[pogo101]

Here is a link to, and the opening passage from, the federal decision in Michigan to which, I am confident, Liberty Counsel was referring:

This case presents the ironic, and unfortunate, paradox of a public high school celebrating “diversity” by refusing to permit the presentation to students of an “unwelcomed” viewpoint on the topic of homosexuality and religion, while actively promoting the competing view. This practice of “one-way diversity,” unsettling in itself, was rendered still more troubling -- both constitutionally and ethically -- by the fact that the approved viewpoint was, in one manifestation, presented to students as religious doctrine by six clerics (some in full garb) quoting from religious scripture. In its other manifestation, it resulted in the censorship by school administrators of a student’s speech about “what diversity means to me,” removing that portion of the speech in which the student described the unapproved viewpoint.

All of this, of course, raises the question, among others presented here, of what “diversity” means and whether a school may promote one view of “diversity” over another.

[wintertime]

This practice of “one-way diversity,” unsettling in itself, was rendered still more troubling -- both constitutionally and ethically --

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&77

It is impossible for any government school to be politically, culturally, or religiously neutral. This incident is an excellent example.

The government school, no matter what it does, will be ESTABLISHING the worldview of some ( with religious content and serious consequences) and undermining the worldview of others. How can this be constitutional? Answer: It can't.

Government schools are an abomination precisely because they trash the human rights guaranteed in our state and federal constitutions.