Good points, Brad. The 1A is concerned about state endorsements of religion, but it is also concerned when persons are made part of a captive audience for speech that offends them. If a commencement audience is a captive audience, it is captive not just for religious speech as in Weisman, but also for secular speech.
Rick Duncan
Brad M Pardee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A couple of thoughts.
First, although a case can be made that the establishment prohibition prevents the school from directing a person to give a religious address, I was always under the impression that a commencement speaker is representing their own views, not those of the school. For example, if the person speaks out against the war in Iraq, it would not be understood as the school district endorsing their views of the war, so there shouldn't be an establishment violation if the person references religion, which should similarly not be understood as the views of the school district.
Second, Marc's post that I was responding to referred to "the objection and offense felt by person entitled to attend the ceremonies of which he writes but who object to speakers using the! m as an occasion to promote their religious beliefs". He didn't refer to an establishment violation but rather "objection and offense". My observation was that people attending commencement ceremonies are going to hear things to which they object or take offense, yet nobody has suggested that objection or offense is a basis for censoring any viewpoints other than religious ones.
Brad
Steven Jamar wrote on 09/02/2005 09:55:59 AM:
> On Sep 2, 2005, at 10:39 AM, Brad M Pardee wrote:
>
> > It seems to me, though, that there are going to be people who object
> > to the views of any commencement speaker who goes beyond Hallmark
> > greeting card platitudes. The person who strongly supports the war
> > in Iraq isn't likely to appreciate a speaker along the lines of a
> > Michael Moore. The person who s! trongly opposes the war in Iraq
> > isn't likely ot appreciate a speaker along the lines of President
> > Bush. Most commencement addresses that have any substance to them
> > in addressing contemporary issues are going to go against the views
> > of a measurable portion of those entitled to attend. Why is it that
> > only religious beliefs have to be censored to avoid objection and offense?
>
>
> Maybe its because of the special status of religion in the
> constitution -- i.e., the prohibition of establishment?
>
> Steve
_______________________________________________
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!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.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.
