<p>Any way we can avoid talking about Jesus and specific religions (such as quoting Bible passages), and stick to talking about the actual act that is described in the OP, in an attempt to keep this thread open? (I just think it’s an interesting thread and I’ve seen too many lately get shut down for directly discussing the merits or what’s “correct” about religion X).</p>
<p>“possibly limited since the Bethel v. Fraser decision, I’m just not certain if the Supreme Court would agree that a graduation speech has the same limitations as other student speech”</p>
<p>True, though I think this Supreme Court would distinguish the Lord’s Prayer from either the sexual obscenity in Bethel or the “promotion of drug use” ("Bong Hits 4 Jesus) in Morse v. Frederick, which is also relevant here. I think the content, rather than the circumstances, would be controlling. I can’t see even the left wing of this court saying that the Lord’s Prayer has the potential to undermine school discipline the way sexual and drug-related speech (arguably) could.</p>
<p>It’s kind of hard to talk about prayer that has no content, but okay. (The Lord’s Prayer is specifically the prayer Jesus says explicitly to say in secret", not like the hypocrites who pray in public.)</p>
<p>Except the valedictorian’s prayer really wasn’t an attempt at prayer at all, but simply incitement. He could have made the point much better if he had said, “I am forbidden from praying here, and I will honor my school that has given me the honor to be your valedictorian, so instead, I will offer a minute of silence where, in my view, the prayer ought to be.”</p>
<p>I still can’t understand how so many can feel threatened by this young man’s prayer. As a lifelong atheist, it would not bother me in the slightest. On the other hand, when Obama or any other US President says “God Bless the United States of America” I want to pick up something and throw it at the television. How can any atheist or agnostic tolerate that from the head of state and not tolerate this young student trying to make his own small statement?</p>
<p>Very good, ttparent, that would be a logical conclusion. Anything else?</p>
<p>Since they say he didn’t break any rules, I’m going to assume that he didn’t have to deliver an approved speech. If this is the case, I can interpret this in a way that makes his action more defensible–to me, at least. The school eliminated the official prayers at graduation–and this kid decided to replace his speech with a prayer. It was a protest, certainly, but if it didn’t violate school rules, it certainly didn’t violate Constitutional limitations, either. It could be a good teachable moment–what the government (including the school), an individual has the right to do. That’s a good thing.</p>
<p>By the way, I think many people who would like to see prayer back in the schools would also support a Jewish kid saying a prayer.</p>
<p>Mini, he was not forbidden to pray. The SCHOOL was forbidden to pray. There was once a prayer as part of the program. Because of protests, they took it out. They did not forbid him to pray.</p>
<p>Further, they said they support his freedom of speech and freedom to express his religion. there will be no disciplinary action as a result.</p>
<p>It was definitely a prayer. It’s a prayer recognized and said by Christians all over the world, and it’s actually an INSTRUCTION given on HOW TO PRAY…given by someone sort of important. So, yes, he said a prayer. He prayed in public, and others joined him…as is important, as the first words are “OUR Father” and not simply “MY Father”. So it sort of implies that it’s a prayer that would be said in a corporate setting and not alone in a closet.</p>
<p>If he was free to say whatever he wanted in his speech, including a prayer, isn’t this really a non-story? The only thing that made it a story was the nice theatrical touch of him tearing up his speech–which may never have existed.</p>
<p>Seems to me it was more in the nature of a protest against the school administration than anything else. Many graduation speeches are protests and controversial.</p>
<p>I’m sure he had to turn in a speech for approval. They have probably decided to withhold discipline for the deviation. They must not have seen what he said as terribly offensive. Neither do I.</p>
<p>austin, I don’t personally see anyone saying they feel threatened by this prayer. </p>
<p>Personally, as an atheist, I’m not offended in the least. I am annoyed when politicians open and close their sessions with a prayer or say “God bless America” but not offended. I just don’t think politics and religion should publicly mix like that. JMO and I’m not really going to be pushing for any laws that change what currently happens. Just not my fight. </p>
<p>With that said, I still think how it was handled was tasteless and yes, probably made a few people- who likely did not make any noise whatsoever- uncomfortable. With that said, I do think he should get whatever punishment any person would normally get for switching their speech at that school. If not, what is to stop the next person from switching their speech to something far more “offensive”?</p>
<p>
Nothing, I hope. I don’t approve of pre-approved val speeches. It’s an opportunity for people to understand the free speech has costs, including the possibility that you’ll hear something that offends you.</p>
<p>TatinG, I don’t think it was against the administration. More against the idea that public prayer needs to be squashed.</p>
<p>The administration caved. I don’t think the boy was terribly upset by that. I think he was more upset that there are people out there who are so offended by a simple public prayer that is meaningful to the majority that they would do everything they can and threaten to sue if the activity is not stopped.</p>
<p>The acknowledgement of God in monumental ocassions is really important to some people, and very traditional in some communities. I think there was a segment of that community, this boy included, that just didn’t appreciate some small group taking away that opportunity, and he had the chance to say, “Nope. I’m not going to let you take this opportunity to acknowledge God publicly away from me and others”, and he did what he did.</p>
<p>Most vals and sals want to be well-received. I doubt that most would say something that would offend the majority of their community, whether or not they had to have the speech approved.</p>
<p>Usually, the point of the approval is so that the student doesn’t say anything bad about the administration, or anything false or sensitive that might lead the district into a lawsuit.</p>
<p>I personally think that it’s rude for a graduation speech to be political, religious or anything that may offend any portion of the captive audience. Political speeches should not be made at graduations where you have to sit there if you want to see your child graduate. Such speeches are rude but should not be punished.</p>
<p>
I basically agree with you–but what if the vast majority of the people in the audience are offended by the elimination of the prayer? In some places in South Carolina, it might have been everybody in the audience. To me, the easy solution is to let the val say whatever he wants, including a prayer.</p>
<p>Hunt, I’m not a fan of pre-approved speeches either. I just like to see rules applied evenly. If there’s no punishment then by golly, there better be no punishment for the next one either. </p>
<p>Fwiw, I do not believe there should be a punishment if one was not specifically laid out ahead of time.</p>
<p>My interpretation of the Val ripping up the prepared speech is that he wanted to make clear that what followed was “his personal” speech and not the “school approved” speech. I might be inferring too much, but the LP is pretty mild compared to some things he could have said.</p>
<p>NewHope, I agree. Ripping it up was actually good for the school. It actually made the statement to the whole crowd that the statements he was making were his own and were not approved, or even shared in advance with the school.</p>
<p>They probably breathed a big sigh of relief when he did that.</p>
<p>When Thomas Jefferson was the president of the Washington D.C. public school board, the Bible and Watt’s Hymnal were used as texts in the classroom.</p>
<p>Jefferson felt the Bible was essential in any successful plan of education:</p>
<p>“I have always said, always will say, that the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens.”</p>
<p>Just wanted to point out this interesting fact about US history.</p>