• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Valedictorian Rips Up Speech And Recites Lord's Prayer

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Im pretty sure almost all validictorians from texas are religious. The only example i have contrary is a friend from my undergrad class who was atheist but she went to a science academy.
 
Remember this is the same state where cheerleaders sued a public school because they couldn't display religious banners during football games.
 
TerryMathews said:
And won...
Click to expand...

Yea I know. Pretty pathetic huh? That case is not closed yet. I am sure it will be appealed. By the time its all said and done, these selfish Christian cheerleaders could cost the taxpayers in their district a million or more dollars in legal fees. Glad this kind of idiocy doesn't happen in my state.
 
bshole said:
Yea I know. Pretty pathetic huh? That case is not closed yet. I am sure it will be appealed. By the time its all said and done, these selfish Christian cheerleaders could cost the taxpayers in their district a million or more dollars in legal fees. Glad this kind of idiocy doesn't happen in my state.
Click to expand...

Oh? You don't have the first amendment in your state?

I knew there were cities that did away with the second, I did not know there were states that did away with the first.



:sly:
 
TerryMathews said:
Oh? You don't have the first amendment in your state?

I knew there were cities that did away with the second, I did not know there were states that did away with the first.

:sly:
Click to expand...

I think Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier would cover this reasonably well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazelwood_v._Kuhlmeier

"The question whether the First Amendment requires a school to tolerate particular student speech—the question we addressed in Tinker—is different from the question whether the First Amendment requires a school affirmatively to promote particular student speech. The former question addresses educators' ability to silence students' personal expression that happens to occur on the school premises. The latter question concerns educators' authority over school sponsored publications, theatrical productions, and other expressive activities that students, parents, and members of the public might reasonably perceive to bear the imprimatur of the school."
Click to expand...

At a school-sponsored event where the school selected student representative is using the school PA system to address the students, staff, and faculty, it is reasonable to view that as having the sanction of the school. As I mentioned before, I do not believe that him tearing up a piece of paper beforehand eliminates the school's ability to control the content of that speech.

In the Texas school cheerleader case the court ruled that students displaying banners was not to be interpreted as the school speaking. I feel like the cheerleaders will eventually lose on that case as well, but certainly it seems like a valedictorian speech at an official graduation event has more of the stamp of school approval than some kids waving banners at a game.
 
Last edited:
TerryMathews said:
Oh? You don't have the first amendment in your state?

I knew there were cities that did away with the second, I did not know there were states that did away with the first.



:sly:
Click to expand...

The First Amendment doesn't mean that people are allowed to spread their religion to others using public resources.
 
The First Amendment doesn't mean that people are allowed to spread their religion to others using public resources.
Click to expand...

Its not even that. Do they really really really have to be total a-holes? Do they think that acting like petulant little children, skirting the rules and suing schools is winning them any converts? Why piss so many people off over such trivial bullshit?
 
They were using the PA system on a continuous basis, no? That's endorsement. You'd have to either be really obtuse or else just enjoy discussing scotus to think there's a valid argument here. There's nothing wrong with what happened apart from religion itself.
 
BlueWolf47 said:
Im pretty sure almost all validictorians from texas are religious. The only example i have contrary is a friend from my undergrad class who was atheist but she went to a science academy.
Click to expand...

Thanks for showing your ignorance. The valedictorian who took a stand for Christians is in South Carolina.
 
Incorruptible said:
Thanks for showing your ignorance. The valedictorian who took a stand for Christians is in South Carolina.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. Well, that's half right, at least. He took a stand. Kind of made a fool of himself, and the school, and christians generally, and democracy, but speeches are hard. Much easier to just pull some pointless sanctimonious stunt.
 
TerryMathews said:
You two convinced me. Clearly, he shouldn't have been allowed to be valedictorian because he is A Christian.

:sly:
Click to expand...

Didn't say that either. My comment was in response to your supposition that he must have critical thinking skills because he did well in high school, specifically a high school in South Carolina. My point was and is now that critical thinking skills are not necessary, important, or necessarily even helpful in the modern public school system which is quite often about memorization, regurgitation, and bullshitting.

If you want to read more into it, by all means go ahead and be butthurt, but my remarks were more an indictment of what they teach in our education system than of his actions. Critical thought simply isn't very highly valued at that educational level, or, for that matter, in society at large.
 
Abraxas said:
Didn't say that either. My comment was in response to your supposition that he must have critical thinking skills because he did well in high school, specifically a high school in South Carolina. My point was and is now that critical thinking skills are not necessary, important, or necessarily even helpful in the modern public school system which is quite often about memorization, regurgitation, and bullshitting.

If you want to read more into it, by all means go ahead and be butthurt, but my remarks were more an indictment of what they teach in our education system than of his actions. Critical thought simply isn't very highly valued at that educational level, or, for that matter, in society at large.
Click to expand...

Who's butthurt? You and the other idiot are insisting that anyone who believes in a God is incapable of critical thinking. And now you've changed the implied definition of critical thinking so that a much larger pool of people are not capable of it.

Which begs the question why attack Christianity at all? It seems to me that religion is no longer your defining characteristic for who has critical thinking skills.
 
TerryMathews said:
Who's butthurt? You and the other idiot are insisting that anyone who believes in a God is incapable of critical thinking. And now you've changed the implied definition of critical thinking so that a much larger pool of people are not capable of it.

Which begs the question why attack Christianity at all? It seems to me that religion is no longer your defining characteristic for who has critical thinking skills.
Click to expand...

I guess we can chalk up reading comprehension as something else public schools failed to instill in you. I never once, in any post in this thread, mentioned Christianity or religion, let alone mentioned a connection between religion and critical thinking skills. My comments were initially, and are now, that I did not accept your contention that his passing high school showed him capable of critical thought, an observation you seem to be going a long way towards supporting.
 
TerryMathews said:
Who's butthurt? You and the other idiot are insisting that anyone who believes in a God is incapable of critical thinking. And now you've changed the implied definition of critical thinking so that a much larger pool of people are not capable of it.

Which begs the question why attack Christianity at all? It seems to me that religion is no longer your defining characteristic for who has critical thinking skills.
Click to expand...

Concentrate. I implied they weren't using it, not that they're incapable. If I thought they were incapable then i wouldnt' be advocating that they be educated...
 
justoh said:
Excellent point. Well, that's half right, at least. He took a stand. Kind of made a fool of himself, and the school, and christians generally, and democracy, but speeches are hard. Much easier to just pull some pointless sanctimonious stunt.
Click to expand...

He didn't make a fool out of himself. He defended Christianity against the school and other groups.
 
Proselytizing to a captive audience at a governmental institution (school) is not a first amendment fight you can win.

Just stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top