it right!! I am no fan of religion but that is re dick u lus.

[More Than A Feeling]

5. Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[UCLA Dem]

7. Welcome!

:bounce:

[trapper914]

24. As long as it's Christian, it's o.k.

If it were Muslim, or perhaps Wiccan, I wonder how much support the child evangelist would get.

[Geekscum]

33. Under the constitution any religious message like this is legal

There have been numerous cases out there like this were schools have tried to silence religious messages from students to other students. It is protectd free speech.

[Book Lover]

28. Welcome

Welcome to DU! Hope to see you around :hi:

[Fire Walk With Me]

20. It's disruptive because it's only barely above the board.

It's sneaky stuff so screw it. Do they have to sneak?

And if they are allowed to do that, can the rest of us take an empiricism break during mass and discuss agnosticism as well?

It's about healthy boundaries.

[More Than A Feeling]

22. It's about the constitution, not our personal feelings

Read Tinker v Des Moines... for the precedent that I, if I were ruling on this case, would apply here. http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Tinker/

[Fire Walk With Me]

23. Absolutely, the child has rights, and the parents should be ashamed

of using them like this. (The child and the child's rights.) Period. It doesn't lessen the offense.

[UCLA Dem]

6. Religion has no place in schools.

Many parents may not want their children preached to at school. If they want religion, they should put their kid in a private school.

[merwin]

9. Look at it from their point of view. They feel the exact same way about

people who don't want religion at school.

Personally, children attending the school should be free to express themselves religiously as long as it doesn't interfere with others. IE: If someone says 'no', don't keep pushing the issue. Same thing as dating at work :) It can quickly turn into harassment.

[HockeyMom]

10. Go ask your Mom

I am a Teacher's Assistant. One little 1st grade boy asked me what the cross was around his neck that his Mom made him wear. I told him to go ask your Mom. Even though I am the same religion and go to the same church this little boy does, it NOT my place to teach him his religion.

[cookiebird]

14. Good return

Quick thinking, HockeyMom. You avoided what could have been interpreted as "wrongful" religious instruction. I think you're very sensitive and wise. I've heard stories of parents 'planting' religious items on their kids just to see which teachers will use the item as an opportunity--on both sides of the issue.

[Zhade]

19. Excellent way to handle it. This atheist applauds you!

NT!

[fishwax]

38. Suppose the class has a valentine's exchange, and some kids bring

valentine's with religious messages or symbols. This happened when I was a kid. I tended to eat whatever candy was attached and ignore whatever the card said anyway, so it didn't bother me. But it seems to me like a 1st ammendment violation to prevent the expression of religious sentiment in some situations.

Schools should be secular. All instruction should be secular. All top-down interactions should be secular. But expressions from children need not be secular, I think, as long as they aren't endorsed or encouraged by the school itself.

So if kids were handing out treats at a winter party and one of the kids handed out a treat with a religious message (probably that apocryphal story about how the candy cane actually represents the blood and purity of christ :eyes:) then I'm not sure why that should be disallowed.

[msongs]

11. then it is ok to pass out KKK propaganda, they are christians too...

and base their entire hate group cult on the bible.

Msongs
www.msongs.com

[onager]

13. Does anyone seriously believe...

...the third-graders came up with this idea?

Hell, no, it was the Fundie parents, once again taking every opportunity to advertise for JeeZus. Whether other people want to hear it or not.

In case you Christ-o-philes haven't noticed, this sort of thing is happening all over the country, and has been for years. They WANT people at each other's throats constantly over religion, and they WANT legal test cases so they can go and whine to Pat Robertson's ACLJ about religious discrimination. Among other things.

What is so damn hard about the simple idea of...school for education, church for religion?

[Fire Walk With Me]

15. Right. They're using children as mules for their agenda

Because no-one is going to argue with children. Very very touchy, they know it, and detail their morality in using them in this way.

That goth kid who was kicked out last week, was that nearby?

[Zhade]

21. Even if the parents did push the kids, it's not government establishment.

They do have the right to exercise their religion, and this doesn't appear to violate the separation of church and state.

[Southern Dem 2005]

35. Agreed, the kids aren't using public funds

and the school isn't supporting it.

You know, a lot of the anti-religious are just as bad and reactionary as the religious right. Just because there is a religious message doesn't mean it is unconstitutional or that someone is trying to cram it down your throats. I doubt theser 3rd graders are much of a threat to your consitutional rights.

[Zhade]

40. See post #27 and my response.

It's still a problem, in that kids are being exploited.

[Southern Dem 2005]

42. Well, IF the kids are exploited its a problem

Although I think parents have a right to teach their kids that one of the obligations of their religious beliefs involves "spreading the Gospel." I may not think its the thing to do but its not necessarily exploitation. If outside groups are using the kids then I would agree that they are being exploited.

[mbperrin]

43. My dad taught us that when people knocked on the door

to ask if we had a plan for eternity, just to say, "Yes, we plan to burn in hell," and then shut the door.

The old man had 3 old maid aunts who took him to the Catholic, Lutheran and Church of Christ every time the doors opened from the time he was 3 until about 13, so he figured he had his church time in.

See? Family training IS the key!

[Southern Dem 2005]

44. Works for me

like I said, I think the parents have every right to raise the kids how they see fit. I steer my kids well clear of religious nut jobs like James Dobson.

[Toots]

16. Winter Party???

First for me though I don't know what else they can call it this day and age. It was always a Christmas Party when I went to school and no one objected, to my recollection.

[rainbow4321]

17. Xmas colors banned, phrase "Merry Xmas" on troops' cards not allowed

If only these parents would put their energy into stuff that REALLY is wrong in this district (like the elimination of the district's social worker dept., our high school steroid abuse---we had to HIRE a steroid czar this year)!
How ignorant of them to ASSUME that the soliders getting the cards would be Christian..what did they expect to happen, the military people to say "Uh, we're handing out cards but you non-Christians need to step aside". What the hell would be WRONG w/ a generic "Happy Holidays"????



http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=19738

Two pro-family groups filed a federal lawsuit against a Texas public school district Dec. 15, alleging that it banned elementary students from exchanging Christian-themed candy cane pens, prohibited students from writing "Merry Christmas" on greeting cards sent to soldiers and even prevented the use of traditional Christmas colors at a school party.

The Alliance Defense Fund and the Liberty Legal Institute filed the lawsuit in federal court against the Plano Independent School District, arguing that district's policy is unconstitutional and violates the students' religious freedoms. The Department of Justice announced Dec. 16 that it is investigating the district's policy.

Students were not allowed to write "Merry Christmas" on greeting cards to U.S. soldiers because the phrase might "offend someone."
Traditional Christmas colors -- such as green and red -- were banned from this year's holiday party. The party, according to Shackelford, is called a "winter party."

"They asked to bring white napkins, white paper plates and white icing," he said. "… Then they said, 'All other items shouldn't be brought because it would violate the school policy against distribution of things without school approval."

[Spangle]

29. Sounds like a Set UP

The school was doing everything possible to make this a non-religus event so EVERYONE could attend the party.

Remember, Jehovah Witness children can't join in on anything "x-mas". I'm sure it's the same with some other faiths. Since several religans have a special holiday around the same time, it's easier to just have ONE party and make it a Winter Party for everyone. It's a festive season, but that is as close as a school should admit to it.

The PARENTS knew what the intent was. Even if the child came up with it on their own (which I doubt), the Parents should have said NO. I also doubt that the children paid for the stuff or wrote all the notes, or put the whole project together by themselfs.

WHY would a parent put their child through this? Are they themselfs seeking special attention? They MUST be.

[Zhade]

18. As an atheist, my stance is clear...

...but it doesn't appear this is pushed by the school, so I think the kid has a right to pass out the messages.

[onager]

27. But it IS being pushed by the R-W pressure groups...

This story is from the ACLJ site. The ACLJ was set up and funded by Pat Robertson, and is run by the insanely theocratic lawyer Jay Sekulow.

Note that this same school district was sued by Fundies last year for putting on a Harry Potter party. I hope I'm not supposed to believe that a bunch of militant 8-yr-olds spontaneously protested about the party.

This has nothing to do with a kid's right to hand out pens, and everything to do with forcing the Jesus Myth into the school by hook or crook:

The plaintiffs are represented by the Liberty Legal Institute, a Texas-based advocacy firm dedicated to protecting "religious freedoms and First Amendment rights for individuals, groups, and churches," according to their Web site...

"Some people want as much access to free speech as possible; others don't want religion endorsed in the classroom. Who's caught in the middle? The school district," said Richard Ackerman, chief counsel for Plano Independent School District.

As an example, he points to a suit last year that accused the school district of promoting the Wicca religion by offering a Harry Potter-themed party as an auction fundraiser item.

"Last year, we were sued for endorsing religion; this year, we're being sued for limiting the right to express one's religion," said Ackerman. "We're tracking a minefield, and this is not what the school district wants to be doing — we're in the business of education."

http://www.aclj.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=1003

I'm an atheist too. Do you think the Liberty Legal Institute would work for free if we wanted to file a lawsuit?

[Zhade]

39. Oh man, don't EVEN get me started on that nutcase Jay Sekulow!!!

My very first job in television, a decade ago when I was 18, was at a low-power fundamentalist christian station. We were so small I wore many hats, and one of those hats involved dealing personally with Sekulow many, many times on a weekly call-in show where he was a frequent guest (this was in NW Florida).

The guy's a nutcase, straight up. Real dick, too. Didn't like to be touched when being miked up. Quite the asshole.

I agree that the RW groups pushing this shit reveals it's not the kids. I don't think these groups should be allowed to exploit children to push their agenda, but it's still not technically an establishment of religion by government, so how can we stop it?

Kids talking about Jesus of their own volition have the right to do so. Unfortunately, right now there's nothing to stop the parents from abusing their children's rights for their own gain. It's maddening.

[Bigmack]

25. I saw a TV show....

... cable I think... a few years ago about how Plano has/had a serious syphilis problem. (no URL.. sorry) It seems Plano is Sin City for the kids. Suburban upper middle class, lotsa churches, money to burn, etc.

Figures...

[Voltaire99]

31. How much would Jesus settle for? Why this case is bullshit.

You know, religious tolerance is no burden in a society committed to cultural pluralism and above all to its crowning achievement, secular government.

Ours is committed to neither.

Today, sympathizing with aggressive Christian fundamentalism is like taking time to respect the handiwork of a knife held to your neck. Nice handle on that blade! Heckuva polish!

Absent any hint of discrimination or malice, the Plano school appears to have erred on the side of protecting non-religious or non-Christian students from state involvement in religious activity. It's a reasonable error, actually, as bright lines regarding the Establishment Clause in public education are hard to find. Partly that's so because, no matter how many times new boundaries are drawn up, the religious right is always trying to slip past them (with the hardly secretive goal of ultimately restoring prayer and Bible reading to schools--its four decade-old axe to grind).

Now, plainly, it's time to settle. The problem has been corrected; the rights are restored to full enjoyment. But no: the plaintiffs want to take the school into deep waters, where a good dunking--hell, call it a baptism in red ink!--will punish it.

That's what this is about: putting a little fear of Jesus, Inc., into the school, teaching it a little lesson in power. What assholes.

[redqueen]

37. Thank you! WAY too many 'nice handle on that blade!' type comments here.

:puke:

[young_at_heart]

41. Religious "messages" have NO place in public schools

There should be no "certain circumstances" for this!

[noonwitch]

45. Both sides are wrong on this

The school is wrong for making a big deal out of the kids handing out the candy canes with religious messages. The kids have the right to freedom of expression, and it is not the school's responsibility to prevent children from discussing religion amongst themselves. The school's responsibility is that teachers and staff not endorse any one religion in school, and to make sure that there is no religious practices having official school sanction.

The kids' families are wrong to sue a school district over something so petty. I'm sure the school district could find better ways to spend the money than giving it to a bunch of selfish fools who think they are doing God's work. The parents also probably encouraged the kids to do this in order to seek a confrontation and be on "The 700 Club" at some point to discuss how they were martyred. School personnel need to start being wise to these kind of tactics and plan accordingly.