Thread: Religious Senior Once Censored Sings Religious Song.

One of the mistaken impressions of the ACLU is that students may not sing religious songs or pray or make religious statements in their graduation speeches.

I am pleased to announce that students may do all the above at public school graduations, and the law and the constitution back them up.

Here is an example of how a non-profit law firm prevailed for student free speech.

May 26, 2006

News Release

Senior Once Censored Sings Religious Song At Graduation


Laporte, MN - Today during practice for graduation this evening, school officials at Laporte High School told students, Aaron Reimer and Victoria Raddatz, they could not sing a duet because of the song's religious content. After Liberty Counsel intervened on behalf of the students, school officials reversed their position and allowed the students to sing.

Laporte High School is a small school, with approximately 30 graduating seniors. A student-led committee working on a portion of the graduation ceremony invited Aaron and Victoria to sing a song. The song they chose is "Treasure of Jesus" by Steven Curtis Chapman, a widely known Christian musician. School officials allowed the seniors to put together a portion of the graduation, which also included, among other things, a student slide show. However, while the students were practicing for graduation Friday morning, school officials learned for the first time that some students intended to sing a Christian song. The students were told they could not sing the song because it is religious viewpoint. The students and their parents then contacted Liberty Counsel.

In a demand letter issued late this afternoon, Liberty Counsel advised school authorities that it could permit the students to sing the song and further advised that Liberty Counsel was prepared to offer free legal assistance. On the other hand, the letter also stated that if school authorities censored the religious viewpoint of the song, such action would violate the First Amendment rights of the students. The choice of the song was solely that of the students. The school did not direct that the song be sung and was unaware of its content until today's rehearsal. When the selection of what to say or sing is solely the independent decision of students, then the school does not violate the Establishment Clause by permitting the message. But the school does violate the Free Speech Clause when officials censor the message because of its religious viewpoint. After negotiating with school officials for almost three hours, explaining the law, and warning of the impending suit if the song was censored, school officials reversed their position and allowed the students to sing the song.

Anita Staver, President of Liberty Counsel, stated: "Students have the right to include religious viewpoints during their graduation speeches. It is inappropriate for a school to censor religious viewpoints from a student's personal graduation message, or in this case, a particular song. It is insensitive and unconstitutional to silence student-initiated musical performances."

Mathew D. Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel, commented: "Religious speech is fully protected by the First Amendment. When school officials intentionally censor a student's message or song because of its religious viewpoint, they cross the line. Thinking they are doing the right thing, school officials who censor religious viewpoints end up offending the Constitution."

As part of its Friend or Foe Graduation Prayer Campaign, Liberty Counsel has a legal memo available at LC.org (in pdf format) which addresses the law regarding graduation prayer.

Want more information? I recommend lc.org and aclj.org for starters. They are a wealth of useful information about the free speech rights and religious rights of school teachers and school students.

Funny, the only reference to the ACLU is yours.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Funny, the only reference to the ACLU is yours.

Are you admitting the ACLU is wrong, but this article omits that fact?

Or are you implying wrongly that the ACLU has always been in favor of free speech including religious free speech?

The ACLU would still be burning books that contain any mention of God or prayer and censoring religious comments by students if it were not for the skilled and talented Christian and Jewish lawyers at groups like the American Center for Law and Justice aclj.org or the Alliance Defense Fund or lc.org.

As long as they don't sing off-key who gives a toss?

As long as they don't sing off-key who gives a toss?

Originally Posted by Diuretic

As long as they don't sing off-key who gives a toss?

HeHe Well stated, Aussie!

Originally Posted by t714zu

Are you admitting the ACLU is wrong, but this article omits that fact?

Or are you implying wrongly that the ACLU has always been in favor of free speech including religious free speech?

The ACLU would still be burning books that contain any mention of God or prayer and censoring religious comments by students if it were not for the skilled and talented Christian and Jewish lawyers at groups like the American Center for Law and Justice aclj.org or the Alliance Defense Fund or lc.org.

I'm not admitting anything. You bring up the ACLU in your "commentary," yet theres nothing in your copied article about the ACLU.

Oh, and I'd appreciate it if you could provide a link (unbiased) demonstrating that the ACLU burned books.

Originally Posted by pramjockey

I'm not admitting anything. You bring up the ACLU in your "commentary," yet theres nothing in your copied article about the ACLU.

Oh, and I'd appreciate it if you could provide a link (unbiased) demonstrating that the ACLU burned books.

HeHe

Quite right! The ACLU doesn't burn books; the ACLU just keeps them unpublished, unread, and censored. Same effect though, which is why I posted 'book burning'.

The real censors now are liberals. They fear ideas and logic.

Originally Posted by t714zu

HeHe

Quite right! The ACLU doesn't burn books; the ACLU just keeps them unpublished, unread, and censored. Same effect though, which is why I posted 'book burning'.

The real censors now are liberals. They fear ideas and logic.

Point me at the evidence, please.

Yes, I would find that interesting to see what books the ACLU recommends banning or even "challenging".