Students suspended for praying

[Eliyahuw]

I am a little shocked at the responses so far. We should sign up for prayer group or pray off school grounds, not bring attention to ourselves. Please say it isn

[Eliyahuw]

The relationship between religion and government in the United States is governed by the First Amendment to the Constitution, which both prevents the government from establishing religion and protects privately initiated religious expression and activities from government interference and discrimination. [ 1 ] The First Amendment thus establishes certain limits on the conduct of public school officials as it relates to religious activity, including prayer.

The legal rules that govern the issue of constitutionally protected prayer in the public schools are similar to those that govern religious expression generally. Thus, in discussing the operation of Section 9524 of the ESEA, this guidance sometimes speaks in terms of "religious expression." There are a variety of issues relating to religion in the public schools, however, that this guidance is not intended to address.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer. [ 2 ] Accordingly, the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals, and the line between government-sponsored and privately initiated religious expression is vital to a proper understanding of the First Amendment's scope. As the Court has explained in several cases, "there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." [ 3 ]

The Supreme Court's decisions over the past forty years set forth principles that distinguish impermissible governmental religious speech from the constitutionally protected private religious speech of students. For example, teachers and other public school officials may not lead their classes in prayer, devotional readings from the Bible, or other religious activities. [ 4 ] Nor may school officials attempt to persuade or compel students to participate in prayer or other religious activities. [ 5 ] Such conduct is "attributable to the State" and thus violates the Establishment Clause. [ 6 ]

Similarly, public school officials may not themselves decide that prayer should be included in school-sponsored events. In Lee v. Weisman [ 7 ], for example, the Supreme Court held that public school officials violated the Constitution in inviting a member of the clergy to deliver a prayer at a graduation ceremony. Nor may school officials grant religious speakers preferential access to public audiences, or otherwise select public speakers on a basis that favors religious speech. In Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe [ 8 ], for example, the Court invalidated a school's football game speaker policy on the ground that it was designed by school officials to result in pregame prayer, thus favoring religious expression over secular expression.

Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer, students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," [ 9 ] and the Supreme Court has made clear that "private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression." [ 10 ] Moreover, not all religious speech that takes place in the public schools or at school-sponsored events is governmental speech. [ 11 ] For example, "nothing in the Constitution ... prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day," [ 12 ] and students may pray with fellow students during the school day on the same terms and conditions that they may engage in other conversation or speech. Likewise, local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, [ 13 ] but they may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against student prayer or religious speech. For instance, where schools permit student expression on the basis of genuinely neutral criteria and students retain primary control over the content of their expression, the speech of students who choose to express themselves through religious means such as prayer is not attributable to the state and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious content. [ 14 ] Student remarks are not attributable to the state simply because they are delivered in a public setting or to a public audience. [ 15 ] As the Supreme Court has explained: "The proposition that schools do not endorse everything they fail to censor is not complicated," [ 16 ] and the Constitution mandates neutrality rather than hostility toward privately initiated religious expression. [ 17 ]

[Eliyahuw]

Prayer is constitutionally protected, which means the school nor any other govt agency cannot make any law or rules restricting it.

Section 9524 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act ("ESEA") of 1965, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, requires the Secretary to issue guidance on constitutionally protected prayer in public elementary and secondary schools. In addition, Section 9524 requires that, as a condition of receiving ESEA funds, a local educational agency ("LEA") must certify in writing to its State educational agency ("SEA") that it has no policy that prevents, or otherwise denies participation in, constitutionally protected prayer in public schools as set forth in this guidance.

[Oh Hamburgers!]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

No, the students were stopped because they were being a distraction, not because they were praying. Your citation of the law actually helps prove what I was trying to say.

Prayer at school activities

A TSBVI student has an absolute right to individually, voluntarily, and silently pray or meditate in school in a manner that does not disrupt the instructional or other activities of the School. A TSBVI student shall not be required, encouraged, or coerced to engage in or refrain from such prayer or meditation during any school activity. Education Code 25.901

**SNIP**

Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer, students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," [ 9 ] and the Supreme Court has made clear that "private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression." [ 10 ] Moreover, not all religious speech that takes place in the public schools or at school-sponsored events is governmental speech.

The students were NOT praying individually. The students were NOT praying silently. The students were praying in a manner that disrupted activities in the school by being an obstruction. This was not private religious speech, therefore it is not protected.

[Eliyahuw]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

No, the students were stopped because they were being a distraction, not because they were praying. Your citation of the law actually helps prove what I was trying to say.

Prayer at school activities

A TSBVI student has an absolute right to individually, voluntarily, and silently pray or meditate in school in a manner that does not disrupt the instructional or other activities of the School. A TSBVI student shall not be required, encouraged, or coerced to engage in or refrain from such prayer or meditation during any school activity. Education Code 25.901

**SNIP**

Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer, students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," [ 9 ] and the Supreme Court has made clear that "private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression." [ 10 ] Moreover, not all religious speech that takes place in the public schools or at school-sponsored events is governmental speech.

The students were NOT praying individually. The students were NOT praying silently. The students were praying in a manner that disrupted activities in the school by being an obstruction. This was not private religious speech, therefore it is not protected.

THe school has absolutely ZERO rights in restricting prayer. The students do not have to pray privately, they can pray in groups. The act passed in 1986 by reagans administration secured the rights of these kids to pray, conduct bible study, hold services on school property without restrictions.

Furthermore i read the article they were in the common area of the lunchroom. THey were asked to move several times in which they did. They were given a offer of a room to which they said they would think on it and get back with the school and the next day the school suspened people. The kids were not disturbing classes or events.

The school had no right to do it. Their Constitutionally barred from prohibiting prayer as well as any bible studies on campus.

Last of all who says they have to pray silently!? Privately in a group isn't silent.

Edited March 9, 2007 by Eliyahuw

[Oh Hamburgers!]

THe school has absolutely ZERO rights in restricting prayer. The students do not have to pray privately, they can pray in groups. The act passed in 1986 by reagans administration secured the rights of these kids to pray, conduct bible study, hold services on school property without restrictions.

Without restrictions? Really? From your last post, it seems quite obvious there ARE restrictions on prayer when it is disruptive.

I am part of this new religion, called Hamburgerism. We are required to pray to the lord burger once every half hour by proclaiming our praise on loud trumpets for all the world to see. You can't restrict my prayer!! I have a right to do this in a public school, because it is my prayer!!

No actually, I don't, and neither do these students. Here is the issue here. The students were not restricted because of their prayer, they were restricted because of their disruption and obstruction. The problem is that people hear "suspended because of prayer" and think "Oh no!! These schools are against Christianity!". But when you look at the facts, you see they weren't really suspended because they were praying, they were suspended because they were praying in a disruptive fashion. Big difference, it is like complaining you aren't allowed to eat in a school after being suspended for starting a food fight. You aren't being suspended for eating, you are being suspended for how you ate.

Furthermore i read the article they were in the common area of the lunchroom. THey were asked to move several times in which they did. They were given a offer of a room to which they said they would think on it and get back with the school and the next day the school suspened people. The kids were not disturbing classes or events.

The school had no right to do it. Their Constitutionally barred from prohibiting prayer as well as any bible studies on campus.

Are we looking at the same situation? The article that was posted said nothing of the sort. Here is what the article said, quite plainly:

The students have not decided whether to formally register as a student-led group, she said. If so, the school would provide a classroom for use before or following school as it would to any sanctioned student-led group, per district policy.

Discipline was leveled last week after students ignored repeated orders to move their prayer circle from the busy student commons in the Heritage core, said Assistant Superintendent Bill Bentley.

A few other students had complained, and the days-old group had become a physical obstacle and a disruption, he said.

I don't see where you got your information exactly, because it is clear it contradicts the original article. Can you cite your source please?

Last of all who says they have to pray silently!? Privately in a group isn't silent.

Boy, I thought that my enormous font would have been enough. Here, I'll post it again:

A TSBVI student has an absolute right to individually, voluntarily, and silently pray or meditate in school in a manner that does not disrupt the instructional or other activities of the School.

[Eliyahuw]

THe school has absolutely ZERO rights in restricting prayer. The students do not have to pray privately, they can pray in groups. The act passed in 1986 by reagans administration secured the rights of these kids to pray, conduct bible study, hold services on school property without restrictions.

Without restrictions? Really? From your last post, it seems quite obvious there ARE restrictions on prayer when it is disruptive.

I am part of this new religion, called Hamburgerism. We are required to pray to the lord burger once every half hour by proclaiming our praise on loud trumpets for all the world to see. You can't restrict my prayer!! I have a right to do this in a public school, because it is my prayer!!

No actually, I don't, and neither do these students. Here is the issue here. The students were not restricted because of their prayer, they were restricted because of their disruption and obstruction. The problem is that people hear "suspended because of prayer" and think "Oh no!! These schools are against Christianity!". But when you look at the facts, you see they weren't really suspended because they were praying, they were suspended because they were praying in a disruptive fashion. Big difference, it is like complaining you aren't allowed to eat in a school after being suspended for starting a food fight. You aren't being suspended for eating, you are being suspended for how you ate.

Furthermore i read the article they were in the common area of the lunchroom. THey were asked to move several times in which they did. They were given a offer of a room to which they said they would think on it and get back with the school and the next day the school suspened people. The kids were not disturbing classes or events.

The school had no right to do it. Their Constitutionally barred from prohibiting prayer as well as any bible studies on campus.

Are we looking at the same situation? The article that was posted said nothing of the sort. Here is what the article said, quite plainly:

The students have not decided whether to formally register as a student-led group, she said. If so, the school would provide a classroom for use before or following school as it would to any sanctioned student-led group, per district policy.

Discipline was leveled last week after students ignored repeated orders to move their prayer circle from the busy student commons in the Heritage core, said Assistant Superintendent Bill Bentley.

A few other students had complained, and the days-old group had become a physical obstacle and a disruption, he said.

I don't see where you got your information exactly, because it is clear it contradicts the original article. Can you cite your source please?

Last of all who says they have to pray silently!? Privately in a group isn't silent.

Boy, I thought that my enormous font would have been enough. Here, I'll post it again:

A TSBVI student has an absolute right to individually, voluntarily, and silently pray or meditate in school in a manner that does not disrupt the instructional or other activities of the School.

Again the LAW doesn't say such a thing! Your reading a opinon. That isn't the law. I posted the law in a separate post. This section you chose to make 50 times bigger is nothing. Its rules set by school board. NOT The law.

Edited March 9, 2007 by Eliyahuw

[Guest Biblicist]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

Prayer at school activities

A TSBVI student has an absolute right to individually, voluntarily, and silently pray or meditate in school in a manner that does not disrupt the instructional or other activities of the School. A TSBVI student shall not be required, encouraged, or coerced to engage in or refrain from such prayer or meditation during any school activity. Education Code 25.901

Nothing in the Constitution as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court prohibits any TSBVI school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the schoolday. But the religious liberty protected by the Constitution is abridged when a district affirmatively sponsors the particular religious practice of prayer.

The School shall not adopt a policy that establishes an improper majoritarian election on religion and has the purpose and creates the perception of encouraging the delivery of prayer at a series of important school events.

Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 120 S. Ct. 2266 (2000)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eliyahuw,

You are forgetting the most important thing. While you may be very good at citing what man's law says about prayer in public places, you have forgotten God's law.

Mathew 6:5-8 5 "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.

6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.

8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

[Eliyahuw]

Uh hold up, it is illegal for the school to do what they did. THey cannot stop them from praying. IT IS CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED! The school was 100% wrong

Prayer at school activities

A TSBVI student has an absolute right to individually, voluntarily, and silently pray or meditate in school in a manner that does not disrupt the instructional or other activities of the School. A TSBVI student shall not be required, encouraged, or coerced to engage in or refrain from such prayer or meditation during any school activity. Education Code 25.901

Nothing in the Constitution as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court prohibits any TSBVI school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the schoolday. But the religious liberty protected by the Constitution is abridged when a district affirmatively sponsors the particular religious practice of prayer.

The School shall not adopt a policy that establishes an improper majoritarian election on religion and has the purpose and creates the perception of encouraging the delivery of prayer at a series of important school events.

Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 120 S. Ct. 2266 (2000)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eliyahuw,

You are forgetting the most important thing. While you may be very good at citing what man's law says about prayer in public places, you have forgotten God's law.

Mathew 6:5-8 5 "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.

6 But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

7 And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words.

8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

Look, were told to not hide our light, prayer is one of those lights. private communication yes, group prayers no they aren't to be hidden.

IF that were the case, then people wouldn't pray in church now would they. Church is a public place.

And secondly, Christians do not have to stand back and allow groups to silence us. These laws are to protect everyone, including christians from the government. AKA separation of church and state. THat means, Government cannot touch religious activities, nor restrict them. Period. Christ taught separation of church and state 2000 years ago, as well as freedom.

this is just 1 point

1. Its Head and Founder--CHRIST. He is the law-giver; the Church is only the executive. (Matt. 16:18; Col. 1:18)

2. Its only rule of faith and practice--THE BIBLE. (II Tim. 3:15-17)

3. Its name--"CHURCH," "CHURCHES." (Matt. 16:18; Rev. 22:16)

4. Its polity--CONGREGATIONAL--all members equal. (Matt. 20:24-28; Matt. 23:5-12)

5. Its members--only saved people. (Eph. 2:21; I Peter 2:5)

6. Its ordinances--BELIEVERS' BAPTISM, FOLLOWED BY THE LORD'S SUPPER. (Matt. 28:19-20)

7. Its officers--PASTORS AND DEACONS. (I Tim. 3:1-16)

8. Its work--getting folks saved, baptizing them (with a baptism that meets all the requirements of God's Word), teaching them ("to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you"). (Matt. 28:16-20)

9. Its financial plan--"Even so (TITHES and OFFERINGS) hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel," (I Cor. 9:14)

10. Its weapons of warfare--spiritual, not carnal. (II Cor. 10:4; Eph. 6:10-20)

11. Its independence--separation of Church and State. (Matt. 22:21)

IV

[apothanein kerdos]

AK, it's not necessary to read court cases. we're all quite capable of reading the constitution. and we're all quite capable of understanding that according to the information we were given, they were not being forbidden to congregate. they were being forbidden from creating an obstacle course.

And this tells me everything.

The Supreme Court interprets what is legal and what is not legal under the Constitution. If you ignore their rulings, then you are most likely wrong in what you are saying.