RE: The Voters Speak
The leading case is Florey v. Sioux Falls School District, 619 F2d 1311(10th Cir.(1981). Marc Stern -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:25 AM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: Re: The Voters Speak I couldnt find the article in the Dallas morning news, but a quick search (actually not so quick as the news coverage was consistently dramatic but empty of substance) shows that the issue actually came up in the context of a live Christmas Show/Pageant. In this show the school allowed a display of a Menorah and a Kwanzaa banner, it also allowed Silent Night and other carols to be sung by the children (with its various references to Christ the Savior is born etc) but it did not allow a Live Nativity Scene to be reenacted by the Children. So far as I can tell from the news coverage, there was no reenactment of the Hanukah miracle etc. Admittedly the facts are murky (anyone have the facts easily available) and the whole issue does depend on them, but I would still think the school's counsel's advice was right, having Children reenact the Nativity in a Public School audiotorium is problematic under the establishment clause. Though I dont know if there are any cases out there that say this. >>From Doug Laycock's description, the Board did not allow the nativity > scene, but permitted a Menorah and a Kwanza display. I read that to > indicate that no other Christmas display was provided as a substitute for > the nativity scene. If that is what occurred, I consider it an error of > judgement. > > I don't have a problem with the Board's decision not to allow the > nativity scene. But if the Board is going to allow what are essentially > cultural and non-religious displays to reflect the diversity of faiths > represented in the community -- I would think there are lots of ways to > recognize the various faith communities that celebrate Christmas in a > display without a nativity scene. > > Alan Brownstein > UC Davis > > >> > >> >Which part of the School District's decision was dumb? Following > advice of cousel and not allowing the nativity scene or getting rid of > the old Board? I thought that the advice counsel gave to the board would > be seen as pretty standard, and I would have given the same. >> > >> > >> >> > >> >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 ___ 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.
Re: The Voters Speak
I couldnt find the article in the Dallas morning news, but a quick search (actually not so quick as the news coverage was consistently dramatic but empty of substance) shows that the issue actually came up in the context of a live Christmas Show/Pageant. In this show the school allowed a display of a Menorah and a Kwanzaa banner, it also allowed Silent Night and other carols to be sung by the children (with its various references to Christ the Savior is born etc) but it did not allow a Live Nativity Scene to be reenacted by the Children. So far as I can tell from the news coverage, there was no reenactment of the Hanukah miracle etc. Admittedly the facts are murky (anyone have the facts easily available) and the whole issue does depend on them, but I would still think the school's counsel's advice was right, having Children reenact the Nativity in a Public School audiotorium is problematic under the establishment clause. Though I dont know if there are any cases out there that say this. >>From Doug Laycock's description, the Board did not allow the nativity > scene, but permitted a Menorah and a Kwanza display. I read that to > indicate that no other Christmas display was provided as a substitute for > the nativity scene. If that is what occurred, I consider it an error of > judgement. > > I don't have a problem with the Board's decision not to allow the > nativity scene. But if the Board is going to allow what are essentially > cultural and non-religious displays to reflect the diversity of faiths > represented in the community -- I would think there are lots of ways to > recognize the various faith communities that celebrate Christmas in a > display without a nativity scene. > > Alan Brownstein > UC Davis > > >> > >> >Which part of the School District's decision was dumb? Following > advice of cousel and not allowing the nativity scene or getting rid of > the old Board? I thought that the advice counsel gave to the board would > be seen as pretty standard, and I would have given the same. >> > >> > >> >> > >> >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 ___ 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.
Re: The Voters Speak
>From Doug Laycock's description, the Board did not allow the nativity scene, but permitted a Menorah and a Kwanza display. I read that to indicate that no other Christmas display was provided as a substitute for the nativity scene. If that is what occurred, I consider it an error of judgement. I don't have a problem with the Board's decision not to allow the nativity scene. But if the Board is going to allow what are essentially cultural and non-religious displays to reflect the diversity of faiths represented in the community -- I would think there are lots of ways to recognize the various faith communities that celebrate Christmas in a display without a nativity scene. Alan Brownstein UC Davis > > > >Which part of the School District's decision was dumb? Following advice of cousel and not allowing the nativity scene or getting rid of the old Board? I thought that the advice counsel gave to the board would be seen as pretty standard, and I would have given the same. > > > > > > > > >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. > ___ 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.
Re: The Voters Speak
Will Linden wrote: But surely this belief by "Christians" comes from the campaign of Jewish me-tooism as a response to the "December dilemna", along with performances of "Judas Maccabaeus" being mounted to compete with "The Messiah", and peddling of (Gah!) "Hanukkah bushes". All of which has now borne hideous fruit in the advent of "Chrismukkah" cards. (s) "First-degree Mischling" At 05:16 PM 12/30/04 -0800, you wrote: While it is hard not to fell badly when a community cuts off its nose to spite its face (and hurts its own children in the process), the school district's decision was pretty dumb. Many Christians believe (erroneously) that Hanukah is a Jewish holiday of serious religious significance No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/04 Which part of the School District's decision was dumb? Following advice of cousel and not allowing the nativity scene or getting rid of the old Board? I thought that the advice counsel gave to the board would be seen as pretty standard, and I would have given the same. 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.
RE: The Voters Speak
But surely this belief by "Christians" comes from the campaign of Jewish me-tooism as a response to the "December dilemna", along with performances of "Judas Maccabaeus" being mounted to compete with "The Messiah", and peddling of (Gah!) "Hanukkah bushes". All of which has now borne hideous fruit in the advent of "Chrismukkah" cards. (s) "First-degree Mischling" At 05:16 PM 12/30/04 -0800, you wrote: While it is hard not to fell badly when a community cuts off its nose to spite its face (and hurts its own children in the process), the school district's decision was pretty dumb. Many Christians believe (erroneously) that Hanukah is a Jewish holiday of serious religious significance No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.7 - Release Date: 12/30/04 ___ 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.
RE: The Voters Speak
While it is hard not to fell badly when a community cuts off its nose to spite its face (and hurts its own children in the process), the school district's decision was pretty dumb. Many Christians believe (erroneously) that Hanukah is a Jewish holiday of serious religious significance and would perceive allowing a Menorah while disallowing a nativity scene in a school to be religious discrimination. It would have made much more sense to include relatively non-religious displays celebrating all three holidays. But basic fairness is no guarantee that majority sensibilities will be placated. In the federal courthouse in Sacramento just a few weeks ago, they had a 9 or 10 foot Christmas tree in the rotunda. A Jewish lawyer asked the building administrator if they could add a 14 inch Menorah and a dreidel to the display. He agreed. But soon people were complaining about the presence of the Menorah. The adminstrator took the Menorah down and then took the tree down too. Apparently, the issue went all the way to Washington -- and both the tree and the Menorah were put back up. Alan Brownstein UC Davis > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > --_=_NextPart_001_01C4EEC8.BBFF62B3 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >The December 17 edition of the "Dallas Morning News" has a front = > page article about the Mustang, Oklahoma, school district that suffered = > a bond defeat in a local election after the superintendent, on advice of = > counsel, disallowed a Nativity scene as part of a school holiday program = > while a menorah and symbols of Kwanzaa were allowed to remain. Mustang = > is a suburb of Oklahoma City, and $10MM of the bond package was to build = > a new elementary school to ease overcrowding. > > The article makes clear that opposition to the bond package was = > intended as a protest against a ruling that many believed was a too = > narrow interpretation of First Amendment Establishment clause. > > > > --_=_NextPart_001_01C4EEC8.BBFF62B3 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > charset=3Diso-8859-1">=0A= > =0A= > =0A= > =0A= > =0A= > 6.5.7226.0">=0A= > Religion and the Schools=0A= > =0A= > =0A= > =0A= > The = > December 17 =0A= > edition of the "Dallas Morning News" has a front page article about the = > Mustang, =0A= > Oklahoma, school district that suffered a bond defeat in a local = > election after =0A= > the superintendent, on advice of counsel, disallowed a Nativity scene as = > part of =0A= > a school holiday program while a menorah and symbols of Kwanzaa were = > allowed to =0A= > remain. Mustang is a suburb of Oklahoma City, and $10MM of the = > bond =0A= > package was to build a new elementary school to ease =0A= > overcrowding. The = > article =0A= > makes clear that opposition to the bond package was intended as a = > protest =0A= > against a ruling that many believed was a too narrow interpretation of = > First =0A= > Amendment Establishment clause.=0A= > =0A= > =0A= > > --_=_NextPart_001_01C4EEC8.BBFF62B3-- > ___ 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.
