Valedictorian's speech cut short by school district because she mentioned God...

[discernment]

The schools fueled by the ACLU have butchered the whole church/state issue long ago to the point where the schools have gone overboard. Just look at how they handle Christmas programs. The framers of the Constitution surely did not have this in mind.

Another case of incrementalism.

 

[Sandy V.]

I'm with ducklite on the action that took place.

We just had a thread a few weeks ago over the 6 or 7 valedictorians with a shared speech and the last girl insisted on going last and then planned her own speech that either added to or was completely different from what was submitted and rehearsed. And consensus was that it was inappropriate of her to do that (And her religious comment was directed at the audience instead of herself).

This is no different. The young woman was not "punished" per se for WHAT she said--she was "punished" for not following instructions and the censors were on standby and she knew the consequences.

Now I think it is rediculous that a child cannot thank God for his influence on their life--something short simple and sweet. However, it isn't fair to others that are present to be preached to. ("I thank God for what he has done for me" is fine...adding "and if you had God in your life blah blah blah" is not fine).

But she got punished for not reading her approved speech and that is all that happened.

Now the censoring of the speech and if they were being too darn persnickety or not is a separate issue and without knowing what her original speech was supposed to be, it is difficult to accurately weigh an opinion on the actions of the district prior to the ceremony.

I agree. I'm the OP of the thread that you mentioned above. In our situation, turns out the girl had planned it out MONTHS before the graduation ceremony took place.

For those that think it's so "horrible" that the girl's right to thank God was curtailed - would you feel the same way if she praised Satan in the same manner?

For me, the DECEPTION and DISHONESTY are far more offensive. Proof positive that, in my community, the most un-Christianlike behavior is often exhibited by those who park their butts on a church pew every Sabbath.

 

[Crankyshank]

Like cardaway indicated, since we don't know what was said in the speech, we really can't make an accurate opinion on the situation.
I think it's sad that a student cannot thank their personal higher power (whatever it is) in a valedictory speech. However it said that she had several mentionings of God and Jesus Christ in her speech. I have a feeling if it was a brief thanking God it would be allowed, but it became a sermon. If I want a sermon I'll go to Church- not a public school graduation.

Obviously the student knew she was doing something wrong and chose to do it anyhow. She needs to suffer the consequences for breaking rules she was well aware existed. If she had a problem with it then she could have stepped down as Valedictorian

 

[chobie]

The schools fueled by the ACLU have butchered the whole church/state issue long ago to the point where the schools have gone overboard. Just look at how they handle Christmas programs. The framers of the Constitution surely did not have this in mind.

Another case of incrementalism.

They didn't have public schools when the framers wrote the constitution.

 

[cardaway]

This is getting beyond ridiculous. I think its great this girl did what she wanted.

And IMO, that is why we have these problems.

 

[poohandwendy]

Not to mention for a Jewish person having to listen to her say the name of G-d over and over again would be horrid, it's a real offense to them to speak the name of G-d aloud.

Huh? I know quite a few Jewish people who use the word God (hope I am not outing them). They do not write it out or speak the Hebrew word for God, though. IIRC

 

[ducklite]

I'd have no issues if a student spoke of Allah or any other deity.

You and many others wouldn't. But there is a large and very vocal right wing group of Christians in this country who would have.

Anne

 

[VSL]

Like cardaway indicated, since we don't know what was said in the speech, we really can't make an accurate opinion on the situation.
I think it's sad that a student cannot thank their personal higher power (whatever it is) in a valedictory speech. However it said that she had several mentionings of God and Jesus Christ in her speech. I have a feeling if it was a brief thanking God it would be allowed, but it became a sermon. If I want a sermon I'll go to Church- not a public school graduation.

Obviously the student knew she was doing something wrong and chose to do it anyhow. She needs to suffer the consequences for breaking rules she was well aware existed. If she had a problem with it then she could have stepped down as Valedictorian

 

[poohandwendy]

You and many others wouldn't. But there is a large and very vocal right wing group of Christians in this country who would have.

Anne

And they woulod be considered equally intolerant IMO. I am sorry, but the speech should not be about the views of the audience, but a reflection of the views of the speaker. I just think it is ridiculous for a valedictorian (we are not talking about just any student) to have their personal thoughts and reflections censored, especially for religous views.

It's ironic to me..."We really want to bestow an honor for your exceptional hard work, maturity, leadership, dedication...but we cannot trust you with a microphone for 5 minutes. You might have thoughts and ideas that may offend someone"

 

[Galahad]

They didn't have public schools when the framers wrote the constitution.

That's hardly relavent. They regularly evoked the name of God and prayed in open sessions of congress. It doesn't follow logically that they would have objected to it in other public setting.

I think it's a silly rule, but it was a rule nonetheless and she knew the consequences.

 

[Miss Jasmine]

You and many others wouldn't. But there is a large and very vocal right wing group of Christians in this country who would have.

Anne

Well that's their problem isn't it? I agree with what PAW has said.

I can't believe that speaking of God or Jesus has become more offensive than profanity.

 

[salmoneous]

The schools fueled by the ACLU .

Actually, the ACLU is often on the student's sides in these cases. See for instance: http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0615/p01s03-ussc.html

 

[chobie]

That's hardly relavent. They regularly evoked the name of God and prayed in open sessions of congress. It doesn't follow logically that they would have objected to it in other public setting.

I think it's a silly rule, but it was a rule nonetheless and she knew the consequences.

Actually, the whole framers argument is irrelavent in this situation.

 

[poohandwendy]

Are we not talking about the TOP student of the class here? Sheesh, the best of the best cannot speak uncensored? What does that say about the school when they cannot allow their BEST students an uncensored 5 minutes?

The whole thing just blows me away.

 

[SadieDog]

I have to side with the district. They have rules, and she knew that. They didn't approve her speech and she knew that. Had she been speaking of Allah or Jah would everyone be as sympathetic? It's highly doubtful. She should have come to a compromise with the district before graduation, instead of just going ahead with a speech that she knew the consequences of giving, and then gteting upset when those consequences happened. Just another example of the entitlement mentality at work in America.

Personally I wouldn't have an issue with her making a one line statement saying that her belief in [a generic] God helped her when things got tough. But IMHO anything more than that is inappropriate and yes, prosteletizing. Her speach had many references to God and "Jesus Christ" and IMHO that has no place at a public school graduation ceremony.

Ducklite, I agree with you. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Are we not talking about the TOP student of the class here? Sheesh, the best of the best cannot speak uncensored? What does that say about the school when they cannot allow their BEST students an uncensored 5 minutes?

The whole thing just blows me away.

Agreed.

But she still broke the rules--which is why there is censorship. Students have brought it upon themselves in years past which is why we are where we are right now.

Yes it is "sad" that she cannot speak uncensored. But had she simply read her agreed upon speech--there would have been no issue. She was provided a consquence for this action. She ruined her own moment.

 

[cardaway]

Are we not talking about the TOP student of the class here? Sheesh, the best of the best cannot speak uncensored? What does that say about the school when they cannot allow their BEST students an uncensored 5 minutes?

The whole thing just blows me away.

Because sadly numerous people have got up and turned what should be a uplifting and wonderful moment into a act of defiance and granstanding.

It used to be people would just do something to their cap and gown or do something silly while walking up to, or on the stage. Now as you pointed out we have the BEST students going much further and schools are left to deal with it.

 

[Crankyshank]

You might think it's sad we have to censor a Valedictory speech. I agree, but I also think it's just as sad that the top student needs to act childish, rebellious, and lacking in consideration for her fellow graduates by turning her speech into a sermon.

Graduations are tedious enough with all the speeches. Listening to someone prattle on about their personal relationship with their higher power (because when you make several mentions of God and Jesus and how they helped you through becomes prattling on imho) doesn't help.

 

[chobie]

On the bright side, this girl is now getting her 15 minutes of fame.

 

[Tanuki]

Do you get the feeling that Karl Rove is cranking up for the election again?

There was an article in my morning paper about how a movie got a PG rating because a guy converted to Christianity in it.

Coincidence? I think not.

While you were discussing this - how many of you caught the news about the Supreme Court's ruling today that may or may not have overturned the environmental laws protecting the wetlands? Those same shrinking wetlands which could have decreased the strength of hurricaine Katrina before it pushed into populated parts of southern Louisiana.

I didn't mean to change the subject - just to point out that you are discussing exactly what you are supposed to be discussing today.