Discussions
Ruling: OC Officials Must Allow H.S. Bible Club
Posted by TheBigRuski • 9/09/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: Bible, church and state, education, Faith, first amendment, law, religion, schools
Last week an Orange County, Calif. high school was told it can no longer ban a Bible club from meeting on campus and must offer them listings in the school’s yearbook and website. However, while the preliminary injunction stands until the case goes to trial, district officials say they will now review the school’s club policies and decide whether to fight the suit.
The school district is kicking and screaming.
Why?
thescroogereport.wordpress.com/2008/09/09/so-cal-school-district-ordered-to...
User Comments
-
You know, my grandfather was one of the most "Christian" men I knew. He taught Sunday school, his parents were missionaries, he had more integrity in his pinky than a whole gaggle of folks. He was completely against prayer and religion in school. Why? If you allow the Christians, you must also allow everyone else. If the Christian kids can have their bibles then so can the Muslim kids. No bias or no go.-
I have no problem with an afterschool Koran study held on campus.
-
@Anniepooh
Wow! Like your grandfather the majority of my family members on both sides are devout Christians who walk the talk. You just described the exact same position that they take about prayer and religion in schools. -
@Anniepooh and timethief
I absolutely agree with you both. Also, I think this decision is going to reek havoc on this school district. I think many groups will be pushing to have their clubs "meet on campus, have access to an advisor and school supplies, and be listed in the yearbook, complete with a photo". I'm wondering how they will determine who can and who can't? What will be the repercussions? -
wrong place
-
-
@AngieSS...
yes, certainly, the truth does divide (or cause "havoc").
How else would they decide on afterschool clubs? The same way they should have been all along...with reason. Although it might be hard to decline a Wiccan study...how complicated is it to determine that this type of group would not be benificial?-
Well, many would say that a Bible study group would not be beneficial either. If you want to study the bible with a group, why not go to church? Why not host Bible study at your home? Why does it need to be in a public school setting? And who will be deciding that some groups are beneficial and some are not. What you see as beneficial, I may not.
-
Would you tell a group of students who may not have their parents at home during afterschool hours to "just go home" or "just go somewhere else" to hold your club? Who may not have the finances to rent a room, whose church or organization may not be open during afterschool hours, who may have to drive a long distance to a meeting room.
While I understand you see this as a devisive issue, it doesn't have to be...if you accept that more good can come of it than "bad." -
wrong spot again
-
TheBigRuski, yes I would. I really don't know how we got so off topic. I didn't realize this case was about them having no parents at home or nowhere else to go. If that is the criteria for a group then again I must say that it is all or none.
-
And what good would "none" be?
-
Easy Ruskie.
Paganism or Wiccan study is not harmful.
That's the kind of mindset that makes all of these after school "clubs" having to do with religion such a mess.
Having a Wiccan or Pagan study would be equally beneficial to Wiccan/Pagan students as a bible study would be to Christian students. -
From what I read, Wiccan has a wide range of sects...from tree hugging to cat killing...so to blanketly say Paganism or Wiccan is not harmful is an incorrect generalization.
First, my viewpoint is that it is flat out wrong...leading in the wrong direction...away from God. However, I can see some sweet attributes like tree hugging and the like to those who have tailored there Wiccan that way. You can sanitize this religion as much as you want...but I would not allow a verifiable cat killing group on campus. Tree hugging Wiccans only. -
Stereotypes Ruskie that's what your assessment is called.
And assumptions. Stereotypes and assumptions.
It is a valid religion, and just because you feel it is "wrong" does not give you the right to engage in willful defamation of someone else's beliefs. -
I will say it's leading down the wrong path till the day I die...sorry to upset you so much as for you to call it defammation.
-
Saying that Wiccans or Pagans kill cats and other stereotypes of a violent or "evil" nature from pure conjunction is defamation.
Saying it's the wrong belief or wrong path is irritating, but tolerable.
The first is an insistence of harm based on incorrect "facts" and misinformation posed as fact.
The second is merely an opinion.
-
-
[Although it might be hard to decline a Wiccan study]
Why would that be any harder than declining a Christian one?
I agree with the all or none and preferably none crowd-
If you have an open club policy then your guidelines might have to be that the club does not have a negative factor on the community. In today's changing "relevant truth" society even Wiccanism is becoming more accepted...so a school district that is not so discerning may have a hard time declining a Wiccan group...even though it's basically the study and idololatry of evil.
-
I decided not to report your comment, Ruskie, but in the future could you NOT refer to my religion as some sort of plague on society?
Thanks. -
Ruski, your comments here are the better evidence than I could provide of why this is a problem. -
Again from Wiki....
Since there is no centralized organization in Wicca, and no single orthodoxy, the beliefs and practices of Wiccans can vary substantially, both among individuals and among traditions. Typically, the main religious principles, ethics, and ritual structures are shared, since they are key elements of traditional teachings and published works on the subject.
As practised by initiates in the lineage of Gerald Gardner, Wicca is a variety of witchcraft founded on religious and magical concepts.
And of course....
A more palatable "nature-based religion."
Please don't act like I'm making things up... or wanting to offend you. I don't.
-
-
IMO parents ought to be outraged that their kids are using 40 year old textbooks. It's a crying shame that the limited budgets the schools have must be spent on fighting this kind of stuff in courts, and stuff like wearing anti-abortion t-shirts to school, rather than on acquiring the educational materials their kids need.
-
Off topic...but the Canadian schools must be ions ahead of us...what, they like reprint new editions every year? That's great!
I wasn't aware of the no 40-year-old textbook left behind program in the U.S...shame on us! -
Once again you have not responded to my comment. My position is that this is a trifling matter, and that the school's budget is being wasted on fighting an unnecessary court battle, rather than on text books and other educational materials. I think the 4 kids and their parent's who have caused this wastage of funds ought to be ashamed of themselves.
-
I haven't read the article (let the bashing begin
), but I think I would come at the statement from a different standpoint than you, TT. Rather than saying the parents should be ashamed of themselves, if the school district actually is underfunded, it shouldn't be wasting its time banning social groups from campus. It should be focusing on educating its students. If you spend your time doing stupid illegal stuff, you take the risk that someone will sue you for it and that you'll have less in your budget to do what you should have been doing in the first place.
For me it's a simple matter of our constitutional guarantees of the right to assemble, the freedom to practice religion, and the right not to be discriminated against because of our religion. A school district can no more deny a religious social group the right to assemble than can the Federal government, because doing so denies them the right to assemble and disparately treats a suspect class protected under the Fourteenth Amendment. -
@opinionstreams...well said!
-
"A school district can no more deny a religious social group the right to assemble than can the Federal government, because doing so denies them the right to assemble and disparately treats a suspect class protected under the Fourteenth Amendment."
They didn't deny the right to assemble. They denied the right to assemble using public school facilities. -
@angie - I understand the distinction you're trying to draw, but actually, at least with respect to what's happening here, the only way a government entity can discriminate is by saying you can't use the public facility. The government cannot deny the public (in this case members of the student body) access to public property when doing so would violate the 1st or 14th Amendments.
-
-
Polybore can't stand it when people scream discrimination when they don't get their way.
The schools decision had nothing to do with the nature of the group. The school's policy is that groups using the school facilities had to be curriculum related.
Sounds like this bible group consisting of 4 yes 4 people are just trouble makers, what a waste of time and money.-
@polybore
I'm so sick of hearing that a handful of extremists can cause the squander of a school budget on fighting this kind of court case.
It's too bad the American system is such that both sides in a court case pay their own legal costs. In Canada and in the UK, the losers pay the whole shot for their own legal costs and for the winner's legal costs too. It's no wonder why they have such a litigious society.
-
-
[Wiccanism is becoming more accepted...so a school district that is not so discerning may have a hard time declining a Wiccan group...even though it's basically the study and idololatry of evil]
First off the term is either paganism or the Wiccan religion, there is no Wiccanism.
Second off, again I agree with the all or nothing
And thirdly its is not "the study of idolatry of evil", it is a nature based religion with emphasize on ritual observance of seasonal and life cycles and that sometimes incorporates polytheism.
Get your facts straight before you start slinging mud please.-
Some of my best friends are pagans -
Mud?
From wiki:
Wiccans practice a form of witchcraft, but not all witches are Wiccans — other forms of witchcraft, folk magic and sorcery exist within many cultures, with widely varying practices. -
Ruski: Wiccans aren't evil.
What does it mean to be evil?
What does it mean to be Wiccan?
Answer these questions and you'll see that there is no overlap. -
Hate the sin...not the sinner.
I have ZERO hate for Wiccans and ZERO tolerance to the implication of "hating" anyone! -
And anyone who disagrees with TBR is a sinner, right? It's a good thing I'm ignoring you.
-
Sort of like lumping all Christians into one group because a few practice speaking in tongues and handle snakes.
Wiccans don't practice a form of witchcraft, only some of them do, just like some christians handle snakes. -
Well said WitchWoman, wiccan and paganism are most definitely not the study of evil. I wish Christian bigots would learn to understand that almost all Christian ceremonies are based on the original pagan ceremonies and have very little to do with Christ -
The Wiccans I know in real life are like philosophical farmers, for lack of a more succinct term.
-
good one jafrabit!
-
I would like to add that witchcraft isn't "Evil" or the practice of it.
-
Perhaps you would be in favor of a Harry Potter Club....grrrrreat!
-
I'd be skeptical of a Harry Potter club in high school LOL.
Otherwise, I have no problem with the series and actually own all seven books, and currently own four of the movies. I became a fan when they first came out when we were trying to get my youngest brother interested in reading.
It worked for him, as he is now an avid reader, and I became hooked on the series.
The problem is....? -
I like the fact that the Harry Potter series developed a lot of first-time and early development readers.
I think the mania over it is crazy...but that's just my two bits.
-
-
Someone should make a Satanic Bible Club. Fair is fair.
Even better, all participants can stand in the shape of a pentacle for the yearbook image. -
Evil is fair?
-
You say it's evil, but is it really?
Evil is that which increases the suffering to happiness ratio of the world. In that regard, I consider many Christians to be more evil than Satanists.
-
-
I agree with TimeThief: This is a complete waste of money. Let them have their little Bible club. Just don't fund the damn thing.
-
yes mud, you are slandering a religion, without having any knowledge or facts about it and that is just not right, no matter which religion it may be.
Wiki is very accurate, so what does any of that have to do with the study of idolatry evil?
Oh and for the record, I am not Wiccan.
And I agree about squandering funds. -
I used Wiccans as an example...my thoughts are that an open club policy is a good thing within the parameters of being a benefit to the school. The view that an afterschool Bible study is NOT a positive to the community is hard for me and a lot of others to comprehend.
-
It's not a positive for the community. What does a bunch of people reading a book with outdated morality that does not promote one iota of science, philosophy, or critical thinking have to do with positively benefiting the community?
I'm not against the group. However, I am against any of the school budget funding the group. -
The school policy is that the activity has to be curriculum related to be included. Your argument is concocted.
-
You answer your own questions in posing them...btw.
-
What? Outdated morality and a lack of science, philosophy, and critical thinking is good for the community? I'll be damned!
-
The expectation that your opinion should have any bearing at all on the court decision here is interesting, given that you do not have a wife or a child, let alone, one registered in the school concerned. This issue does not personally affect you.
Moreover, you and "a lot of others" do not have to comprehend anything other than what the school's policy said. And, as you strategically did not state the school's policy when you posted here it looks like you may be just spoiling for an argument based on feeble evangelizing - again. -
@TT are you calling me names again?
Egotistical, single, unknowledgeable, feeble....and....gulp...evangelical? -
@TT are you calling me names again?
Egotistical, single, unknowledgeable, feeble....and....gulp...evangelical?
The answer to your question is "no" I have not called you or anyone else a names in this thread. And as implying that I did so is untruthful. -
Just calling an ace an ace...and a spade a spade.
-
Why would a closed, after school group be a benefit to the school or non participating students?
-
Because just one positive afterschool club (regardless of what it is) might just mean one less violent gang banging on the street....just maybe, ya think?!
-
Sure - but that doesn't benefit the school - it benefits the children in the group, and possibly a rough neighborhood.
And, that criteria would apply to any group held after school form sports to religious groups to academic groups to detentions.
How would it benefit the school, or other student sin it directly?
Example, and after school art program could benefit the school by working to create murals or artwork intended for school use.
Academic after school groups help the school receive funding, and prepare students for competitions which help te school's reputation and public standing.
Sports programs create revenue for the school, as well as boosting public standing.
All the above mentioned examples also help students gain the appropriate type of after school activities tat helps them get into college, as well as giving them a leg up on scholarships. -
One less gang banger is a benefit to all!
-
-
Grammar matters. TBR, in your OP here, you write "was told." That's the passive voice, and by using it you neglected to share a relevant part of the story: *who*. So which court are we talking about?
-
-
It's not a lack of comprehension, Ruski; it's a lack of correct grammar in the OP.
-
Right TBR, found the link through your blog, but i thought the info. belonged on this thread. Here's the judge: U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney.
Also, the article provides background on the school, but not the judge or this kind of ruling. It would be interesting to know how this one fits into the bigger picture.
Voodoo, there's nothing grammatically wrong with the passive voice. I just don't like it, because it encourages us to leave out key information. -
OK...make me work a little...
This is not the first time the district has dealt with religious groups hoping to form clubs on campus. In 2003, the Pacific Justice Institute challenged the district's decision to ban a Bible group at El Dorado High in Placentia. But the institute never filed a lawsuit and the Bible club was not allowed to form on campus, Smith said.
After another suit filed by the institute in 2001, Saddleback Valley Unified School District in south Orange County banned 29 non-academic groups rather than allow a religious one to form. The policy was reversed months later.
source of original article...taking you away from the shameless blog promotion:
www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bible4-2008sep04,0,6208549.story -
Mark: Yeah, and my professor told me if I use passive voice in any of my English essays I would probably get a guaranteed F.
-
Also, again...didn't realize we were using AP style in BLOGGING!
-
-
Bad example then, because I would have the view that an afterschool Wiccan study is NOT a positive to the community would be hard for me and a lot of others to comprehend. Especially as Wiccanas are extremely enviromentally conscientious and community service oriented.
-
I agree with giving this thread the "F" rating and I'm out of here.
-
Seconded. This topic is a load of contrived evangelizing BS.
-
Suppression of or overlooking of the facts, emotionally charged distraction contrived for the purpose of Christian evangelizing - rate it F for failed and vacate it.
-
-
*gasp!* evangelizing! oh....my....gosh!
-
Evangelizing isn't a good thing, Ruski. Discussion? Fine. Discourse? You bet. Debate? Tolerable. Evangelizing? No.
-
I love you, voodoo...you crack me up!
(who would have thought that posting a link to a blog post about a news story would be a no-no) -
You didn't just post a link. Quit trying to misdirect the things people say.
Do you seriously think in fallacy? Is that why you think logic is so funny? -
Did you go outside today, voodooK?
-
-
Why are we getting so caught up in whether this is evangelizing or not or whether the school "should" allow the club. This is really a simple matter of our constitutional guarantees of the right to assemble, the freedom to practice religion, and the right not to be discriminated against because of our religion (or lack thereof). A school district can no more deny a religious social group the right to assemble than can the Federal government, because doing so violates the First Amendment and disparately treats a suspect class protected under the Fourteenth Amendment.
When the district applies the pretextual reason that the bible club goes against an otherwise unenforced policy of "curriculum-only" clubs, the school is violating constitutional rights. This is just about application of the law folks. Maybe I'm seeing it as just a legal issue because of my training, but I'm really not following all the "evangelizing" and "Christians should or should not" talk.-
While a public school can't deny the group (I never said it should), it can't fund it either.
-
@voodoo - oh but it can, if it equally funds all other groups and provides other religous groups the ability to assemble. If the school only allowed the Christian group to assemble, it would be discrimation for a number of reasons, but it would also violate the Establishment Clause. However, if equal access is provided to all religious groups, so that one is not "established", the school district has to fund the religious group to avoid discriminating against it in favor of secular groups.
-
but I'm really not following all the "evangelizing" and "Christians should or should not" talk.
Because it is the mantra of several members here. -
Technically speaking, the school isn't permitted to fund ANY religious groups unless it provides the same resources to them all. The Chess Club and the French Club and the Debating Society are curriculum-related, the gay support groups and environmental awareness groups relate to our society in secular terms and as such, do not breach the wall between Church and State.
The State (public schools, being State-funded, are arms of the State) cannot fund any religious exercise without equally funding similar exercises for all religions. To do otherwise would be to give preference to one faith over another, thereby establishing a state-sanctioned religion, something specifically prohibited by the US Constitution. Rather than go to the expense of providing equal resources to a limitless number of religious, quasi-religious and pseudo-religious groups, arms of the government tend to just issue a blanket prohibition to them all: equal denial of resources.
We don't ask the local Baptist church to host the Evolution Club or the GLT Teen Support Group, demanding that the church provide space and supplies and utilities and janitorial service, PLUS include the clubs in their church programs and bulletins. We don't because schools have their own buildings and infrastructure in which to do so and the church is fully within its rights to refuse to house something it finds objectionable: clubs that support and discuss such things as evolution and gender dysphoria.
Isn't it odd that a school, which is funded by taxpayers of many different sets of beliefs, doesn't have that same right of refusal? The church has its own place for a bible club to meet, just as the school has its own place for the Evolution Club or the GLT Teens group to meet. Why not just keep them in their own venues? -
@sweetviolet--that would just make way too much sense!
-
@sweetviolet - because it would violate 200+ years of constitutional law. This isn't a "stay in your house and I'll stay in mine" country. The 1st and 14th Amendments set up an open society whereby government cannot deny rights to its citizens on a discriminatory basis; and the entire constitution is founded on the ideal that government cannot arbitrarily tell private citizens what they can and cannot do. So, the dynamic that a private citizen can be selective while the goverment cannot is engrained in our national psyche, and for good reason.
This country was founded on the principle that government should (1) be OF and FOR all the people; and (2) not arbitrarily rob citizens of individual freedoms. In the context of this discussion, point 2 is effectuated by the 1st Amendment's "freedom of religion" and "right to assemble" clauses.
Read my blog article discussing this in the context of same-sex marriage opinionstreams.com/blog/?p=13
I agree with you though, as I stated in my post above yours, that the school is only obligated to fund the religious group if it also funds all religious groups. A school is not, however, permitted to discrimnate against all religious groups by not providing them access just because it doesn't want to fund them.
You can't enforce the Establishment Clause without respecting the assemblage and practice clauses. -
@opinionstreams: "You can't enforce the Establishment Clause without respecting the assemblage and practice clauses."
There is nothing in the assemblage and practice clauses that imply that assemblage must be allowed anywhere a group wants to assemble. Hence, access to certain state-owned facilities can be limited or even prohibited. The people may still assemble, but they just can't do it anywhere they feel like. Just as the State can quite legitimately keep us out of the Pentagon if our business is not Pentagon-related, it can just as legitimately keep us out of public schools if our business is not school-related. -
@sweetviolet - You seem to be confusing "public" government buildings with "closed" or "private" government buildings. The Supreme Court has ruled that government can prohibit public access to government property that is closed to the public. I believe the Pentagon is considered a building that is closed to the public, as is the White House and virtually every other executive or legislative headquarters building.
A public school is not private government property, at least not with respect to the children who attend it, so the government cannot arbitrarily deny access to a public school (again, at least not with regard to its students). Getting back to the specific case here, it is arbitrary for the school to deny assemblage rights to the religious group if it grants those rights to other non-curricular groups.
-
-
removed by author
-
TT!! - you removed your post after I'd answered it. Respectfully, I have removed my answer.
-
I removed the questions that I posted because I decided that fueling this thread was pointless. Thanks for removing your answers too.
-
-
Antigay Christian leader admits to molesting young girls
www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid35620.asp
Ex-Turlock Christian School teachers accused of sending lewd text messages to teen
www.modbee.com/1618/story/376089.html
Molestation Charges Pile Up Against Sarasota Youth Minister
www2.tbo.com/content/2008/may/23/more-charges-added-against-former-sarasota...
Family relates LaPorte minister's abuse of teen
www.post-trib.com/news/1162418,lpjohndoe.article
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
