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

[momof2inPA]

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.

You are so right on the money. The other "spin" lately was that letter that someone found in Iraq that "Al Qaeda" had written, in which Al said his group is in trouble becuase of the U.S. soldiers in Iraq and that Al Qaeda has been trying to stir up trouble between the U.S. and Iran. If anyone believed that b.s., I have a bridge to sell you. It does indicate that the U.S. will be backing off Iran, I'm thinking. With China and Russia backing Iran, that was a foregone conclusion, anyway. Then, we have a hazy kinda story about Al Qaeda supposedly having plans to attack the NY subway and how those things haven't occurred because we have so completely stifled Al Qaeda's activities by invading Iraq. So here we are getting the masses riled up for the war in Iraq and against those minutiae of the population that would snuff out Christianity in the U.S. Yep, we're getting ready for another election. Done ranting about "spin."

Back on topic, I agree with poohandwendy's posts.

 

[ducklite]

Just curious, what did you think of the Janet incident? I, personally, did not think the **** was a big deal...but it was obvious that they staged it. Their 'feigned innocence' was what made me disgusted.

I agree about the feigning innocence part being disgusting, but I also believe that their act was offensive. If I go to an "R" rated movie, and there's nudity, it' my choice to go or not to go, but if I go I shouldn't complain. On the other hand if I take my niece to a "G" movie and the rating is inaccurate or the theatre puts on "Saving Private Ryan" instead (I use that as the first few minutes are incredibly violent) I'm going to be mightly upset, because this was not the "family friendly" entertainment I was led to believe I'd see.

And with this, I don't think it was a big deal, I agree that she should not have broken the rule but I think the school just made it worse. And of course, as stated before, I think there shouldn't be any censoring anyways. But, it sounds like the school was not just dismissing any mention of God and were being reasonable, so she was absolutely wrong. She should have met them half way and discussed it further if she had an issue with it.

I agree, I think there was wiggle room for both of them, but she had it in her head that she was going to do what she was going to do, period. Somehow I think that if she had said something like "My personal belief in God as my saviour, my faith, and my Christian lifestyle has helped me choose the right path for myself, and overcome obstacles that got in my way. I thank God for being beside me on this journey." and left it at that, no one would have given it a second thought. But she crossed the line.

Anne

 

[cardaway]

Just curious, what did you think of the Janet incident?

That's a long answer since I'm totally against the FCC rules as they exist today. Specific to the incedent, I have no idea who was telling the truth and who knew what before it happened.

 

[LuvDuke]

Regardless of the agenda, a graduation speech is not the place for pushing it, IMO.

There's two issues involved here -- whether or not a school should censor speeches and whether or not they should have enforced those rules once they knew that they were being broken. You may not agree that censorship should have been allowed, but I would think that since she was given ample warning of the rules and still proceeded to break those rules, the school was well within their right to pull the plug on the girl. Heck, they knew the speech ahead of time, censored it and then proceeded to hear her begin to proceed with the same speech. If I was the person who first disallowed the speech, I'd be ticked to hear it being recited in spite of my objections.

GMTA!

 

[poohandwendy]

What part of lying do you not grasp? She lied and used the opportunity as her own private soapbox.

Rosa Parks broke the rules, got arrested, and was sent to jail. And how can you possibly compare a fight against racism with some little high school pischa who thinks someone actually gives a crap about what she thinks, lies about her intentions, and uses a captive audience to push her views?

Btw, no one has to respect someone else's views, religious or otherwise. The only thing we are obligated to do is respect someone's right to have a view. That's it.

Whoa, calm down there. I 'grasp' what lying is and I have never, ever implied or said that she did not lie. I am quite aware of the circumstances of Rosa Parks situation, thanks. I think a fight against racism is entirely comparable to a fight against censorship. (after reading more, I do agree that she was not being stifled because they compromised, so that really isn't a good excuse for her anyways)

I just said I do not think it is a big deal and do not think valedictorian's should be censored to begin with. The valedictorian in my DDs class pushed her views in her speech (not religion)...oh well, her 5 minutes of fame. Big deal.

And I never said anyone has to respect anyones views. Not sure where you got that one from.

I do admit, I am not sure what a 'pischa' is, perhaps you can enlighten me?
TIA

 

[discernment]

There's something called separation of church and state... if

Really, show that to me in the Constitution.

 

[goofygirl]

pischa= jewish slang word for a young person who wants to be tough and has a 'tood.

 

[goofygirl]

I don't know the whole text of the speech, so I can't say for sure.

If she thanks God in the speech a few times, I think it's no big deal.

If she says God and Jesus over and over again like a sermon, then it's not appropriate.

 

[LuvDuke]

Whoa, calm down there. I 'grasp' what lying is and I have never, ever implied or said that she did not lie. I am quite aware of the circumstances of Rosa Parks situation, thanks. I think a fight against racism is entirely comparable to a fight against censorship. (after reading more, I do agree that she was not being stifled because they compromised, so that really isn't a good excuse for her anyways)

I just said I do not think it is a big deal and do not think valedictorian's should be censored to begin with. The valedictorian in my DDs class pushed her views in her speech (not religion)...oh well, her 5 minutes of fame. Big deal.

And I never said anyone has to respect anyones views. Not sure where you got that one from.

I do admit, I am not sure what a 'pischa' is, perhaps you can enlighten me?
TIA

Oops, my apologies. I must've misread your point.

As to what a pisha is, it's a Yiddish term, in this case used as a derogatory term, for someone or something that's not very important in the scheme of things. It's one of those terms you know what it is because you grew up with it, but damned if you can to explain it to someone else.

 

[JimFitz]

You are so right on the money. The other "spin" lately was that letter that someone found in Iraq that "Al Qaeda" had written, in which Al said his group is in trouble becuase of the U.S. soldiers in Iraq and that Al Qaeda has been trying to stir up trouble between the U.S. and Iran. If anyone believed that b.s., I have a bridge to sell you. It does indicate that the U.S. will be backing off Iran, I'm thinking. With China and Russia backing Iran, that was a foregone conclusion, anyway. Then, we have a hazy kinda story about Al Qaeda supposedly having plans to attack the NY subway and how those things haven't occurred because we have so completely stifled Al Qaeda's activities by invading Iraq. So here we are getting the masses riled up for the war in Iraq and against those minutiae of the population that would snuff out Christianity in the U.S. Yep, we're getting ready for another election. Done ranting about "spin."

Back on topic, I agree with poohandwendy's posts.

The plan to bomb the subways was reported over a year ago, but no one listened. It's not new or made up. As a matter of fact, the intelligence agencies are at a loss as the why it was called off. They think that someone in the Saudi government had the only operative (that new about the entire plane) killed.

It's also known that Al Quaeda has been looking to start a war between the US and Iran for sometime. Thats not made up either.

 

[CJRN]

JEEZ!!

What the hector is wrong with the school, poor kid

 

[SadieDog]

One of the reasons my children don't attend public school.

And we have a GREAT public school system.

One of the reasons my children DO attend public school.

 

[dcentity2000]

Positive discrimination sucks.



Rich::

 

[LuluLovesDisney]

I agree with Ducklite. Mentioning God wasn't the problem, it was that she a) went over the line and b) was in defiance of authority/school policy.

Schools have a responsibility to "censor" certain things. If she used the *f word* in her speech, I doubt as many people would be defending this as "free speech." Free speech does have its limitations.

 

[chris1gill]

Really, show that to me in the Constitution.

The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution, but rather is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, Jefferson referred to a "wall of separation between church and state."


Not to mention that "Separation of church and state" is recognized by the Supreme Court, the court that rules over all public and most private entities in this country, as such, all public locations are required to follow rules and precedents of the court... There is no room at any graduation of any public school for someone to start with their preaching....

 

[LuvDuke]

JEEZ!!
What the hector is wrong with the school, poor kid

I know ............... poor little liar who was forced to accept the consequences of her actions. Maybe they skipped over that commandment at her church. Yeah, that's the ticket. She didn't know lying was wrong because they never told her. Must be it.

 

[DawnCt1]

The person taking the microphone away is not acting alone, he or she represents a group, a group in most cases made up by the people in the audience who have kids in that school.

The person denying Rosa Parks a front seat on the bus wasn't the bus driver. It was institutionalized racism supported by the bus company, the city and the state. Rosa Parks broke the rules. According to your point of view, it was correct that she was arrested.

 

[Charade]

I don't think that the two can be compared. Rose Parks was protesting racism and looking for fair treatment and respect. The valedictorian already had that, and was pushing her religious beliefs on others, which to me shows an utter lack of respect, particularly after the administration had warned her not to.

Had she been the valedictorian of my class I would have gotten up and walked out, and made a MAJOR stink while doing so. It's not just her graduation, it's EVERYONE's graduation, and it's ignorant for one person to push their religion down the throats of everyone else.

Anne

At the time, it was the law (not just a "rule") that Rosa Parks was required to sit in the back. Of course the law was racist and wrong. But at the time, it was still the law. Ms. Parks was treated appropriately because she broke the law. The uproar the followed was the start to the changes we have today. IMO, we coming full circle in some areas as in this case. She had the right to mention God in her speech. As many times as she wanted in fact. You may not have liked it, found it offensive, raised a stink and walked out. That's YOUR right. The school doesn't have the right to limit her right to free speech that isn't generally accepted as offensive. They just redefined that speaking about how religion and God inspired one's life is offensive and inappropriate. That's truly sad.

It's interesting that we herald Rosa Parks for standing up (she knew the consequences of her actions) for injustices against blacks but this girl is considered a rule breaker (and a LIAR) and got the treatment she deserved.

 

[eclectics]

At the time, it was the law (not just a "rule") that Rosa Parks was required to sit in the back. Of course the law was racist and wrong. But at the time, it was still the law. Ms. Parks was treated appropriately because she broke the law. The uproar the followed was the start to the changes we have today. IMO, we coming full circle in some areas as in this case. She had the right to mention God in her speech. As many times as she wanted in fact. You may not have liked it, found it offensive, raised a stink and walked out. That's YOUR right. The school doesn't have the right to limit her right to free speech that isn't generally accepted as offensive. They just redefined that speaking about how religion and God inspired one's life is offensive and inappropriate. That's truly sad.

It's interesting that we herald Rosa Parks for standing up (she knew the consequences of her actions) for injustices against blacks but this girl is considered a rule breaker (and a LIAR) and got the treatment she deserved.

You think it's sad and that's your opinion to have. The facts stay the same. The school was in the position of authority, not this student. Comparing her to Rosa Parks does a diservice to Mrs. Parks, I think. Rosa Park's actions changed the course of history in this country. All this girl did was to thumb her nose because she didn't get her way. I don't happen to believe Christians in this country are in need of liberation, as African Americans were, and indeed in some ways still are, although some may believe so. And Dawn, if Rosa Parks wasn't arrested that day, the only people who would have known she changed history would have been the other people on the bus. Who knows what path the civil rights movement would have taken if the passenger just shrugged his shoulders and the driver looked the other way. Lot's of people thank God she was arrested.

 

[cardaway]

The person denying Rosa Parks a front seat on the bus wasn't the bus driver. It was institutionalized racism supported by the bus company, the city and the state. Rosa Parks broke the rules. According to your point of view, it was correct that she was arrested.

Correct? Not in my opinion.

If people want to make the comparison of this girl to Rosa Parks that is their right, but I find it rediculous.