Invocation/Lord's Prayer at public school graduation

[Kolga]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
For nine unelected justices to override the will of the people would force people to not participate in a prayer that they wish to participate in. That is as much an offense against freedom of speech as forcing people to hear the prayer. Saying that everyone in the student body and audience is “forced to participate” is a strange interpretation. How could someone be forced to participate if they’re free to think that they’re not participating?
[/QUOTE]

IANAL, especially NACS (not a constitutional scholar), but I don’t think that’s how it works. The “will of the people” can’t (as far as I understand it) circumvent the Constitution. If the will of the people is to include one and only one religious value in a state-sponsored public event, well, I’m thinking that the people, in their infinite wrongness, need to be reined in a bit.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
For nine unelected justices to override the will of the people would force people to not participate in a prayer that they wish to participate in. That is as much an offense against freedom of speech as forcing people to hear the prayer. Saying that everyone in the student body and audience is “forced to participate” is a strange interpretation. How could someone be forced to participate if they’re free to think that they’re not participating?
[/QUOTE]

When you’re talking about minors, SCOTUS has clearly opined that stronger protections are required. Minors are much more subject to indoctrination than adults.

Those nine unelected justices override the will of the people constantly; that’s their job. Where do you think all these laws that SCOTUS has to toss out as unconstitutional come from?

[ITR_champion]

[QUOTE=Kolga]
IANAL, especially NACS (not a constitutional scholar), but I don’t think that’s how it works. The “will of the people” can’t (as far as I understand it) circumvent the Constitution. If the will of the people is to include one and only one religious value in a state-sponsored public event, well, I’m thinking that the people, in their infinite wrongness, need to be reined in a bit.
[/QUOTE]

The only thing that the Constitution says about religion is that there are no tests for office, no establishment of religion, and no prohibition of free expression of religion. Now if any high school principal at a ceremony demands that only Christians be allowed to run for office or that we establish a Church of the United States with powers similar to the Church of England in 1783, I’ll be the first to protest. However, the only way to say that following the will of the people in this circumstance is unconstitutional is to come up with new definitions of common English-language words.

It’s worth noting that from the Boston Tea Party to Thoreau to Martin Luther King, Jr., Americans have a long tradition of doing what is right even when the government threatens them for doing so. I’m sure many public high school students are proud to join that tradition by praying even when the government wants them muzzled.

[Kolga]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
I’m sure many public high school students are proud to join that tradition by praying even when the government wants them muzzled.
[/QUOTE]

Ah, yes, the old “Christians are persecuted in this country!” canard. Nobody’s muzzling Christians, nobody’s telling Christians they can’t practice their religion, and nobody’s trying to outlaw Christianity or prayer. What the SCOTUS and the Constitution IS trying to do, however, is prevent overt and, in many cases, covert attempts to impose religion on others in state-sponsored situations and events that are not necessarily open for people to NOT participate.

[ITR_champion]

[QUOTE=flyboy]
Again, the Supreme Court from Lee:Bolding mine.
[/QUOTE]

And the Supreme Court also says that growing a marijuana plant in your own garden is “interstate commerce”. Bluntly I do not view the Supreme Court as a good authority on basic logic and the meaning of ordinary words.

[Lemur866]

[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Incorrect. Any attempt to use school equipment to endorse religion (or to make listening to that endorsement a condition for collecting a diploma) is a violation of the First Amendment.
[/QUOTE]

But attending the graduation ceremony is NOT a condition for collecting a diploma. Plenty of kids graduate and get their high school diploma and don’t bother to show up for the ceremony. Participating in the ceremony is not a requirement for graduation.

I think we’ve all established that the school officials cannot lead prayers, they can’t invite priests or shamans to lead prayers, they can’t schedule a moment of prayer into the graduation ceremony, they can’t tell students to lead prayers, and they can’t choose student speakers based on whether that student will lead a prayer or not.

But student speeches are typical features of graduation ceremonies. If the valedictorian starts praying in the middle of her valedictory speech, what should the school officials do to stop her? Cut off her microphone and hustle her off the stage? To use the hyperbolic fantasy scenario presented earlier, are they going to arrest her for praying? Obviously they can’t do that.

So if the schools have an obligation not to establish a state religion, they also have an obligation to allow the free exercise of religion. “Arresting” a student for praying isn’t the answer.

Of course it’s an open secret in these towns that the student speakers will lead prayers. They’ve found a method of putting prayer into the ceremony that can pass constitutional review. Everyone, including the school officials, know that students will lead prayers during the ceremony. But what should be done to school officials who don’t cut off student prayers? What liability do they face? And if they do cut off student prayers, aren’t they state actors prohibiting the exercise of religion?

[ITR_champion]

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]

1. Murder may objectively be defined as “bad”; prayer may only subjectively defined as “good”.
   [/quote]

And I am among those who define it as good.

2. Your previous post didn’t have anything to do with the Constitution; it simply address whether such prayer (or the prohibition thereof) was rude.

My previous post also didn’t mention murder and cannibalism.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
And the Supreme Court also says that growing a marijuana plant in your own garden is “interstate commerce”. Bluntly I do not view the Supreme Court as a good authority on basic logic and the meaning of ordinary words.
[/QUOTE]

And yet you view the Congress that approves the nomination of said Justices as authorities?

[ITR_champion]

[QUOTE=Kolga]
Ah, yes, the old “Christians are persecuted in this country!” canard. Nobody’s muzzling Christians, nobody’s telling Christians they can’t practice their religion,
[/quote]

Pardon the interruption, but if the students believe that there should be a prayer at a graduation ceremony and the courts intervene to prevent that from happening, then someone is muzzling Christians and telling them they can’t practice their religion.

and nobody’s trying to outlaw Christianity or prayer. What the SCOTUS and the Constitution IS trying to do, however, is prevent overt and, in many cases, covert attempts to impose religion on others in state-sponsored situations and events that are not necessarily open for people to NOT participate.

For the Supreme Court to ride in and declare what sort of the prayer there will be, while throwing out the will of the people, is imposing a religious viewpoint. A ban on prayer at graduation ceremonies is not a religious neutral position. It is a definite statement about how worthwhile a prayer is. Graduation is a big moment in the lives of these students and most of these students feel it’s appropriate to have a prayer. To prevent them from doing so is about as imposing as you can get.

[villa]

[QUOTE=Lemur866]
But student speeches are typical features of graduation ceremonies. If the valedictorian starts praying in the middle of her valedictory speech, what should the school officials do to stop her? Cut off her microphone and hustle her off the stage? To use the hyperbolic fantasy scenario presented earlier, are they going to arrest her for praying? Obviously they can’t do that.

So if the schools have an obligation not to establish a state religion, they also have an obligation to allow the free exercise of religion. “Arresting” a student for praying isn’t the answer.

[/QUOTE]

What would the school do if the student started stating that African Americans were the source of all bad things in the United States, that they should not be allowed to attend college, that integrated education was an evil?

I would imagine they would turn the microphone off, at the very least. Were the Klan to be making such claims at a rally in the town square, they would not have that authority. But that is the difference the event makes to whether speech is protected or not.

Freedom of religion protects religious beliefs. It does not, and has never to my knowledge been held to, protect without limit actions undertaken in the expression of those beliefs, regardless of how heartfelt those actions may be.

[ITR_champion]

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
And yet you view the Congress that approves the nomination of said Justices as authorities?
[/QUOTE]

Nope.

[DSYoungEsq]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
I graduated from high school in Kentucky in 2000 and every school in the city had a prayer at the graduation ceremony. The students voted on the issue in advance and prayer always won by large margins. There were no legal challenges that I’m aware of. I’m entirely in favor of the system, since I prefer decision by democracy to decision by nine dictators. I don’t see any reason why a small number of students having to listen to something they don’t like is any more rude and offensive than the government stopping a large number of students from hearing something they do like.

(Since somewhat will no doubt ask, I’d be quite all right with a prayer from a different religious tradition if that’s what the students in some school vote for.)
[/QUOTE]

Of course, the United States Constitution itself precludes the federal government from activities that establish a state religion, and this has justifiably been read into the meaning of “liberty” as applied against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. So, while one may or may not be more “offensive,” as a society one has been determined to be an unconstitutional, and therefore illegal act. And it isn’t the one involving subjecting people to a state-sponsored religious practice. :smack:

[villa]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
Pardon the interruption, but if the students believe that there should be a prayer at a graduation ceremony and the courts intervene to prevent that from happening, then someone is muzzling Christians and telling them they can’t practice their religion.

[/QUOTE]

Preventing a religious practice is not prohibited. One is not exempt from murder laws because one claims that one was sacrificing a virgin to the Sun God. Believing that the Sun God demands virgins to be sacrificed is protected, of course.

Similarly, prayer is not prevented at any event. There is nothing stopping a person praying.

[Kolga]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
Pardon the interruption, but if the students believe that there should be a prayer at a graduation ceremony and the courts intervene to prevent that from happening, then someone is muzzling Christians and telling them they can’t practice their religion.
[/QUOTE]

Wrong. Someone is telling them that they can’t practice one particular aspect of their religion in that particular setting. They can pray, in groups or alone, up to the very moment that the ceremony begins. They can pray, silently and non-disruptively, during the ceremony itself. They can begin praying, silently or aloud, alone or in groups, the moment that the ceremony ends. They simply cannot use the state-sponsored ceremony itself to impose their particular spirituality on a captive audience.

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
For the Supreme Court to ride in and declare what sort of the prayer there will be, while throwing out the will of the people, is imposing a religious viewpoint. A ban on prayer at graduation ceremonies is not a religious neutral position. It is a definite statement about how worthwhile a prayer is. Graduation is a big moment in the lives of these students and most of these students feel it’s appropriate to have a prayer. To prevent them from doing so is about as imposing as you can get.
[/QUOTE]

A ban on prayer in a state-sponsored event is a religiously neutral position if it involves all prayers of any kind. Graduation is also a big moment in the lives of students of different faiths, and their families, and those people have just as many rights as others. Again, prayer of all hues can occur in any form and fashion before, some form and fashion during (silent and private), and again in any form and fashion afterwards. The ceremony itself, as a state-sponsored event, should not include imposed expressions of faith such as prayer.

If a speaker wants to include in their speech references to their particular faith as important to them in terms of accomplishing graduation, that, too, is completely acceptable. Leading the captive audience in prayer is imposition of one, single, particular faith, and if done as a “wink and nod” aspect in a state-sponsored event, is unconstitutional.

[flyboy]

[QUOTE=Lemur866]
But attending the graduation ceremony is NOT a condition for collecting a diploma. Plenty of kids graduate and get their high school diploma and don’t bother to show up for the ceremony. Participating in the ceremony is not a requirement for graduation.
[/quote]
My earlier post (#54) shows what the SCOTUS thinks about that argument–it’s not valid, at least to them. Specifically:

(d) Petitioners’ argument that the option of not attending the ceremony excuses any inducement or coercion in the ceremony itself is rejected. In this society, high school graduation is one of life’s most significant occasions, and a student is not free to absent herself from the exercise in any real sense of the term “voluntary.”

But student speeches are typical features of graduation ceremonies. If the valedictorian starts praying in the middle of her valedictory speech, what should the school officials do to stop her? Cut off her microphone and hustle her off the stage? To use the hyperbolic fantasy scenario presented earlier, are they going to arrest her for praying? Obviously they can’t do that.

Who says? This is from the principal in the Black Horse case, again from my earlier posts:

Principal Palatucci testified before the district court that any student who attempted to give an unscheduled address at graduation in contravention of administrative direction would be arrested if police were available, even if a majority of the graduating students had previously approved.

And if they do cut off student prayers, aren’t they state actors prohibiting the exercise of religion?

No, they’re state actors prohibting the state sponsorhip of religion (or, at least, the appearance thereof).

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

[QUOTE=ITR champion]
Pardon the interruption, but if the students believe that there should be a prayer at a graduation ceremony and the courts intervene to prevent that from happening, then someone is muzzling Christians and telling them they can’t practice their religion.
[/QUOTE]

“The students” do not believe that there should be a prayer. A majority of the students believe so. The Constitution exists to protect the minority.

Either you believe that the graduation ceremony is a school activity (and therefore takes place under the aegis of the government) or you don’t. If you do, there can’t be a scheduled prayer, plain and simple.

If you don’t, you can always have your own graduation ceremony with all the prayers you want. Or, just do what the socially conscious high school graduate of faith might do - pray afterward.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Principal Palatucci testified before the district court that any student who attempted to give an unscheduled address at graduation in contravention of administrative direction would be arrested if police were available, even if a majority of the graduating students had previously approved.

Actually, that doesn’t quite answer the question of what happens if the valedictorian starts praying; the valedictorian’s address presumably is scheduled.

[villa]

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
If you don’t, you can always have your own graduation ceremony with all the prayers you want. Or, just do what the socially conscious high school graduate of faith might do - pray afterward.
[/QUOTE]

But then you aren’t showing everyone how wonderfully devout you are. Nor are you shaming the heathen.

[ITR_champion]

[QUOTE=Kolga]
Wrong. Someone is telling them that they can’t practice one particular aspect of their religion in that particular setting. They can pray, in groups or alone, up to the very moment that the ceremony begins. They can pray, silently and non-disruptively, during the ceremony itself. They can begin praying, silently or aloud, alone or in groups, the moment that the ceremony ends.
[/QUOTE]

This is basically saying that students can pray as long as they don’t do it in the manner that they want it, that logic and common sense dictate, and that traditional has usually had it. I think it’s quite understandable why many students would view that as unacceptable.

[flyboy]

[QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright]
Actually, that doesn’t quite answer the question of what happens if the valedictorian starts praying; the valedictorian’s address presumably is scheduled.
[/QUOTE]
But it does give you an idea of what the reaction will be (or at least could be) to something unexpected from a speaker.