Jeffersons letter was to support the idea that it was permissible to maintain Christian values, principles and practices in official policy.

((But, in 1947)) in the case of Everson v. Board of Education, the Court, for the first time, (((did not cite Jefferson's entire letter,))) but selected only eight words from it. The Court now announced: "The First Amendment has erected (and here are the
eight words) 'A WALL OF SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE.' That wall must be kept high and impregnable." This was a new philosophy for the Court.

((It had taken the eight words from Thomas Jefferson's letter completely out of context.))

After this case, the Court began to speak frequently of a separation of church and state, broadly explaining that this is what the Founders wanted - this is their great intent. The court failed to quote the Founders; it just asserted that this is what they wanted. ========================

The courts continued on this track so steadily that in
(((1958))) in a case called Baer v. Kolmorgen one of the judges was tired of hearing the phrase (((and wrote a dissent, warning, that if the court did not stop talking about the separation of church and state, people were going to start thinking it was part of the Constitution.))))

===Dr. William James, the father of Modern Psychology, said "There is nothing so absurd but if you repeat it often enough people will believe it." Oh, well. =========
=

In (((1962))) in the case of Engel v.Vitale, the Court delivered its first ever ruling which completely separated Christian principles from education; the case struck down school prayer. And, in this case, the Court redefined the word "church". For 170 years prior, the word, "church" - as used in the phrase, ((("separation of church and state" was defined to simply mean, "a federally established denomination." However, the Court now explained that the word, "church", would mean "a religious activity in public".)))

This was the major turning point in the interpretation of the First Amendment. The Court had just announced a brand new
doctrine. With no historical or legal precedent - it now could prohibit religious activities in public settings

It did not begin until 1947....


David Coresh====a topic I know pretty well. I am sorry but I do know something...someone. He was and did do ungodly things to children. That is all I will say.------

Why would a man kill his own children?? Put a bullet in their heads?


Kat

To kind of re-inforce the post at the beginning, why does eveyone complain about religion and state? I notice those SAME ppl happily take the religious holidays off work with pay, or work them for the holiday pay. Freedom of religion means just that.Put yer words into action and tell yer bosses that you'd be perfectly willing to work this Easter with NO holiday pay..just straight time. Bet you won't tho The problem is that Christianity is getting the boot while at the SAME time ppl from other religions feel they should be able to stuff their beliefs down my throat.
Solution, if yer not from here and you don't like our belief system, you can take advantage of one of our other great freedoms...you can LEAVE anytime you want, no one is making you stay. I'm perfectly happy to let you practice your religion as you see fit...but for God's sake lemmie practice mine!!!

Anyone with Google can check these quotes from Jefferson for accuracy and context. I leave it to Jefferson himself to debate Kat in absentia by posting some of his quotes:

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814


"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes."

-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.


"The whole history of these books [the Gospels] is so defective and doubtful that it seems vain to attempt minute enquiry into it: and such tricks have been played with their text, and with the texts of other books relating to them, that we have a right, from that cause, to entertain much doubt what parts of them are genuine. In the New Testament there is internal evidence that parts of it have proceeded from an extraordinary man; and that other parts are of the fabric of very inferior minds. It is as easy to separate those parts, as to pick out diamonds from dunghills."

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, January 24, 1814


"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity."

-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782


"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own."

-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Horatio G. Spafford, March 17, 1814

So dear reader, you tell me: does this sound like the someone who Kat contends thought Christianty embedded in Civil government was (or still is?) a Good Thing(tm)?

Kerry O.

It never ceases to amaze me how people can turn things around to suit them. Maybe me included.

The Christian thing, being referred too was the French and English. He was afraid of the same thing happening here.

Christianity is not government. Government is not Christianity. It was originally written to keep government out of the business of religion. No say in how it is run. Christianity is not to try and run government.

My point was that this was not an open issue up until the early mid forties. Until someone wanted to stir the pot.

Now anyone with an issue can and does begin to change things to suit him her. Too bad it doesn't work that way for the good.
It's funny how that 1 in 10,000 carries so much weight.
Ever since these things have happened....our world, climate, values, and honor has changed. The whole atmosphere of America and surrounding lands have come apart.

By the way....never have used google yet, but do look into other things on the net.

Not just the net, mind you...but I also own books.

I only wish things were as they were when I was younger. Way younger. There was not near the turmoil with our lives and governments and people as there is now.

By the way...if and when I do research...I make sure I am getting the unedited version of said letters.

Now, that being said...I will leave you with this thread.

I am no longer interested in it. It just brings us all into distress in our beliefs.

Hugs to you all.

Kat

Amen!!!

Who's saying you can't? I'm christian & I still practice mine. To argue how far it goes is one thing, but to say there should be no seperation is another, Jefferson was CLEARLY against theocratic law. Jefferson clearly knew it had to swing both ways, religion should not be ruled by the government nor should government be ruled by religion. Even Jesus himself implied this when he said "give unto ceaser what is ceasers and give unto god what is gods". If you wanna talk about leaving america if you don't like something, you're free to leave if you don't like the seperation. This is my home, "land of the free";^]

I'm not saying there should be NO separation. Theocratic gov'ts are not a good thing at all. All I'm trying to say is the gov't seems to put Christianity on the back burner while allowing more freedom of other religions

How about some examples? Are there some school sponsored covens I don't know about? I have yet to see any non christian religion recieve any more special treatment than us christians, in fact we still get more preferance treatment than other religions in government. I have yet to see a legitamite claim to opression against christians coming from the government in the US;^]

Couldn't help myself here:

There is certain government interference in that some are now not allowed to have Christmas lights or crosses in their own yards. Not to mention that in some neighborhoods; flags are not allowed to be displayed proudly on poles in their own bought yards.

All because usually ONE PERSON is offended. Why is it that people that are in numbers higher than those that get things changed are left out?

One person; a dad wants prayer left out of a basketball game because his daughter is an atheist. He is working hard on this to the pain of his own daughter. This is something that the members want before their own game. But, because of one dad she is being ostracized and left out of normal school activities because she is in effect paying for his aggressive and dislike of what others see as their right? She began by simply stepping away from the prayer fold. It was accepted that way. But he has taken it to a legal and law issue. Trying to ruin it for everyone else. Trying to force them into submissiveness to his belief. He is ONE....they are many. But, he will win because that seems to be the way it is now.

Kat

Where are these people being prevented from displaying on their own private property? Sorry, but I haven't heard any evidance of that, if so I would fight it. But it sounds a bit of a stretch;^]

It is real. I have no reason to lie.
It has happened here in Oklahoma. Someone was offended by the lights and Christmas beliefs of him. They made him take them down. A cross was also shown on the lawn, it was made to be taken down as well. It was said that it offended and was his belief and had no right to push his beliefs on someone else.

I made a cross and decorated it and put it on my lawn. It is pretty. I have had eggs thrown at it. I keep expecting someone to say something about it. But, so far...so good. I have also had them to drive by and yell at my house that God sucks.

In our schools it has been made that the kids are not supposed to say "Merry Christmas" to anyone on school property.



A friend of my neice was expelled from school because of such a thing.

My own neice was taken to the principles office and threatened with expulsion because she defended her belief in God.
She was told to leave it alone. To which the other was not told anything?

It happens, my friend. Just wait awhile. You will hear more of it.

As for the flags...it is I am sure to be found.
It has made the news more than once.

Kat

I'd have to see it to believe it, though I have heard of people having to take down lights because of the epelptic population, but that's another story. Still, even if true that's a specific issue & doesn't have anything to do with church & state, that's a personal freedom, free speech issue;^]

Oh....and many schools are not allowed to decorate in Christmas decorations anymore.

They are even trying to get Christmas plays and musicals out.

One such musical play was taken somewhere else in an effort to keep it alive for the many that wanted it.

I can't remember...but it seems that they are trying to keep it in the school. It is a thing that has been done for years. But, because one is pissed, it changes for the masses that want it.

One place has even been hit with they do not want them to have their live Nativity anymore out in public view. HELLOOOO!

One church here in OK., in Edmond was attacked and tried to make remove their 50 ft tall cross off their property. It is beautiful. The light chnages as you drive by. They ( the trouble makers)did lose that one because the masses fought it. It still stands, for now.

Kat

Well, are they allowed to hang Kwanzaa decorations? Kids can pray & talk religion in school all they want, the school just can't sponsor it. Christians still get favoritism from government which we shouldn't. I'm wanting though to see some record of these events you're claiming;^]

I have no clue about hanging whatever...but, in all fairness, I am sure it would not be a problem. We have so many diversities.

As for praying in school? Not a chance of a group prayer. It is NOT allowed. Unless it is taken outside. It is being done however in some schools by going outside and circling around the flagpole and garden area holding hands and having prayer.

They have even tried to make a big deal of the footballers saying their prayer before a game.

And...I am not making any of this up sir. I have no reason to do so. It matters not to me if you believe me or not. It is...had to be public record somewhere. It has all been shown on the news here. Tis the only reason I have knowledge of some of it.

I'm done. I am not accustomed to being called a liar of sorts. So, I shall be off to something a little more fun than this.

Have a wonderful day, and be safe and prosperous.

Kat

I never called you an liar, I said I'd like to see the records documenting said events. And no, there is no mandate banning private or group prayer in school, it just can't be sanctioned by the schools. Kids can get together at lunch & pray together or even hold a bit of bible study, there are absolutly no laws preventing that. But again, even if so that's an issue of degree and not the seperation itself. The seperation, unless you're not equipped to understand Jeffersons plain wording, is 100% supported by Thomas Jefferson;^]

do you think that people would be any friendlier if someone was to put a cross upside down in their yard? or if someone was to put one of the the hindu gods in their lawn?

people are biggoted agaist all kinds. imo, catholic people have the least right to complain. you lot have been persecuting and opressing everyone else for hundreds of years.

people to this day will judge you based on your faith or lack thereof, i've been told i'm a bad person because i don't believe. the world takes all kinds. and in this country, there is more than one faith and that means you can't shove your's down someone else's throat.

now, i would never say it's right for anyone to tell you what you can and can't have on your own property, but that's not the way things work. we have laws about grass length, nonrunning cars sitting in the driveway. it's all rediculous, but this is america. religions and some decorations are the least of our concerns. our rights have been cancelled out because of prejudice pc bull**** and people's lack of acceptance or tolerance for anything but their own wants

Kat here.

I appreciate your views on that thread in "religion" forum.

I for one have wished and hoped for much more from our lives. To each live and be our own person in this world. To not tolerate; but be accepting of all that is different from our own. But knowing...we are not really all that different.

To each have our own beliefs as well as our own thoughts to what is good and right for us.

I hope that I come across as one of those; if I do not...then I have failed. I will do my very best to be on cue and learn and become more and more as I would wish to be.

All are welcome in my world. Our world. I love people...I love differences...I love that we are able to speak our truths and hopefully be aware and made aware of all that is us.

Thank you for being you.

Kat

What the heck???? I have been having problems with my pc or this site?

That actually was supposed to be a private mail to toast.

Doo doo dooo dooo doo doo doo dooo

There is no oppression, worse than the that which comes from being uneducated. PLEASE educate yourselves, and complain to the correct 'agency(s)'.

But Please don't complain if your Christian raised child comes home with satanic, or wiccan pamphlets and announces their intent to 'check' it out? Will you stop them?

The following was copied from:
http://www.ed.gov/Speeches/08-1995/religion.html

Religion In The Public Schools: A Joint Statement Of Current Law
April 1995
The following document was not produced by the U.S. Department of Education. Secretary Riley, however, is a strong supporter of continuing efforts by religious and education organizations to find common ground on the issue of religious expression in public schools. The Secretary has said many times before, "Public schools should not be hostile to religion." This document reflects a significant new effort by religious groups to find common ground.
________________________________________


A r c h i v e d I n f o r m a t i o n
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
THE SECRETARY
________________________________________
"...Schools do more than train children's minds. They also help to nurture their souls by reinforcing the values they learn at home and in their communities. I believe that one of the best ways we can help out schools to do this is by supporting students' rights to voluntarily practice their religious beliefs, including prayer in schools.... For more than 200 years, the First Amendment has protected our religious freedom and allowed many faiths to flourish in our homes, in our work place and in our schools. Clearly understood and sensibly applied, it works."
President Clinton
May 30, 1998
________________________________________
Dear American Educator,
Almost three years ago, President Clinton directed me, as U.S. Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Attorney General, to provide every public school district in America with a statement of principles addressing the extent to which religious expression and activity are permitted in our public schools. In accordance with the President's directive, I sent every school superintendent in the country guidelines on Religious Expression in Public Schools in August of 1995.

The purpose of promulgating these presidential guidelines was to end much of the confusion regarding religious expression in our nation's public schools that had developed over more than thirty years since the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1962 regarding state sponsored school prayer. I believe that these guidelines have helped school officials, teachers, students and parents find a new common ground on the important issue of religious freedom consistent with constitutional requirements.

In July of 1996, for example, the Saint Louis School Board adopted a district wide policy using these guidelines. While the school district had previously allowed certain religious activities, it had never spelled them out before, resulting in a lawsuit over the right of a student to pray before lunch in the cafeteria. The creation of a clearly defined policy using the guidelines allowed the school board and the family of the student to arrive at a mutually satisfactory settlement.

In a case decided last year in a United States District Court in Alabama, (Chandler v. James) involving student initiated prayer at school related events, the court instructed the DeKalb County School District to maintain for circulation in the library of each school a copy of the presidential guidelines.

The great advantage of the presidential guidelines, however, is that they allow school districts to avoid contentious disputes by developing a common understanding among students, teachers, parents and the broader community that the First Amendment does in fact provide ample room for religious expression by students while at the same time maintaining freedom from government sponsored religion.

The development and use of these presidential guidelines were not and are not isolated activities. Rather, these guidelines are part of an ongoing and growing effort by educators and America's religious community to find a new common ground. In April of 1995, for example, thirty-five religious groups issued "Religion in the Public Schools: A Joint Statement of Current Law" that the Department drew from in developing its own guidelines. Following the release of the presidential guidelines, the National PTA and the Freedom Forum jointly published in 1996 "A Parent's Guide to Religion in the Public Schools" which put the guidelines into an easily understandable question and answer format.

In the last two years, I have held three religious-education summits to inform faith communities and educators about the guidelines and to encourage continued dialogue and cooperation within constitutional limits. Many religious communities have contacted local schools and school systems to offer their assistance because of the clarity provided by the guidelines. The United Methodist Church has provided reading tutors to many schools, and Hadassah and the Women's League for Conservative Judaism have both been extremely active in providing local schools with support for summer reading programs.

The guidelines we are releasing today are the same as originally issued in 1995, except that changes have been made in the sections on religious excusals and student garb to reflect the Supreme Court decision in Boerne v. Flores declaring the Religious Freedom Restoration Act unconstitutional as applied to actions of state and local governments.

These guidelines continue to reflect two basic and equally important obligations imposed on public school officials by the First Amendment. First, schools may not forbid students acting on their own from expressing their personal religious views or beliefs solely because they are of a religious nature. Schools may not discriminate against private religious expression by students, but must instead give students the same right to engage in religious activity and discussion as they have to engage in other comparable activity. Generally, this means that students may pray in a nondisruptive manner during the school day when they are not engaged in school activities and instruction, subject to the same rules of order that apply to other student speech.

At the same time, schools may not endorse religious activity or doctrine, nor may they coerce participation in religious activity. Among other things, of course, school administrators and teachers may not organize or encourage prayer exercises in the classroom. Teachers, coaches and other school officials who act as advisors to student groups must remain mindful that they cannot engage in or lead the religious activities of students.

And the right of religious expression in school does not include the right to have a "captive audience" listen, or to compel other students to participate. School officials should not permit student religious speech to turn into religious harassment aimed at a student or a small group of students. Students do not have the right to make repeated invitations to other students to participate in religious activity in the face of a request to stop.

The statement of principles set forth below derives from the First Amendment. Implementation of these principles, of course, will depend on specific factual contexts and will require careful consideration in particular cases.

In issuing these revised guidelines I encourage every school district to make sure that principals, teachers, students and parents are familiar with their content. To that end I offer three suggestions:

First, school districts should use these guidelines to revise or develop their own district wide policy regarding religious expression. In developing such a policy, school officials can engage parents, teachers, the various faith communities and the broader community in a positive dialogue to define a common ground that gives all parties the assurance that when questions do arise regarding religious expression the community is well prepared to apply these guidelines to specific cases. The Davis County School District in Farmington, Utah,is an example of a school district that has taken the affirmative step of developing such a policy.

At a time of increasing religious diversity in our country such a proactive step can help school districts create a framework of civility that reaffirms and strengthens the community consensus regarding religious liberty. School districts that do not make the effort to develop their own policy may find themselves unprepared for the intensity of the debate that can engage a community when positions harden around a live controversy involving religious expression in public schools.

Second, I encourage principals and administrators to take the additional step of making sure that teachers, so often on the front line of any dispute regarding religious expression, are fully informed about the guidelines. The Gwinnett County School system in Georgia, for example, begins every school year with workshops for teachers that include the distribution of these presidential guidelines. Our nation's schools of education can also do their part by ensuring that prospective teachers are knowledgeable about religious expression in the classroom.

Third, I encourage schools to actively take steps to inform parents and students about religious expression in school using these guidelines. The Carter County School District in Elizabethton, Tennessee, included the subject of religious expression in a character education program that it developed in the fall of 1997. This effort included sending home to every parent a copy of the "Parent's Guide to Religion in the Public Schools."

Help is available for those school districts that seek to develop policies on religious expression. I have enclosed a list of associations and groups that can provide information to school districts and parents who seek to learn more about religious expression in our nation's public schools.

In addition, citizens can turn to the U.S. Department of Education web site (http://www.ed.gov) for information about the guidelines and other activities of the Department that support the growing effort of educators and religious communities to support the education of our nation's children.
Finally, I encourage teachers and principals to see the First Amendment as something more than a piece of dry, old parchment locked away in the national attic gathering dust. It is a vital living principle, a call to action, and a demand that each generation reaffirm its connection to the basic idea that is America -- that we are a free people who protect our freedoms by respecting the freedom of others who differ from us.

Our history as a nation reflects the history of the Puritan, the Quaker, the Baptist, the Catholic, the Jew and many others fleeing persecution to find religious freedom in America. The United States remains the most successful experiment in religious freedom that the world has ever known because the First Amendment uniquely balances freedom of private religious belief and expression with freedom from state-imposed religious expression.

Public schools can neither foster religion nor preclude it. Our public schools must treat religion with fairness and respect and vigorously protect religious expression as well as the freedom of conscience of all other students. In so doing our public schools reaffirm the First Amendment and enrich the lives of their students.

I encourage you to share this information widely and in the most appropriate manner with your school community. Please accept my sincere thanks for your continuing work on behalf of all of America's children.
Sincerely,

Richard W. Riley
U.S. Secretary of Education

RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Student prayer and religious discussion: The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment does not prohibit purely private religious speech by students. Students therefore have the same right to engage in individual or group prayer and religious discussion during the school day as they do to engage in other comparable activity. For example, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable nondisruptive activities. Local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and other pedagogical restrictions on student activities, but they may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against religious activity or speech.

Generally, students may pray in a nondisruptive manner when not engaged in school activities or instruction, and subject to the rules that normally pertain in the applicable setting. Specifically, students in informal settings, such as cafeterias and hallways, may pray and discuss their religious views with each other, subject to the same rules of order as apply to other student activities and speech. Students may also speak to, and attempt to persuade, their peers about religious topics just as they do with regard to political topics. School officials, however, should intercede to stop student speech that constitutes harassment aimed at a student or a group of students.

Students may also participate in before or after school events with religious content, such as "see you at the flag pole" gatherings, on the same terms as they may participate in other noncurriculum activities on school premises. School officials may neither discourage nor encourage participation in such an event.

The right to engage in voluntary prayer or religious discussion free from discrimination does not include the right to have a captive audience listen, or to compel other students to participate. Teachers and school administrators should ensure that no student is in any way coerced to participate in religious activity.

Graduation prayer and baccalaureates: Under current Supreme Court decisions, school officials may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation, nor organize religious baccalaureate ceremonies. If a school generally opens its facilities to private groups, it must make its facilities available on the same terms to organizers of privately sponsored religious baccalaureate services. A school may not extend preferential treatment to baccalaureate ceremonies and may in some instances be obliged to disclaim official endorsement of such ceremonies.

Official neutrality regarding religious activity: Teachers and school administrators, when acting in those capacities, are representatives of the state and are prohibited by the establishment clause from soliciting or encouraging religious activity, and from participating in such activity with students. Teachers and administrators also are prohibited from discouraging activity because of its religious content, and from soliciting or encouraging antireligious activity.

Teaching about religion: Public schools may not provide religious instruction, but they may teach about religion, including the Bible or other scripture: the history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature, and the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries all are permissible public school subjects. Similarly, it is permissible to consider religious influences on art, music, literature, and social studies. Although public schools may teach about religious holidays, including their religious aspects, and may celebrate the secular aspects of holidays, schools may not observe holidays as religious events or promote such observance by students.

Student assignments: Students may express their beliefs about religion in the form of homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free of discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Such home and classroom work should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance, and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school.

Religious literature: Students have a right to distribute religious literature to their schoolmates on the same terms as they are permitted to distribute other literature that is unrelated to school curriculum or activities. Schools may impose the same reasonable time, place, and manner or other constitutional restrictions on distribution of religious literature as they do on nonschool literature generally, but they may not single out religious literature for special regulation.

Religious excusals: Subject to applicable State laws, schools enjoy substantial discretion to excuse individual students from lessons that are objectionable to the student or the students' parents on religious or other conscientious grounds. However, students generally do not have a Federal right to be excused from lessons that may be inconsistent with their religious beliefs or practices. School officials may neither encourage nor discourage students from availing themselves of an excusal option.

Released time: Subject to applicable State laws, schools have the discretion to dismiss students to off-premises religious instruction, provided that schools do not encourage or discourage participation or penalize those who do not attend. Schools may not allow religious instruction by outsiders on school premises during the school day.

Teaching values: Though schools must be neutral with respect to religion, they may play an active role with respect to teaching civic values and virtue, and the moral code that holds us together as a community. The fact that some of these values are held also by religions does not make it unlawful to teach them in school.

Student garb: Schools enjoy substantial discretion in adopting policies relating to student dress and school uniforms. Students generally have no Federal right to be exempted from religiously-neutral and generally applicable school dress rules based on their religious beliefs or practices; however, schools may not single out religious attire in general, or attire of a particular religion, for prohibition or regulation. Students may display religious messages on items of clothing to the same extent that they are permitted to display other comparable messages. Religious messages may not be singled out for suppression, but rather are subject to the same rules as generally apply to comparable messages.

THE EQUAL ACCESS ACT
The Equal Access Act is designed to ensure that, consistent with the First Amendment, student religious activities are accorded the same access to public school facilities as are student secular activities. Based on decisions of the Federal courts, as well as its interpretations of the Act, the Department of Justice has advised that the Act should be interpreted as providing, among other things, that:

General provisions: Student religious groups at public secondary schools have the same right of access to school facilities as is enjoyed by other comparable student groups. Under the Equal Access Act, a school receiving Federal funds that allows one or more student noncurriculum-related clubs to meet on its premises during noninstructional time may not refuse access to student religious groups.

Prayer services and worship exercises covered: A meeting, as defined and protected by the Equal Access Act, may include a prayer service, Bible reading, or other worship exercise.

Equal access to means of publicizing meetings: A school receiving Federal funds must allow student groups meeting under the Act to use the school media -- including the public address system, the school newspaper, and the school bulletin board -- to announce their meetings on the same terms as other noncurriculum-related student groups are allowed to use the school media. Any policy concerning the use of school media must be applied to all noncurriculum-related student groups in a nondiscriminatory matter. Schools, however, may inform students that certain groups are not school sponsored.

Lunch-time and recess covered: A school creates a limited open forum under the Equal Access Act, triggering equal access rights for religious groups, when it allows students to meet during their lunch periods or other noninstructional time during the school day, as well as when it allows students to meet before and after the school day.
Revised May 1998
________________________________________
List of organizations that can answer questions on religious expression in public schools
Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism
Name: Rabbi David Saperstein
Address: 2027 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 387-2800
Fax: (202) 667-9070
Web site: http://www.rj.org/rac/
American Association of School Administrators
Name: Andrew Rotherham
Address: 1801 N. Moore St., Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: (703) 528-0700
Fax: (703) 528-2146
Web site: http://www.aasa.org
American Jewish Congress
Name: Marc Stern
Address: 15 East 84th Street, New York, NY 10028
Phone: (212) 360-1545
Fax: (212) 861-7056
National PTA
Name: Maribeth Oakes
Address: 1090 Vermont Ave., NW, Suite 1200, Washington, DC 20005
Phone: (202) 289-6790
Fax: (202) 289-6791
Web site: http://www.pta.org
Christian Legal Society
Name: Steven McFarland
Address: 4208 Evergreen Lane, #222, Annandale, VA 22003
Phone: (703) 642-1070
Fax: (703) 642-1075
Web site: http://www.clsnet.com
National Association of Evangelicals
Name: Forest Montgomery
Address: 1023 15th Street, NW #500, Washington, DC 20005
Phone: (202) 789-1011
Fax: (202) 842-0392
Web site: http://www.nae.net
National School Boards Association
Name: Laurie Westley
Address: 1680 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone: (703) 838-6703
Fax: (703) 548-5613
Web site: http://www.nsba.org
Freedom Forum
Name: Charles Haynes
Address: 1101 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: (703) 528-0800
Fax: (703) 284-2879
Web site: http://www.freedomforum.org

-###-
________________________________________
[ Homepage | Guidelines | Guides | Partnerships | Statements | Publications | Contact us ]

________________________________________
This page last modified January 26, 2000 (kms)

Furthermore, the protection of 'free religious exercise' is ALIVE AND WELL.

Title 42 of the U.S. code under bill S.178.IS, Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) was recently updated by President Bush's urgings on January 18, 2007.

Briefly and simply put the purpose of the update to RFRA was to acknowledge that current and futures laws, while neutral toward religion, could create a burden on religious exercise. In order that religions have a way to combat this possibility, the use of a legal precedent, called the compelling interest test, will be used to determine if the law has placed a substantial burden on religious exercise without compelling justification.

Actually, I believe Bush was attempting to manipulate the system. You see in many previously open statements he VOWED that he would personally veto any bill with regards to the marriage amendment and any bill that would grand the GLBT community, equality as homosexuals, specifically PER HIS PERSONAL RELIGIOUS BELIEFS. However, in 2006 it became apparent that three major bills presented in favor of the GLBT community were gaining popularity. He FEARED he may have to keep his promise, so he requested that a quck fix be added to the RFRA.

Fortunately for us the man is more manipulative than intelligent and the 'compelling interest test' actually supports the GLBT side better than his own. UNFORTUNATELY for the GLBT, all three bills failed due to varying circumstances, BUT in 30 years, never has success been so close. With the new update, it is even closer, as the battles begin anew in 2008.

The POINT IS - FREEDOM OF RELIGION IS VERY IMPORTANT TO THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT TO THE PEOPLE. So those who complain about their rights being infringed upon, are blowing a lot of smoke up the wrong a(ss)venues.