Christian Artwork Banned in High School Art Class

[Deputy Nutz]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/WI_RELIGIOUS_CENSORSHIP_WIOL-?SITE=WIMIL&SECTION=STATE&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Absolutely ridiculous in my opinion. The individual not the institution is expressing themselves. This is not a violation of the supreme courts rulings.

[LL2]

That art teacher should be fired for giving him a zero. Shouldn't a teacher show tolerance towards all religions?

[Harlan Huckleby]

well, this case is pretty ridiculous.

but if it's anything-goes with art, then artistic nativity scenes can be displayed throughout the school.

And if I'm into worshiping the vagina, well, hands off my beavers.

it does open a sticky wicket

[Deputy Nutz]

well, this case is pretty ridiculous.

but if it's anything-goes with art, then artistic nativity scenes can be displayed throughout the school.

And if I'm into worshiping the vagina, well, hands off my beavers.

it does open a sticky wicket

Nobody said anything about displaying the kids artwork in public. The teacher graded it a zero. Artwork can be private, something that the student did for a grade but doesn't have to show off to his classmates or his school.

once again Harlan your point isn't consistent.

[The Leaper]

Seems to me that this class wasn't really about creating or appreciating true art if the students have to leave their rights as an American citizens at the door of the school per their teacher.

I despise the notion of a graded art class in high schools...honestly, how does one grade artwork? I also personally believe few high school students today are mature enough to honestly grasp the significance and depth of art. Forcing them to attempt that in a mandatory class seems ridiculous.

[Harlan Huckleby]

should kids be able to create artwork that makes fun of christian symbols?

what about the kid that wants make an asshole collage? (guess that would look like the Nutz family reunion.)

don't kids display their artwork?

maybe there is a compromise that can be worked out.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Seems to me that this class wasn't really about creating or appreciating true art if the students have to leave their rights as an American citizens at the door of the school per their teacher.

So anything goes if it is art?

I generally agree. But not in public school.

[The Leaper]

I generally agree. But not in public school.

Yeah, that is why I don't like the notion of art in a public school. Art is something all people should come to appreciate...but you don't have to force it on them in high school. That is a period of time where most children are struggling to find their own identity, let alone try to attempt to interpret how someone else views the world.

Art classes should be voluntary in high school...and should be graded on a pass/fail basis. At that point, you can set the limits for decency and not infringe on everyone's perceived rights...if you don't want to deal with it, don't take the class.

[Patler]

IF, and I emphasize "IF" the facts set out in the article are correct, the pro-religion, anti-religion and agnostic groups will have a field day with this case. There is something in it for everyone!

The comment that made me chuckle was the art teacher wanting changes in the drawing, because other students were making remarks about it. What an awful thing! Art evoking thought, opinions, discussion and emotion! Artists would be appalled! People talking about a work of art? How disgusting!!!!

[Freak Out]

The lawsuit is a joke.....just more rabble rousing by a group of Christians who think their rights were trampled down by a godless school district. The rules for the class were pretty clear it sounds like any reference to a religion was not allowed in THIS CLASS. Big freaking deal...paint a landscape with a biblical billboard on your time if you want. I agree that "art" should not be graded in that situation only participation in the class should be...the student participated but just didn't follow the ground rules.

[MJZiggy]

Seems to me that this class wasn't really about creating or appreciating true art if the students have to leave their rights as an American citizens at the door of the school per their teacher.

I despise the notion of a graded art class in high schools...honestly, how does one grade artwork? I also personally believe few high school students today are mature enough to honestly grasp the significance and depth of art. Forcing them to attempt that in a mandatory class seems ridiculous.

I agree with you about grading art. I know someone who takes pictures and keeps asking me if they're good. I say "do you like them?" And that is the only criteria I set. If she likes what she sees then it's good. I think it's good for kids to be exposed to the arts. Let 'em draw whatever. Expose them to art that others have done, the work of the Masters, but don't try to hand out a grade on something that's so subjective.

I would be interested to see what the other drawings from the class looked like, recalling that the assignment was to do a landscape.

[packinpatland]

Seems to me that this class wasn't really about creating or appreciating true art if the students have to leave their rights as an American citizens at the door of the school per their teacher.

I despise the notion of a graded art class in high schools...honestly, how does one grade artwork? I also personally believe few high school students today are mature enough to honestly grasp the significance and depth of art. Forcing them to attempt that in a mandatory class seems ridiculous.

I agree with you about grading art. I know someone who takes pictures and keeps asking me if they're good. I say "do you like them?" And that is the only criteria I set. If she likes what she sees then it's good. I think it's good for kids to be exposed to the arts. Let 'em draw whatever. Expose them to art that others have done, the work of the Masters, but don't try to hand out a grade on something that's so subjective.

I would be interested to see what the other drawings from the class looked like, recalling that the assignment was to do a landscape.


You're referring to me aren't you............... :wink:

[Scott Campbell]

Let 'em draw whatever. Expose them to art that others have done, the work of the Masters, but don't try to hand out a grade on something that's so subjective.



That's solid advice, and worthy of a B+.

[MJZiggy]

Seems to me that this class wasn't really about creating or appreciating true art if the students have to leave their rights as an American citizens at the door of the school per their teacher.

I despise the notion of a graded art class in high schools...honestly, how does one grade artwork? I also personally believe few high school students today are mature enough to honestly grasp the significance and depth of art. Forcing them to attempt that in a mandatory class seems ridiculous.

I agree with you about grading art. I know someone who takes pictures and keeps asking me if they're good. I say "do you like them?" And that is the only criteria I set. If she likes what she sees then it's good. I think it's good for kids to be exposed to the arts. Let 'em draw whatever. Expose them to art that others have done, the work of the Masters, but don't try to hand out a grade on something that's so subjective.

I would be interested to see what the other drawings from the class looked like, recalling that the assignment was to do a landscape.


You're referring to me aren't you............... :wink:

No, dear, you teach me. I'm referring to my new office mate. She loves taking pictures around her house but isn't confident in whether they're any good or not. I keep telling her that if she likes them, then they're good. It's not like she's going to go off and try and get them in a gallery show or anything.

[Kiwon]

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project.

Millin showed the student a policy for the class that prohibited any violence, blood, sexual connotations or religious beliefs in artwork. The lawsuit claims Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester.

The boy tore the policy up in front of Millin, who kicked him out of class. Later that day, assistant principal Cale Jackson told the boy his religious expression infringed on other students' rights.

Jackson told the boy, his stepfather and his pastor at a meeting a week later that religious expression could be legally censored in class assignments. Millin stated at the meeting the cross in the drawing also infringed on other students' rights.

.................................................. ....................................

The joke is the hostility toward religion and free expression on the part of the teacher and assistant principal and selective enforcement of unconstitutional rules in determining that a cross, a drawing of one cross, a religious symbol seen throughout the world and inextricably intertwined with American history, somehow "infringed on other students' rights."

Again, John Q. Public has to yield to the sensibilities of John Q. Pagan.

I hope the lawsuit is successful and Mr. Jackson and Ms. Millin get to undergo "sensitivity training" and have someone remind them of American history and that Supreme Court rulings protecting speech supercede their own private hostile biases against religion.

[MJZiggy]

Well, to that topic, if a kid drawing a cross into his classroom work is infringing on other students' rights, then what about every church, temple and mosque in the country. What they saw is likely nothing different than they see in their everyday lives anyway, yet these people act like the students are somehow being violated by it? Yeesh.

[Kiwon]

Watch it, MJZ.

You just may go blind! Here is the offensive artwork:

http://www.foxnews.com/images/358697/1_61_040108_drawing.jpg

How will these high schools seniors ever survive the psychological harm from this drawing?

[Freak Out]

Watch it, MJZ.

You just may go blind! Here is the offensive artwork:

http://www.foxnews.com/images/358697/1_61_040108_drawing.jpg

How will these high schools seniors ever survive the psychological harm from this drawing?

I like it. Looks like an album cover for some bible thumping metal band.

[Oscar]

My take on this..Thinking back some 20plus years since I sat in an art class in high school.....God, (oops I used the G word lol ) who cares.. I'd say the only person who felt the need to make it an issue was the teacher.. I say what the fuck if this dude wants to draw a cross.. Or, if the next guy writes.....whatever... on his land scape thing. Chasing girls, sports, and maybe drinking beer where on my mind...Not what some dick beater who sat next to me drew a picture of... :lol: I just find it hard to believe that the students were offended.. Probably wrong... I miss the good old days.

[Oscar]

I'm thinking its on Ozzy's next disk cover... Cool drawing BTW... :)

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Seems to me that this class wasn't really about creating or appreciating true art if the students have to leave their rights as an American citizens at the door of the school per their teacher.

I despise the notion of a graded art class in high schools...honestly, how does one grade artwork? I also personally believe few high school students today are mature enough to honestly grasp the significance and depth of art. Forcing them to attempt that in a mandatory class seems ridiculous.

I agree with you about grading art. I know someone who takes pictures and keeps asking me if they're good. I say "do you like them?" And that is the only criteria I set. If she likes what she sees then it's good. I think it's good for kids to be exposed to the arts. Let 'em draw whatever. Expose them to art that others have done, the work of the Masters, but don't try to hand out a grade on something that's so subjective.

I would be interested to see what the other drawings from the class looked like, recalling that the assignment was to do a landscape.

While i agree about grading art..this isn't art in that form. This is like the basics of art, ie, figure study. This isn't some sorta picasso interpretation, most likely, of a landscape. The assignment was to draw a landscape...and most likely they are being graded on perspective, shadow, etc.

THis is no different than art classes in college. When you take a figure study class you dont' get to "interpret" the figure..the profs are looking to see that you can draw the figure accurate and get the muscalature, etc.

BTW, notice how the teacher didn't have a problem with the cross..only the verse on the cross.

This is just another christian looking to be persecuted. And, if he really had problem, why not address it when he signed up for the class and the teacher posted the requirements of attending.

And, i GUARANTEE that if a non-christian had produced a drawing of a landscape with something offensive to his christian sensibility he wouldn't be defending that student's right as an artist..and free speech. It would then be a "hate crime," etc...and that it was further proof of hostility to christians.

[Oscar]

I thought is read that the cross was an issue as well..I'll read the article again..

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I thought is read that the cross was an issue as well..I'll read the article again..

Maybe i'm wrong, but i took reference to the bible as the issue.

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project."

A cross or a building could certainly be part of a landscape, but a verse..not so much.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Watch it, MJZ.

You just may go blind! Here is the offensive artwork:

http://www.foxnews.com/images/358697/1_61_040108_drawing.jpg

How will these high schools seniors ever survive the psychological harm from this drawing?

Lets say that instead of a cross, there was a representation of a penis. And we'll go with the phallic graphic that Skinbasket had in his SIG that caused mass hysteria and censorship here at PackerRats.

Do you think the school prohibiting that graphic in an art pic would have been a big story?

The people excited about this story do not care about censorship. They are pissed-off that religion is excluded from public schools.

Maybe art class is the exception to the rule where you allow religious expression.

[Oscar]

I thought is read that the cross was an issue as well..I'll read the article again..

Maybe i'm wrong, but i took reference to the bible as the issue.

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project."

A cross or a building could certainly be part of a landscape, but a verse..not so much.

I agree with you on that Ty. I just did a cemetery landscape scene on a guitar...Looks cool.. Has a few crosses...I just can't get the fact that these young people were offended..Its one thing to try an "preach" your opinions about religion ..It's another..(to me) to draw them.. I'm sure I'm missing the point..lol :)

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I thought is read that the cross was an issue as well..I'll read the article again..

Maybe i'm wrong, but i took reference to the bible as the issue.

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project."

A cross or a building could certainly be part of a landscape, but a verse..not so much.

I agree with you on that Ty. I just did a cemetery landscape scene on a guitar...Looks cool.. Has a few crosses...I just can't get the fact that these young people were offended..Its one thing to try an "preach" your opinions about religion ..It's another..(to me) to draw them.. I'm sure I'm missing the point..lol :)

THat is exactly it. If he had merely left the crosses, that insn't preaching. He certainly could have left out a mosque, stars of david, wiccan symbols, etc. But, a verse is directly preaching. While for many of us non-christians..John 3:16 is mostly remembered for the rainbow wigged loon at sporting events...you should know that it basically says that if you don't believe in jesus you won't have eternal life. That is preaching my brother! Can i get an AMEN!!

I think from reading this article that this kid was pretty persistent in his goals of exposing the "truth" to his fellow students. And, if you are one of those kinds you are apt to get some negative feedback. I for one, was angry at my teachers a couple of times, but i never resorted to aggression nor defiance like tearing up a a school policy in front of the teacher. Does that sound like a mellow, jesus freak to you?

My guess is that the kids were long tired of his antics and saw this as chance to nail him according to the "law."

I say good for them.

[Harlan Huckleby]

If I were the kid, I would show up at art class dressed as Jesus. A real crown of thorns. A cross, if i could get it in. A real blood trickle. Tell the instructor that it's a performance piece, and he should back off.

[Oscar]

I thought is read that the cross was an issue as well..I'll read the article again..

Maybe i'm wrong, but i took reference to the bible as the issue.

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project."

A cross or a building could certainly be part of a landscape, but a verse..not so much.

I agree with you on that Ty. I just did a cemetery landscape scene on a guitar...Looks cool.. Has a few crosses...I just can't get the fact that these young people were offended..Its one thing to try an "preach" your opinions about religion ..It's another..(to me) to draw them.. I'm sure I'm missing the point..lol :)

THat is exactly it. If he had merely left the crosses, that insn't preaching. He certainly could have left out a mosque, stars of david, wiccan symbols, etc. But, a verse is directly preaching. While for many of us non-christians..John 3:16 is mostly remembered for the rainbow wigged loon at sporting events...you should know that it basically says that if you don't believe in jesus you won't have eternal life. That is preaching my brother! Can i get an AMEN!!

I think from reading this article that this kid was pretty persistent in his goals of exposing the "truth" to his fellow students. And, if you are one of those kinds you are apt to get some negative feedback. I for one, was angry at my teachers a couple of times, but i never resorted to aggression nor defiance like tearing up a a school policy in front of the teacher. Does that sound like a mellow, jesus freak to you?

My guess is that the kids were long tired of his antics and saw this as chance to nail him according to the "law."

I say good for them.

I have no interest in arguing. My only point was that I couldn't understand why the others gave a shit what the kid drew.. By your example you give those the right to lash out out at the kids that wear black and have piercings. Because there tired of there antics?? I just don't see a drawing as that big a deal.. I also see no need in continuing here. Game, Set, Match my friend..You win.. :lol:

[BallHawk]

If I were the kid, I would show up at art class dressed as Jesus. A real crown of thorns. A cross, if i could get it in. A real blood trickle. Tell the instructor that it's a performance piece, and he should back off.

If he actually did that I think the classmates could assist with the blood trickle...

But, honestly, there's two sides to the story. I can see both sides, though I'd be more willing to side with the teacher.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I thought is read that the cross was an issue as well..I'll read the article again..

Maybe i'm wrong, but i took reference to the bible as the issue.

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project."

A cross or a building could certainly be part of a landscape, but a verse..not so much.

I agree with you on that Ty. I just did a cemetery landscape scene on a guitar...Looks cool.. Has a few crosses...I just can't get the fact that these young people were offended..Its one thing to try an "preach" your opinions about religion ..It's another..(to me) to draw them.. I'm sure I'm missing the point..lol :)

THat is exactly it. If he had merely left the crosses, that insn't preaching. He certainly could have left out a mosque, stars of david, wiccan symbols, etc. But, a verse is directly preaching. While for many of us non-christians..John 3:16 is mostly remembered for the rainbow wigged loon at sporting events...you should know that it basically says that if you don't believe in jesus you won't have eternal life. That is preaching my brother! Can i get an AMEN!!

I think from reading this article that this kid was pretty persistent in his goals of exposing the "truth" to his fellow students. And, if you are one of those kinds you are apt to get some negative feedback. I for one, was angry at my teachers a couple of times, but i never resorted to aggression nor defiance like tearing up a a school policy in front of the teacher. Does that sound like a mellow, jesus freak to you?

My guess is that the kids were long tired of his antics and saw this as chance to nail him according to the "law."

I say good for them.

I have no interest in arguing. My only point was that I couldn't understand why the others gave a shit what the kid drew.. By your example you give those the right to lash out out at the kids that wear black and have piercings. Because there tired of there antics?? I just don't see a drawing as that big a deal.. I also see no need in continuing here. Game, Set, Match my friend..You win.. :lol:

I think you are misunderstanding. I'm not arguing, merely giving you an explanation as to the "why" the kids would care.

While it may not be a big deal...my guess, as I stated before, is that this kid has long been pushing his agenda (no different than any other person pushing an agenda) and the kids were tired of it. Once they saw an opportunity to put him in his place..they took it. That is what smart, smart alecky, independent, artsy kids do.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

If I were the kid, I would show up at art class dressed as Jesus. A real crown of thorns. A cross, if i could get it in. A real blood trickle. Tell the instructor that it's a performance piece, and he should back off.

If he actually did that I think the classmates could assist with the blood trickle...

But, honestly, there's two sides to the story. I can see both sides, though I'd be more willing to side with the teacher.

I agree. There are two sides to every argument.

The only thing that blows my mind is a student tearing up a school policy in front of the teacher. That shows no respect and i thought part of christianity..if not most religions is respecting authority/adults.

I can tell you this...my parents woulda respected Tyrone's spirit, but woulda tanned his hide for acting that juvenile.

[Deputy Nutz]

Watch it, MJZ.

You just may go blind! Here is the offensive artwork:

http://www.foxnews.com/images/358697/1_61_040108_drawing.jpg

How will these high schools seniors ever survive the psychological harm from this drawing?

Lets say that instead of a cross, there was a representation of a penis. And we'll go with the phallic graphic that Skinbasket had in his SIG that caused mass hysteria and censorship here at PackerRats.

Do you think the school prohibiting that graphic in an art pic would have been a big story?

The people excited about this story do not care about censorship. They are pissed-off that religion is excluded from public schools.

Maybe art class is the exception to the rule where you allow religious expression.

Actually the reason that I am pissed off is not because of religion being excluded from public schools. My problem is that school administrators, school boards, and teachers have know idea how to interpret some pretty simple rulings by the supreme court.

From the constitution, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion". This is known as the establishment clause.

I am sorry, maybe I haven't read all the rulings of the past 50 years or so about religion in public schools by the supreme court, but I couldn't find any rulings that prohibited students from expressing their religion or praying in school on an individual basis.

Here are some rulings that I read that might help shine some light on the subject one way or another.

(Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe) June 19th, 2000 Supreme Court Ruling
http://usgovinfo.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://caselaw.findlaw.com/cgi%2Dbin/getcase.pl%3Fcourt=US%26amp%3Bnavby=case%26amp%3Bv ol=000%26amp%3Binvol=99%2D62
Prior to 1995, a student elected as Santa Fe High School's student council chaplain delivered a prayer over the public address system before each home varsity football game. Respondents, Mormon and Catholic students or alumni and their mothers, filed a suit challenging this practice and others under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. While the suit was pending, petitioner school district (District) adopted a different policy, which authorizes two student elections, the first to determine whether "invocations" should be delivered at games, and the second to select the spokesperson to deliver them. After the students held elections authorizing such prayers and selecting a spokesperson, the District Court entered an order modifying the policy to permit only nonsectarian, nonproselytizing prayer. The Fifth Circuit held that, even as modified by the District Court, the football prayer policy was invalid.


Held: The District's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violates the Establishment Clause. Pp. 9-26.


This was the ruling that deemed prayer before high school football games as unconstitutional.

WESTSIDE COMMUNITY BD. OF ED. v. MERGENS June 4th 1990 Supreme Court Ruling
http://usgovinfo.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://caselaw.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl%3Fcourt=US%26amp%3Bvol=496%26amp%3Binvo l=226
Westside High School, a public secondary school that receives federal financial assistance, permits its students to join, on a voluntary basis, a number of recognized groups and clubs, all of which meet after school hours on school premises. Citing the Establishment Clause and a School Board policy requiring clubs to have faculty sponsorship, petitioner school officials denied the request of respondent Mergens for permission to form a Christian club that would have the same privileges and meet on the same terms and conditions as other Westside student groups, except that it would have no faculty sponsor. After the Board voted to uphold the denial, respondents, current and former Westside students, brought suit seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. They alleged, inter alia, that the refusal to permit the proposed club to meet at Westside violated the Equal Access Act, which prohibits public secondary schools that receive federal assistance and that maintain a "limited open forum" from denying "equal access" to students who wish to meet within the forum on the basis of the "religious, political, philosophical, or other content" of the speech at such meetings. In reversing the District Court's entry of judgment for petitioners, the Court of Appeals held that the Act applied to forbid discrimination against respondents' proposed club on the basis of its religious content, and that the Act did not violate the Establishment Clause.


I admit I didn't put hours into this research, and I am not claiming that I am a expert on this stuff, but I beg any of you to please point out where he violated any of the Supreme Court's ruling on Religion in Public School?

Here are some key Court Rulings
http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa070100a.htm#when

The 1962 Court's interpretation of the Establishment Clause ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,") in Engle v. Vitale has since been upheld by both liberal and conservative Supreme Courts in six additional cases:

1963 -- ABINGTON SCHOOL DIST. v. SCHEMPP -- banned school-directed recital of the Lord's Prayer and reading of Bible passages as part of "devotional exercises" in public schools.
1980 -- STONE v. GRAHAM -- banned the posting of the the Ten Commandments on public school classroom walls.
1985 -- WALLACE v. JAFFREE -- banned observance of "daily moments of silence" from public schools when students were encouraged to pray during the silent periods.
1990 -- WESTSIDE COMMUNITY BD. OF ED. v. MERGENS -- held that schools must allow student prayer groups to organize and worship if other non-religious clubs are also permitted to meet on school property.
1992 -- LEE v. WEISMAN -- outlawed prayers led by members of the clergy at public school graduation ceremonies.
2000 -- SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT v. DOE -- banned student-led pre-game prayers at public high school football games.

[Deputy Nutz]

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project.

Millin showed the student a policy for the class that prohibited any violence, blood, sexual connotations or religious beliefs in artwork. The lawsuit claims Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester.

Funny I didn't know a teacher had the authority to do this. In fact I think this might be impossible to do, at least to a minor, did the kids parents sign this? Did the families lawyer read it before it was signed?

The boy tore the policy up in front of Millin, who kicked him out of class. Later that day, assistant principal Cale Jackson told the boy his religious expression infringed on other students' rights.


I didn't realize that boy must have took his painting and marched up and down the hallways of his school pushing it into the face of all his classmates. The bottom line nobody had to see the artwork besides the student and the teacher. He doesn't have the right for his work to be displayed in the school for the public eye to view.

Jackson told the boy, his stepfather and his pastor at a meeting a week later that religious expression could be legally censored in class assignments. Millin stated at the meeting the cross in the drawing also infringed on other students' rights.

This is where it is debatable, how in fact did it infringe on others rights Outside of the other students making fun of the artwork and the student, and the teacher's reaction to the work? If the boy began preaching to others in the class, specifically about the print, then yes, his religious behavior then became disruptive to the classroom. The argument over the acceptablenesses of the work was can not be associated with the actual religious message disrupting the classroom. Freedom of expression, first amendment rights about the student's cross might be infringed by the school and Millin.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I am sorry, maybe I haven't read all the rulings of the past 50 years or so about religion in public schools by the supreme court, but I couldn't find any rulings that prohibited students from expressing their religion or praying in school on an individual basis.

OK, but then you get into the gray areas. What if kids want to form a prayer club. Are they allowed to put up anouncements for it?

Or the artwork. Can the kid display religious art work in class? That seems kind of inevitable. And even stickier, what about religious images in art that might be sacrilegious to some students?

I agree that the teacher should have not taken any action in this case. But I do see why the school has the position that they have to keep religion out of the schools completely, because there are all these slippery slopes.

[Scott Campbell]

What if kids want to form a prayer club.



Then I imagine the polar ice caps will melt and life on this planet will cease to exist. :roll:

[Tyrone Bigguns]

"His teacher, Julie Millin, asked him to remove the reference to the Bible, saying students were making remarks about it. He refused, and she gave him a zero on the project.

Millin showed the student a policy for the class that prohibited any violence, blood, sexual connotations or religious beliefs in artwork. The lawsuit claims Millin told the boy he had signed away his constitutional rights when he signed the policy at the beginning of the semester.

Funny I didn't know a teacher had the authority to do this. In fact I think this might be impossible to do, at least to a minor, did the kids parents sign this? Did the families lawyer read it before it was signed?

The boy tore the policy up in front of Millin, who kicked him out of class. Later that day, assistant principal Cale Jackson told the boy his religious expression infringed on other students' rights.


I didn't realize that boy must have took his painting and marched up and down the hallways of his school pushing it into the face of all his classmates. The bottom line nobody had to see the artwork besides the student and the teacher. He doesn't have the right for his work to be displayed in the school for the public eye to view.

Jackson told the boy, his stepfather and his pastor at a meeting a week later that religious expression could be legally censored in class assignments. Millin stated at the meeting the cross in the drawing also infringed on other students' rights.

This is where it is debatable, how in fact did it infringe on others rights Outside of the other students making fun of the artwork and the student, and the teacher's reaction to the work? If the boy began preaching to others in the class, specifically about the print, then yes, his religious behavior then became disruptive to the classroom. The argument over the acceptablenesses of the work was can not be associated with the actual religious message disrupting the classroom. Freedom of expression, first amendment rights about the student's cross might be infringed by the school and Millin.

1. Just because you don't know doesn't make it not so. Schools have long had the right to censor. They do it all the time with school papers. Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier. I don't see how this is much different.

Furthermore our good friend Mr. Scalia said "The First Amendment (search) has not repealed the ancient rule of life, that he who pays the piper calls the tune."

The justice, who limited his discussion to art issues, said he wasn't suggesting that government stop funding the arts, but that if it does fund artwork, it is entitled to have a say in the content, just like when it runs a school system.

This sort of thing happens all the time..yet i rarely hear anyone say anything about it when it doesn't effect the religious right. Where was the outcry when bill nevins lost his job because he didn't censor his student's poetry..poetry that critized the war and No Child Left behind.

And, children at school do not enjoy the same civil rights...ie, your locker can be searched at any time.

2. You are making huge leaps without any basis. I highly doubt that he painted this work behind a curtain. I highly doubt that he didn't want to to show his work..and like most art classes...you SHOW you work. Art is for consumption.

3. Placing a reference to a verse..he is preaching.

You've seen the painting. Just explain how the verse is any way, shape, or form part of landscape.

[Harlan Huckleby]

What if kids want to form a prayer club.
Then I imagine the polar ice caps will melt and life on this planet will cease to exist. :roll:

try and have a serious discussion and it gets reduced to distorting the arguments of the other side.

You're a bad man. Very bad man.

[Scott Campbell]

For those that don't understand why Utah is like living in a different country.



Religious education programs designed for secondary students are called “seminaries." In areas with large concentrations of Latter-day Saints such as Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming in the United States, and in some places in Alberta, Canada, instruction is offered on a released time basis during the normal school day in meetinghouses, or facilities built specifically for seminary programs, adjacent to public schools. Released-time seminary classes are generally taught by full-time employees. In areas with smaller LDS populations early-morning or home-study seminary programs are offered. Early-morning seminary classes are held daily before the normal school day in private homes or in meetinghouses and are taught by volunteer teachers. Home-study seminary classes are offered where geographic dispersion of students is so great that it is not feasible to meet on a daily basis. Home study seminary students study daily, but meet only once a week as a class. Home study classes are usually held in connection with weekly youth fellowship activities on a weekday evening.

The first seminary was established in 1912 adjacent to Granite High School in Salt Lake City, Utah, under the supervision of Joseph F. Merrill.(View Image) Thomas J. Yates was the first seminary teacher.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

For those that don't understand why Utah is like living in a different country.



Religious education programs designed for secondary students are called “seminaries." In areas with large concentrations of Latter-day Saints such as Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming in the United States, and in some places in Alberta, Canada, instruction is offered on a released time basis during the normal school day in meetinghouses, or facilities built specifically for seminary programs, adjacent to public schools. Released-time seminary classes are generally taught by full-time employees. In areas with smaller LDS populations early-morning or home-study seminary programs are offered. Early-morning seminary classes are held daily before the normal school day in private homes or in meetinghouses and are taught by volunteer teachers. Home-study seminary classes are offered where geographic dispersion of students is so great that it is not feasible to meet on a daily basis. Home study seminary students study daily, but meet only once a week as a class. Home study classes are usually held in connection with weekly youth fellowship activities on a weekday evening.

The first seminary was established in 1912 adjacent to Granite High School in Salt Lake City, Utah, under the supervision of Joseph F. Merrill.(View Image) Thomas J. Yates was the first seminary teacher.

That sounds good.

Scott, i know people joke, but are you LDS?

Obviously, living in the greater phoenix area I have worked with a number.

[Scott Campbell]

What if kids want to form a prayer club.
Then I imagine the polar ice caps will melt and life on this planet will cease to exist. :roll:

try and have a serious discussion and it gets reduced to distorting the arguments of the other side.


I was making a serious point. I don't want a bunch of bureaucratic policy wonks like you wasting taxpayers dollars and micromanaging every facet of my life in order to achieve your vision of the utopian society.

[Scott Campbell]

Scott, i know people joke, but are you LDS?


Uhhh, no. Usually the beer gives me away.

[BallHawk]

OK, but then you get into the gray areas. What if kids want to form a prayer club. Are they allowed to put up anouncements for it?

There are things like that all over the school. All schools in this area run FCA (Fellowship of Christian Athletes.) People won't care if you don't shove the issue in their face.

Now, there are tons of double-standards in the school system because Christianity is the dominant religion in this country. What if a kid drew the crescent and star on his paper and quoted the Qur'an? There'd be mass outrage, few people would be flocking to his side.

[Deputy Nutz]

I am sorry, maybe I haven't read all the rulings of the past 50 years or so about religion in public schools by the supreme court, but I couldn't find any rulings that prohibited students from expressing their religion or praying in school on an individual basis.

OK, but then you get into the gray areas. What if kids want to form a prayer club. Are they allowed to put up anouncements for it?

Or the artwork. Can the kid display religious art work in class? That seems kind of inevitable. And even stickier, what about religious images in art that might be sacrilegious to some students?

I agree that the teacher should have not taken any action in this case. But I do see why the school has the position that they have to keep religion out of the schools completely, because there are all these slippery slopes.

Here you go, this is taken from the same web address

But, you can still pray
Through their rulings, the court has also defined some times and conditions under which public school students may pray, or otherwise practice a religion.

"at any time before, during or after the school-day," as long as your prayers do not interfere with other students.
In meetings of organized prayer or worship groups, either informally or as a formal school organization -- IF -- other student clubs are also allowed at the school.
Before eating a meal at school -- as long as the prayer does not disturb other students.
In some states, student-led prayers or invocations are still delivered at graduations due to lower court rulings. However, the Supreme Court's ruling of June 19, 2000 may bring this practice to an end.
Some states provide for a daily "moment of silence" to be observed as long as students are not encouraged to "pray" during the silent period

I rarely defend the religious right. In fact the religious right might be the reason why I choose to vote against the republic party, but anyways, the issue is with the local governments and school boards and their ability to recognize balance and equal treatment.

Tyrone, you are arguing that the verse on the Landscape is what is at issue, you consider the written verse as preaching, that this reference to the verse, not the actual verse itself is infringing on other students. Again, I say we have now turned into a very nit picky nation of easily offended people if a painting done by a high school student infringes on others rights.

[Harlan Huckleby]

ya, I get that. the question is the extent that they can PROMOTE their prayer group.

[Deputy Nutz]

ya, I get that. the question is the extent that they can PROMOTE their prayer group.

They have the same rights to promote their after school group as any other non commitment activity taking place after school. Most likely privately funded flyers by the students of the group. It can not be sponsored by a church and a religious figure such a priest or a pastor is not allowed to mediate the group.

I middle school in the Waukesha area actually rents out their gym to a church every Sunday. Is long as they would be willing to do the same for all groups it is legal.

[MJZiggy]

For those that don't understand why Utah is like living in a different country.



Religious education programs designed for secondary students are called “seminaries." In areas with large concentrations of Latter-day Saints such as Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming in the United States, and in some places in Alberta, Canada, instruction is offered on a released time basis during the normal school day in meetinghouses, or facilities built specifically for seminary programs, adjacent to public schools. Released-time seminary classes are generally taught by full-time employees. In areas with smaller LDS populations early-morning or home-study seminary programs are offered. Early-morning seminary classes are held daily before the normal school day in private homes or in meetinghouses and are taught by volunteer teachers. Home-study seminary classes are offered where geographic dispersion of students is so great that it is not feasible to meet on a daily basis. Home study seminary students study daily, but meet only once a week as a class. Home study classes are usually held in connection with weekly youth fellowship activities on a weekday evening.

The first seminary was established in 1912 adjacent to Granite High School in Salt Lake City, Utah, under the supervision of Joseph F. Merrill.(View Image) Thomas J. Yates was the first seminary teacher.

My sister in law taught one of these and probably still does. Five a.m.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Scott, i know people joke, but are you LDS?


Uhhh, no. Usually the beer gives me away.

Are you LD?

[Harlan Huckleby]

They have the same rights to promote their after school group as any other non commitment activity taking place after school.

I can see some potential problems with this. Although judged case by case.

Hari, hari, Krishna krishna, krishna, hari krishna, hari krishna.

I don't think schools should be recruiting grounds for religion.

[BallHawk]

Man, you should of seen the kick in Edgar Allen Poe.

[Harlan Huckleby]

they must have a lot of oldies stations down there for the retirees

[Iron Mike]

That kid should just draw some Veggie Tales, 'cuz Veggie Tales are KEWL!!!!

http://static.flickr.com/91/252898770_e5844f889e_o.jpg

[Scott Campbell]

Scott, i know people joke, but are you LDS?


Uhhh, no. Usually the beer gives me away.

Are you LD?


I had VD once.

[Iron Mike]

Scott, i know people joke, but are you LDS?


Uhhh, no. Usually the beer gives me away.

Are you LD?

OK, are you ADD or OCD??? 8-)

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm Bi-curious. That means i'd like to try sleeping with two women, right?

[Scott Campbell]

Scott, i know people joke, but are you LDS?


Uhhh, no. Usually the beer gives me away.

Are you LD?

OK, are you ADD?


That's a excellent question. I'm probably closer to......HEY, THERE GOES A SQUIRREL..........what were we talking about again?

[SkinBasket]

I'm Bi-curious. That means i'd like to try sleeping with two women, right?

Your mom and the "vagina" you make out of the crook of your elbow don't count, so I think you'll have to remain forever curious.

[Freak Out]

...and the "vagina" you make out of the crook of your elbow don't count, so I think you'll have to remain forever curious.

Never tried that one.