Banned from getting diploma for mentioning Jesus?

Question

What is everyone's thoughts on this? A senior at a Denver HS mentioned to her class about getting to know Jesus during her Valedictorian speech at their graduation ceremony. She was told unless she writes some sort of apology to the school disctrict, she will not be able to receive her diploma. I understand seperation of church and state is very important, however this doesnt seem to violate, and please correct me if Im wrong. She is a student at that school and holds personal beliefs, just as every other student does. Would she be suspended from school had she mentioned Jesus in the halls inbetween classes too? Does the fact its an assembly change her free speech? The school district seems pretty secure in their assertion that she violated some sort of church/state seperation, so can anyone clue me in on what the violation might be?

Thought I would get in trouble for posting a link...ok guys start editing and tell me what you think.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295432,00.html

Her speech was 30 seconds long, I do not know if the entire 30 seconds was used up talking about Jesus, or if she added a mention of Him on the tailend of it.

Alan and SDW: so do you both believe that the fact she encouraged others to know Him as opposed to just speaking about her own experience with Jesus in a legal sense changed her free speech rights? Would it be at that point that her as a student was prothelitizing at a school function?

Answer 1

I am a Christian who thinks that schools need to be free of religion. However if she wants to thank Jesus for her accomplishments that is her right. Also I don't see anything wrong with her thanking Buddha or whoever the Pagans and Wiccans thank. It is her speech. Its not like everyone had to pray to that God or anything.

However this doesn't violate her right to free speech. The right to free speech is in the media, not the schools. Hence, no profanity is allowed in schools.

If she was telling everyone they need to get to know Jesus then she needs to understand that is inappropriate. A high school graduation ceremony is not the place to witness.

Answer 2

To me it would depend on the context, what she said and how often she said it. If it was a brief mention, like "Finding Jesus my Freshman year helped me graduate" and that was it, I wouldn't think that would be a violation. However, if she went on and on about it, making the audience uncomfortable and thinking they were at a church service instead of a graduation, then, yes, I think that would be a violation of something. I'd have to do some more research into the Colorado codes and such and get a transcript of what exactly she said in order to get a firmer answer, but frankly, I'm too tired to do that right now, so this is my gut instinct on the matter.

Always good to question everything. :) Keep it up.

Answer 3

I am a strong believer in the separation between church and state, however, I believe that even though I'm quite sure I disagree with her opinion, she, as an individual, has a right to freedom of speech. The school is wrong and I think she would win a lawsuit.

Addition -

I read the link and I still believe that since she did not work for the school she has the legal right to say whatever she wants. I also think the school has no right to read her speech before she gives it. I would feel the same way about an atheist, buddhist, muslim, jew, wiccan, or any other person saying what they believe. We are allowed to disagree with each other and we are allowed to speak our minds. She held no position of authority. She represented no organization. She only represented herself and I don't believe anyone has a right to suppress her thoughts or actions unless they threaten anyone else. If anyone was threatened by her words they are going to have a hard time living in this free society. If a representative from the school said these words I would believe that to be wrong, but, for an individual; it's OK.

Answer 4

Ok - I found the articles. Very interesting.

While I probably would not have withheld her diploma there are a couple interesting facts:

1. The students were required to give the speeches to the principle before the presentation for his approval. This student deliberately lied and gave a fake speech ahead of time that did not mention Jesus.

2. Her speech did not just thank Jesus for helping her graduate. It encouraged everybody in the audience to get to know Jesus.

Consider #2 above - if she had encouraged everybody in the audience to get to know Allah or Krishna or Buddha - what do you think the Christian Right would have said about this?

Yes, we should all have freedom of speech. But she broke the rules and what she said would probably not have been acceptable if she had picked a less "popular" god to encourage on the audience.

Answer 5

She was attempting to emulate other popular cases of late where students have defied the rules and said the lords’ prayer during their speech at graduation despite being told it was not permitted.
These kids are being used-it's all political! It's all set up by the Fundamental Christians to get the attention of moderate Christians "What I can't even mention Jesus now"?
There is a difference between having personal beliefs and using a graduation ceremony to talk about your personal relationship with Jesus and evangelize.
I think the school was right in this case.
Had I been in the audience I would have stood up and walked out.

Answer 6

You would have to be more clear about her comments to get an informed answer. You said that she "mentioned getting to know Jesus". Was this a passing comment or was her speech primarily about her relationship with Christ? Was she speaking about herself or suggesting that everyone in her class or everyone in attendance should "get to know Jesus"?

The school may be afraid that someone might accuse them of allowing proselytizing, in the assembly which could let them in for a lot of trouble.

If it was just a passing comment, which was not a main point of her speech then I doubt that the school has much of a leg to stand on.

Edit:

Fox news....hmmm...

Well according to the article it wasn't at all a passing comment but one encouraging everyone to get to know Jesus. Which is most definitely proselytizing, which is certainly not acceptable in a public school.

The article also said that she made no mention of this comment during rehearsals. Had she done so at least she would have given other students a chance to comment on her evangelism, or make suggestions of their own about getting to know their deities or religion. And the staff could have informed her to alter it so that it would not cause her a problem.

However, I doubt that the school will win this, if nothing else public opinion will be against them. I believe that they were right to be concerned though, if she has the right to proselytize, then every student there should have been given the same opportunity.

Answer 7

When she gave the speech she was representing all of the students, not just the ones who share her beliefs. That said, I'm not sure how the school should have reacted.

A link would have been helpful so we could have more information.

(Edit)
Thanks for the link.

Erica Corder was dishonest:
"When it was Corder's turn, she encouraged the audience to get to know Jesus Christ." ... "Corder had not included those remarks during rehearsals." [Excerpts from the linked article.]

Not only is religious preaching inappropriate to the occasion, and the venue, she was dishonest about it:
"The lawsuit said Brewer would not give Corder her diploma until she included a sentence saying, 'I realize that, had I asked ahead of time, I would not have been allowed to say what I did.' Corder received her diploma after complying." [Excerpt from the linked article.]

If the school had ignored what she did, it would have been tantamount to tacit approval. Aside from the constitutional issue, our schools should not encourage dishonesty. The school district did the right thing.
.

Answer 8

Actually, she probably violated a rule established by the school district. Are you insinuating that Christians should be exempt from certain rules? Would you be upset if a grad were unable to receive their diploma because of mentioning being an atheist during his or her valedictorian speech?

Answer 9

Some could only handle one pentacle , others two and some five . Even though the parable of the talents discloses a slothful and wicked one-coiner , many who could only handle one coin could get saved . Pentacles in the Tarot correspond to relationship . A one-coiner can only ' get it ' on his or her conduct being valid . A two coiner can apply the two coins on the marriage relationship . Such two coiners aren't saved automatically they must ' trade ' relative to Atonement and relationship successfully . Such then achieve to their sins ' paid for ' . A person whose abilities allowed it can relate to the concept of Politics , institutions , and even the family , of course their success also is not automatic they must ' trade ' with a view towards Atonement and a larger sphere of relationship . a politician for example has the ability to relate to the national family tree . Clearly any politician isn't automatically noble so , a number of them even though having five pentacles could fail to have their sins paid for . The Pentacles are an eternal continuum factor Jesus uses to pay for peoples sins with . The bankers are an Antichrist factor Jesus has the right to get back his Pentacle from , the interest is the one coiner saved . One coiners can find eternal nobility but to avoid sloth and connected wickedness must believe in a totally fair and square Godhead and act in accord with that belief .

Answer 10

School's gonna hurt after that one. Especially if she is delayed from getting into college because of it.

What she did may have been in poor tact, but in no way violated any law. Unless there's more to the story than what we know so far--I'd have to know exactly what she said. This is gonna cause some big waves for both sides of the debate in the near future.


Aah, that changed everything! By talking about her own faith, she would have been okay... but what she did was inappropriate for the circumstances. Not worthy of her diploma being kept away, but certainly some kind of action (I guess that withholding a diploma is the only thing that a school has left to do on graduation day).

I'm guessing that the school only acted because people complained that they were offended... I doubt that the school would have taken this kind of action on their own initiative.

I still think that she will win the lawsuit, however.