A possible argument for having release time only for religious programs is that parents who wish to have religious values taught to their children are just about the only ones who cannot seek to have the public schools inculcate their chosen values. Those who wish to have environmental values, healthy lifestyle values, multicultural values, or patriotic values can seek to have their values taught by the school.
The Establishment Clause prohibits schools from inculcating religious values not because those values are unimportant or disfavored or damaging, but because such inculcation is to be left to parents and private organizations, who are guaranteed the right freely to exercise religion. Where the school steps out of the way to allow parents to have such inculcation done by private groups, both the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses are honored. Mark S. Scarberry Pepperdine University School of Law -----Original Message----- From: Lupu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 10:50 AM To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics Subject: RE: 21st Century Zorach Released time has several problems in addition to trapping the left- behind students in a dead hour (Rick, high schoolers may have study halls, but 2nd graders usually don't, so this is a sham argument): 1. Why is released time only for religious studies? Why shouldn't it be for any activity of educational or civic value (Scouts, chess, or music lessons away from school, etc.)? I have never heard a good argument for religion-only released time. 2. Why should the school be releasing time from its curriculum in the first place? If school is longer than need be, shorten it. If parents want religious education for their children, why not send them for it before or after school? 3. In communities in which the vast majority of children go to Bible study during release time, there is pressure on other children to conform and ask parental permission to go too. (Someone wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post in the past week or so, describing this exact situation as part of her childhood.) Conformity pressures are always present among children, of course, but here (as in Engel), the school is creating the context in which conformity pressures are highlighted. Being "left behind" in class is a more visible nonconformity than going off on one's own after school. (In my grade school days, the only children who left my public school for release time were Catholic; there weren't many, and the program spotlighted them as in a religious minority in the public school and as too poor to attend Catholic school as most of their fellow Catholics did.) Chip Lupu On 18 Feb 2005 at 10:13, Rick Duncan wrote: Forwarded by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Forwarded to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date forwarded: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:00:39 EST/EDT Date sent: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:13:30 -0800 (PST) From: Rick Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> Subject: RE: 21st Century Zorach Send reply to: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu> <mailto:religionlaw- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> <mailto:religionlaw- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > But isn't a study hall something constructive? Public > schools have study halls all the time, and they count > toward the mandatory school attendance requirement. > No? > > I thought the point that someone, maybe Doug, made was > that parents are coerced into granting their consent > for released time unless the school provides some > meaningful activity for those who remain on campus. I > doubt if very many parents would choose an off-campus > religious program they oppose over a supervised study > hall for children who remain on campus. > > Now, if children not participating in the release time > program were required to clean the school's toilets or > wash and wax its floors, we would have some coercion > to talk about. But a study hall seems to me both a > legitimate and a meaningful alternative to > participation in the released time program. Study is > good. Children need to do more of it. > > And, if I were putting the program together, I would > also allow any parent who objected to the study hall > to request that his or her child be released into his > or her custody during the released time period. This > would ensure that no one need remain on campus during > the released time period. Spending time with parents > is good. Children need to do more of it. > > Rick Duncan > > > > --- Marc Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Marty's point as I understand it is not that > > students choosing to > > participate in released time programs are coerced to > > believe. It is that > > students who do not participate confront school > > mandated boredom are > > being punished for not participating in released > > time programs. Until > > the second circuit decision, I had taken it is > > settled that schools had > > to do something constructive with those who chose to > > remain behind. > > Marc Stern > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Rick Duncan > > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 12:19 PM > > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics > > Subject: RE: 21st Century Zorach > > > > It seems to me that if there is a problem with > > modern > > "released time" programs, the problem is not with > > the > > releasing of students whose parents request a > > release, > > but rather in not providing something to do for the > > kids whose parents don't wish them to be released. > > > > I don't know the facts of the cases Marty mentions. > > It > > seems to me that the school must do *something* with > > the kids who stay behind. Even a supervised study > > hall, in which students have an opportunity to work > > on > > their homework assignments or to study for tests and > > quizzes, is something. It would probably be even > > better if the school provided some kind of > > activity--say, art or multicultural > > appreciation--for > > the students who stay on campus during the released > > time period. > > > > Mandatory attendence laws and the public school > > monopoly over public funding of education do indeed > > impose a substantial burden on families who wish > > their > > children to be exposed to more diversity of thought > > and opinion than they receive in the secular public > > schools. The released time program permits children > > to > > be exposed to another way of looking at the world; > > it > > provides them an opportunity to choose to visit a > > spiritual oasis in what is otherwise a secular > > intellectual desert. > > > > Since children are released only if their parents > > consent and request release, as in Good News there > > is > > no state-imposed coercion imposed on children who > > participate in the program. > > > > I don't see a problem under the EC. Indeed, how can > > it > > be an establishment of religion for the state merely > > to release children, upon the request of their > > parents, from state custody. > > > > Suppose the program were amended to allow children > > who > > do not wish to be part of an organized released time > > program to be released instead into the custody of > > their parents for that hour? Shouldn't that take > > care > > of any objection about leaving some children behind? > > > > Rick Duncan > > University of Nebraska College of Law > > Red State Lawblog: www.redstatelaw.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > Rick Duncan > > Welpton Professor of Law > > University of Nebraska College of Law > > Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > > > > "When the Round Table is broken every man must > > follow either Galahad or > > Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand > > Miracle > > > > "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, > > briefed, debriefed, or > > numbered." --The Prisoner > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > All your favorites on one personal page - Try My > > Yahoo! > > http://my.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > > 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. > > _______________________________________________ > > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > > 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. > > > > > ===== > Rick Duncan > Welpton Professor of Law > University of Nebraska College of Law > Lincoln, NE 68583-0902 > > "When the Round Table is broken every man must follow either Galahad > or Mordred: middle things are gone." C.S.Lewis, Grand Miracle > > "I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or > numbered." --The Prisoner > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > 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. > Ira C. ("Chip") Lupu F. Elwood & Eleanor Davis Professor of Law The George Washington University Law School 2000 H St., NW Washington D.C 20052 (202) 994-7053 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu 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. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu 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.
