If she has expressed to the school that she will violate their policy and will make religious speech at a school function, then she’s probably best suited to one of the ACLJ type orgs.

I’m guessing the latter is the case, but I don’t know for sure.

By the way – I can think of precisely one difference between silent prayer & the voiced kind – it is a matter of who can hear you. CAn you think of others?

Let me make sure I have this right: the school is being heavy handed

Certainly the school is responsible for the Ms. Allen decision. Whether it is heavy handed or not would probably require more background knowledge.

Allen ought to consider reaching out to the ACLU if she ponders saying prayer out loud in front of a group of students, because they’ll have her back.

If she has a legitimate complaint, the ACLU is the big guns. She could go to one of the “house” Christian legal groups, but they don’t have the track record the ACLU does. Judging by your emphasis, maybe her case isn’t so strong. I’m guessing that if that is her true, expressed intention – to lead a prayer at a school event – then she wouldn’t have much of a case… that would be one she should take to the ADL. They enjoy sure-losers that they can use for propaganda. But, yeah – if she has a legitimate case, then the ACLU is her best friend.

I don’t know if this qualifies as “overreaction” on the part of the school system. I do know that there is a history of holding the ACLU accountable for overreacting school systems, though. Which is dumb. In most cases – where the issue is clear – if a school districts overreacts to the point where they are violating students’ rights – the ACLU is available to help the students.

The school district made their own bed – they’re going to have to play it cool for a while, until they’ve had their turn lying in it.

So the school district, not the ACLU or the court

That was in the quote I put forth in my first comment on the matter: “Mr. Staver said the district also agreed to forbid senior class President Mary Allen from speaking at the school’s May 30 graduation ceremony on the chance that the young woman, a known Christian, might say something religious.”

Still would be interested to know what lay behind that decision.

I pointed that out a bit earlier, from the PNJ link: “The rationale: Faculty and administrators help select those student officers. If one of them chose to give a prayer in violation of the court order, it would constitute an endorsement by the school and place school officials in jeopardy of being held in contempt of court.
Because, as you pointed out, “there are limits…”

While the lunchtime prayer is the issue before the court, Lay garnered far more publicity after Wyrosdick decided, on the advice of the district’s lawyers, that the Student Government Association president and senior class president could not speak at graduation ceremonies.

So the school district, not the ACLU or the court. Still would be interested to know what lay behind that decision.

Reading the lyrics from a rap song. Legal.

Why wouldn’t it be?

Reading from Heather has two mommies. Legal.

Why wouldn’t it be? Generally speaking this is a positive thing… but even if it were neutral or negative, what does the constitution say about tolerance education?

Saying “Bush sucks”. Legal.

Advancing a partisan political position – should not be legal. I don’t know if it is or not… but it shouldn’t be.

Getting kids to write letters to congress in ’96 asking why the Republicans wanted to starve them. Legal.

See above… shouldn’t be legal if it is…

Playing Al Gore’s enviro-religious movie during SCIENCE CLASSES. Legal (and was done).

Next you’re going to tell me they indoctrinated kids with Avogadro’s chemico-religious number, made them read Shakespeare’s litero-religious plays, and taught them about the historico-religious Civil War!!! Damn them!

Saying “thanks for this food, Lord”. Banned.

Technically, as a function of the state – yes.. falling under very clear prohibitions of separation of church and state that have been recognized for quite some time now. Not that it doesn’t happen all the time. Most people don’t care too much. Students don’t file suit over it, and the ACLU isn’t inclined to take it up. But yeah – illegal, because the state doesn’t have any business thanking “the Lord” for food. And, for somebody under a court injunction after turning their school into Falwell-land – can get you into trouble.

Look – sending in a false resume to a potential employer is bad, but not illegal. Checking the wrong box on your tax forms – less bad, but illegal. Throwing out a bunch of red herrings doesn’t make it legal – doesn’t make it should be legal to take advantage of your state position to make state-sponsored prayers. I can list a million things I don’t like about the way schools do things – some of which probably should be and aren’t illegal. So, what? “They did it too” isn’t a justification.

Lastly: every Christian is a hypocrite, so don’t stress over someone pushing a line on a web site. I’m a hypocrite, Billy Graham is a hypocrite; we’re all sinners, that’s the first criteria in accepting Christ.

That’s as it may be. I don’t care. I don’t know anyone who isn’t a hypocrite. I am just having fun with the fact that all of these people are up in arms because the state doesn’t allot them time and payroll to use its offices to defy their own Bible and Savior. That’s hilarious to me. It doesn’t have any bearing on the discussion. It’s just funny… It’s kind of like saying that my rights as a Christian are infringed because the courts frown on me committing adultery. It’s my right as a Christian to commit adultery!!! Look – I’m being religiously oppressed because if I commit adultery, the court will give the kids to my wife! Help! Help! I’m being repressed! Now you see the violence inherent in the system!