Posted on 09/24/2003 4:08:51 PM PDT by Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS
Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals finds that 4-year-old had no right to give classmates pencils that said "Jesus loves the little children."
A federal appeals court has forbidden children as young as 4 to give gifts bearing religious messages like "Jesus loves the little children" to their classmates during classroom activities.
A three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Pennsylvania and New Jersey, found late last month that such gifts represent "student advocacy," according to its decision in a case brought by the parents of a 9-year-old boy against the Egg Harbor Township (N.J.) Board of Education.
Daniel Walz, then 4, touched off the controversy in spring 1998 when he brought pencils emblazoned with the message "Jesus loves the little children" a heart symbol actually stood in for "loves" to an Easter party in his pre-kindergarten class. His teacher confiscated the pencils and reported Daniel to the principal; Daniel's parents later sued, alleging violation of his right to free speech.
A Camden, N.J., U.S. District Court judge ruled against the Walzes in February 2002; the 3rd Circuit panel affirmed that ruling this past Aug. 27.
"This decision is probably one of the worst I've ever read," said John Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, which is representing the Walzes. "What they're saying to schools in the 3rd Circuit is that you have total control and kids have no freedom at all."
The decision, Whitehead added, is at odds with the U.S. Supreme Court's precedent-setting 1962 Tinker v. Des Moines Community School District ruling, which famously found that public school students "do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gates." In that case, the court ruled, in order to deny a student's free speech rights, a school "must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint."
"The only disruption here," Whitehead pointed out, "was the teacher who blocked (Daniel from handing out his pencils)."
The 3rd Circuit acknowledged the protections of the Tinker decision in its ruling, but found that they didn't apply to Daniel's gifts. In pointing out other examples where "a school's need to control student behavior will necessarily result in limitations on student speech," Chief Judge Anthony J. Scirica noted that "a quiet reading period necessarily requires silence."
Whitehead, who plans an appeal to the full 3rd Circuit and to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary, said that in addition to tyrannically stifling free speech, the 3rd Circuit has taught "a real bad lesson in political science to children."
"In the schools kids should learn about the Constitution and freedom and rights so that when they go out in life they believe that and practice that and support other people in that," he told CitizenLink. "If you're taught in schools that you have absolutely no rights, there's no telling the kind of negative impact that will have in the future."
And that's why parents must not allow their children to get that message from this decision, according to Eric Buehrer, president of Gateways to Better Education, a national organization that helps students and educators better understand and appreciate the contributions of Christianity to society and the world.
Until the courts reach a final resolution in the Walz case, Buehrer said, there is much parents can do to expose their children's classrooms to biblical truths.
"The courts have already ruled on the appropriateness to come in and read kids the Christmas story or the Easter story," he explained. "Good News (Bible) clubs can get started after school that's been settled by the Supreme Court, too.
"So this is not a hopeless situation. There are opportunities for Christian families to continue to make a difference."
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Gateways to Better Education has launched a project called "Tending the Garden of Your School" for parents seeking tips on how to bring a Christian influence to their child's school. To learn more, visit the organization's Web site.
(NOTE: Referral to Web sites not produced by Focus on the Family is for informational purposes only and does not necessarily constitute an endorsement of the sites' content.)
The Court's reasoning is probably that the school has unwittingly provided this kid with a captive audience to preach to. Consequently, they are de facto endorsing the child's religion.
This would follow from the line of caselaw which holds that students can organize Bible study groups during non-instructional time, because nobody's being forced to join or pay attention. But a teacher can't lead a prayer, or let a student give a public prayer before a football game, because the school is implicitly giving sanction to that prayer by providing it with a captive audience.
It's no wonder we've got 40 somethings running around with the crack of their asses showing in public, they never had a chance to play in the mud or watch a blade of grass grow or eat a wormy apple in the shade of a tree.
Those of you who have children need to know that they will remember the disappointments long after the cheers have faded.
When God is removed from the body politic it will create a vacuum that will be filled by something. I shudder to think what it might be.
Pick one:
A) Warehouse for storing children so both parents can support the burgeoning tax and regulation burden.
B) Indoctrination Center for producing compliant, dependent citizens.
C) Additional layer of government jobs to placate the teachers union.
D)All the above.
Only the CONGRESS is prohibited from establishing any religion according to the Bill of Rights, Article I. U.S. Constitution. There is NOTHING in the Constitution that forbids or prohibits schools endorsing or promoting a religious precept, we have done so in America for the better part of 200 years without problem until the last two to three decades by a minority of morally-devoid relativists and Activist Judges.
This would follow from the line of caselaw which holds...
Ahhh, now we come to it...CASELAW. Sorry, according to the Constitution itself, CASELAW is NOT law - except by those whom accept the whims of a Judge as the Ultimate Lawgiver, which the Supreme Law of the Land prohibits. ONLY CONGRESS can make law - the Judiciary is to rule UPON WRITTEN LAW PASSED by the Legislatures, or to measure a case based upon the written laws, not "interpret" law as they see fit to mean.
But since Americans are now ignorant of our very Foundations, and we have left the running of the Republic to the "professionals" and the High Priesthood of Secular, Humanist, Liberal Lawyers - we have defacto law of judicial precedents being accepted as "law".
Wonder how long and how comfortable all of you are going to be when some Judge rules that political speech that is hostile to the Administration or government is subversive and therefore not 'protected' and can be prohibited? Once that precedent is set, imagine all the laws that will stem from that false foundation.
For roughly 200 years, America accepted and even expected the promotion of Christianity and religious precepts in our schools and institutions. In-fact, our Founders and early Institutions themselves considered it imperative for the survival of the Republic for them to do just that:
"Let every student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life, John 17:3, and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of Him." - Rules and Precepts of Harvard.
The first amendment says that government has to respect all religions equally.
Really? Where are those words written? Article I, Bill of Rights reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercize thereof..." Sorry, I still don't find the words "government has to respect all religions equally."
In-fact, one of our first Legal Scholars who advised our Founders warned us against doing that very thing:
"An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indiference, would create universal disapprobation, and universal indignation." - Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice 1811
Why can't people acknowledge that when they defend people like Walz and Judge Moore, they're also defending Muslims and lesbian parents who want to convert *their* kids?
America was founded on the Laws of God in scripture, codified in the 10 Commandments, the cornerstone which was Jesus Christ. The Founders understood this Republic would only last as long as the people were beholden to that foundation.
Because we have devolved into debauchery and redefined morality, bending and reworking our foundations to accomodate our newfound tolerances and acceptances of hostile doctrines and precepts is still going to turn this Republic into a tyrannical secular democracy and ultimately be destroyed. We already see the fruits of this in our culture - it is all downhill from here.
"No human society has ever been able to maintain both order and freedom, both cohesiveness and liberty apart from the moral precepts of the Christian religion applied and accepted by all the classes. Should our Republic ever forget this fundamental precept of governance, men are certain to shed their responsibilities for licentiousness and this great experiment will then be surely doomed" - John Jay
Moral relativism, indifference and acceptance of traditions and new beliefs hostile to the very pillars of our existance, will result in our complete collapse into pure tyranny and eventual annihilation. Our Founders warned us of this, God in scripture warns us of this - and We the People have not heeded, and are being governed by our own ideas and suppostions of morality.
We will go the way all the Republics before us have gone, and in short order.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.