|
In a message dated 12/10/2004 1:44:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It seems to me that the only relevant question in terms of this lawsuit is whether any of those assignments are properly given by this teacher to his students, not whether they might hypothetically be okay in a different set of circumstances. I say they clearly are not. Well, why? I looked over each of these assignments and I am dumbfounded by the assertion that these assignments inculcate belief. They seem well crafted to guide a student into studying the tenets of, and learning about, important aspects of the Christian religion, and about the connection between the Christian religion and the formation and progress of this Nation.
The only way that such dogmatic rejections of the propriety of Mr. Williams' easter assignment could be justified is if no assignment involving the reading of the Easter story from the Bible may be made in a public school, if no writing assignment ever may require a student to "respond" to themes such as sacrifice, resurrection, hope, new life. I realize that I am asking persons who challenge the propriety of this assignment sheet to offer some demonstration of its unconstitutionality beyond the bare assertion of it; and I realize that such calls for proof often are charged by others as a dodge for real analysis. But I am truly perplexed. This assignment sheet does not, to my reading of it, do anything other that provide the means for a student to learn about these subjects.
Jim Henderson
Senior Counsel
ACLJ |
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
