Denied First Amendment Right?

[Yzzim]

My brother is a freshman in high school and for his English class they have to do an essay on something debatable. He had no clue what to do it on so I mentioned that he should look at Noah's Ark and do his report on that. I've got videos and books on it, both for and against it so there's no doubt it's a debatable topic.
So, he goes up to the teacher and asks her if that's a good topic. She said "Seperation of church and state. You're not allowed to do any topic based on the Bible."
After that my brother was devistated. He still hasn't found a topic while everyone else is going on with their rough draft. I've been thinking about going in and talking to the teacher but I want to make sure that I'm right.
So was my brother denied his first amendment right? Doesn't he have the right to do his paper on anything he wants? The Seperation of Church and State just means that the teacher can't say "OK class, your assigment is to read chapters 1 to 4 in Revelations tonight." Correct?

 

[gopunk]

i don't think so, since he has the right to write the paper, but that doesn't mean his teacher will give him a good grade. it's not like he'll be put in a court of law if he writes it about the bible.

furthermore, the teacher probably doesn't want to grade anything about the bible, because the bible is a long ass book.

btw, if you're really looking for topics, how about blackhawk down? that's debatable...

 

[IJump]

Find documents looking at the feasibility or Noah's ark as a historical event rather than a bible story. Then, if they still don't let him, find a lawyer to write a letter, stating that he is investigating the historical event rather than the bible story.

If that doesn't work, find out where the teacher lives!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jobberd]

Well the teacher is allowed to regulate what kind of essays students write, but I don't think students aren't allowed to discuss religion at all. I could be wrong though, I don't know too much about the issue

 

[b0mbrman]

Someone had it in their sig, I thought it was a good quote...went something like this:

"There is only one universal right and that is the right to do as you damn well please. And with this, there is only one universal responsibility: to accept the consequences for your actions."

Okay, your brother can do the paper on whatever he wants. He can do it on lollipops and pretty, pretty bunnies for all the teacher cares. But, if he wants to be himself he also has to take the consequences for it and that could be getting a bad grade

 

[Yzzim]

<< But, if he wants to be himself he also has to take the consequences for it and that could be getting a bad grade >>


Why should he get a bad grade on a story that is found in the Bible? Just because it's in the Bible?

Gotta run to work.....be back around midnight cst

 

[Tominator]

<< "Seperation of church and state. You're not allowed to do any topic based on the Bible." >>



Liberal's last refuge is in Academia.....

 

[ShallowHal]

I don't agree with the teacher. But I think you'll find that outside of religious schools, any mention of religion
in the classroom is frowned upon. There are stories about students filing lawsuits because god was mentioned in their
classroom and they are athiest. It's easier for the theacher to just say no to everything Bible related.

 

[Hammer]

Maybe you should introduce her to the 2nd amendment

 

[notfred]

It's perfectly legal for him to write about the bible. It's not legal for the teacher to advocate Christianity.

 

[Russ]

<< She said "Seperation of church and state. You're not allowed to do any topic based on the Bible." >>



This teacher is full of crap, and is twisting the meaning to suit her own bigoted agenda.

Russ, NCNE

 

[ThisIsMatt]

1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Have your brother tell the teacher to respectfully shove it. The term separation of church and state is a cliche, often applying the 1st amendment to things not even intended...

 

[gopunk]

Why should he get a bad grade on a story that is found in the Bible? Just because it's in the Bible?

it really doesn't matter, all that matters is what the teacher says. it's retarded, yes, but that's just the way it is. i wouldn't look at it as a bible specific thing if i were you, just think of it as any other book the teacher doesn't like. for example, if your brother wanted to write about a science textbook, do you think his teacher would allow that? i don't think so.

 

[ShallowHal]

Official Participation or Encouragement
of Religious Activity

4. Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those capacities, are representatives of the state, and, in those capacities, are themselves prohibited from encouraging or soliciting student religious or anti-religious activity. Similarly, when acting in their official capacities, teachers may not engage in religious activities with their students. However, teachers may engage in private religious activity in faculty lounges.
Student Assignments and Religion

7. Students may express their religious beliefs in the form of reports, homework and artwork, and such expressions are constitutionally protected. Teachers may not reject or correct such submissions simply because they include a religious symbol or address religious themes. Likewise, teachers may not require students to modify, include or excise religious views in their assignments, if germane. These assignments should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance, relevance, appearance and grammar.

Got this from
The ACLU.

 

[Russ]

Gopunk is correct, and it's even worse in college. With most professors, you could write the most brilliant paper in the history of the class, and if it's written from a Conservative slant you can pretty much be guaranteed a lower grade.

It's wrong, but it's a fact of life in the education system.

Russ, NCNE

 

[ThisIsMatt]

<< Official Participation or Encouragement
of Religious Activity

4. Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those capacities, are representatives of the state, and, in those capacities, are themselves prohibited from encouraging or soliciting student religious or anti-religious activity. Similarly, when acting in their official capacities, teachers may not engage in religious activities with their students. However, teachers may engage in private religious activity in faculty lounges.
Student Assignments and Religion

7. Students may express their religious beliefs in the form of reports, homework and artwork, and such expressions are constitutionally protected. Teachers may not reject or correct such submissions simply because they include a religious symbol or address religious themes. Likewise, teachers may not require students to modify, include or excise religious views in their assignments, if germane. These assignments should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance, relevance, appearance and grammar.

Got this from
The ACLU. >>

score

 

[Zenmervolt]

<< It's perfectly legal for him to write about the bible. It's not legal for the teacher to advocate Christianity. >>

This is correct. Your brother would be in the right (IMO morally as well as legally) to write the paper on the Christian story of the great flood. However, bear in mind that after being proven wrong the teacher will likely not be very happy and will almost certainly go out of her way to find fault in the paper.

On a side note, it's people like her that give the rest of us agnostics/atheists a bad image. There's a difference between disagreeing with someone else's beliefs and trying to silence those beliefs. The first is perfectly OK, the second is just plain assinine and the teacher has chosen the second.

ZV

 

[dullard]

This is roughly how the courts have defined the first amendment: You have the right to freedom of speech - however, there is a time and place for everything.

Ex: You have the right to shout your favorite phrase. However, if you shout it at 3 am you might disturb neighbors. Thus you have the right to shout it, but just not at 3 am. (Wrong time).
Ex: You have the right to have a sitdown protest over a businesses practices. However, you cannot do it in the middle of a busy highway. Instead you must move your protest a few feet in either direction to the sidewalk. (Wrong place).

Your brother has the right to create an essay on Noah's Ark. He can write it, he can publish it, he can read it, he can shout it out loud, he can do lots of things with it. However he cannot yell it at 3 am disturbing the neighbors (wrong time) and he cannot publish it at school (wrong place). Simply asking him to move his right to a different time or location does not violate his right.

 

[Raspewtin]

i'm sure if your brother thinks back to everytime he had an extra opportunity with his religion that he shouldn't have had, or had some part of his religion funded by tax dollars (whether it is declaring the ground around your church a public park so that city pays for its maintenance, or going to your local library and seeing the huge disparity of christian magazines and books paid for with taxpayer dollars vs. other religions), he'll probably feel a little less "devastated" and realize that in the big scheme of things, he's probably way far ahead re: the seperation of church and state and free speech.

or if your brother is very devastated, tell him to write the paper anyway, when he gets a bad grade, take it to the principal, yadda, yadda, yadda. everyone chooses which battles they want to fight. at worst it will be a lesson in which battles are worth fighting and which aren't for him.

 

[Russ]

<< and he cannot publish it at school (wrong place). >>



Dullard,

Did you read the thread before posting?

Russ, NCNE

 

[OutHouse]

<< Official Participation or Encouragement
of Religious Activity

4. Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those capacities, are representatives of the state, and, in those capacities, are themselves prohibited from encouraging or soliciting student religious or anti-religious activity. Similarly, when acting in their official capacities, teachers may not engage in religious activities with their students. However, teachers may engage in private religious activity in faculty lounges.
Student Assignments and Religion

7. Students may express their religious beliefs in the form of reports, homework and artwork, and such expressions are constitutionally protected. Teachers may not reject or correct such submissions simply because they include a religious symbol or address religious themes. Likewise, teachers may not require students to modify, include or excise religious views in their assignments, if germane. These assignments should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance, relevance, appearance and grammar.


Interesting that the title of the above is "Religion In The Public Schools A Joint Statement Of Current Law:

Where did they get these laws? are they mingles with the ACLU agenda? I find that page suspect.

 

[glenn1]

<< Someone had it in their sig, I thought it was a good quote...went something like this:

"There is only one universal right and that is the right to do as you damn well please. And with this, there is only one universal responsibility: to accept the consequences for your actions." >>



LOL... yeah, that person with that quote in his sig is a pretty sharp guy

Just FYI, the quote belongs to P.J. O'Rourke, i've just borrowed it to use

 

[gopunk]

Where did they get these laws? are they mingles with the ACLU agenda? I find that page suspect.

how is it suspect? because they say that teachers can't force students to remove religous stuff? btw, in case you haven't noticed, aclu agenda is to preserve civil liberties... which should be on your agenda too.

 

[OutHouse]

because there are no references to where they those laws come from. where did the ACLU read them? are the acutally what is on the books or a ALCU interputatoion?

 

[gopunk]

<< because there are no references to where they those laws come from. where did the ACLU read them? are the acutally what is on the books or a ALCU interputatoion? >>



with what part do you disagree with? chances are, they got it from looking at supreme court rulings. they don't explicitly cite any sources, but if you read the beginning, it gives you a rough idea. and it's unlikely that it's only an aclu interpretation, judging from the list of co-signers.