Bring in some Pantheistic believers and let the kids decide for themselves.

"Alright kids, would you like to listen to Pastor Mark talk about Jesus or Berzerker Erik talk about channeling the warrior spirit of the gods?"

It's kinda weird that preachers feel the need to keep in touch with these kids off church hours.

If only these children had more guns, they wouldn't need preachers to criticize them.

Under current school visitation policy, friends and family can come visit children at lunch.

By allowing students to receive visitors during their lunch hour, the school has created a limited public forum.  It would violate the 1st and 14th Amendments to deny visitation by a friend, just because it's a friend from church.  And it would be unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination to deny visits, just because religious matters are discussed during those visits.  That's the way I see it, anyways.

 I would be PISSED if I found out some God-bothers were harassing my little girl during lunch at school.

SkinnyHead: Under current school visitation policy, friends and family can come visit children at lunch.

By allowing students to receive visitors during their lunch hour, the school has created a limited public forum.  It would violate the 1st and 14th Amendments to deny visitation by a friend, just because it's a friend from church.  And it would be unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination to deny visits, just because religious matters are discussed during those visits.  That's the way I see it, anyways.

Minor children in a school environment do not enjoy the same level of constitutional protections as adults do.

Odds that I'll hear more about this later on facebook?
Hugh.

Who would want to endure raucous proselytizing and tasteless gruel simultaneously?

SilentStrider: Odds that I'll hear more about this later on facebook?
Hugh.

"IF YOU DON'T SHARE THIS YOU HATE JESUS!"

SkinnyHead: Under current school visitation policy, friends and family can come visit children at lunch.

By allowing students to receive visitors during their lunch hour, the school has created a limited public forum.  It would violate the 1st and 14th Amendments to deny visitation by a friend, just because it's a friend from church.  And it would be unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination to deny visits, just because religious matters are discussed during those visits.  That's the way I see it, anyways.

Well, that's nice.

Solon Isonomia: SkinnyHead: Under current school visitation policy, friends and family can come visit children at lunch.

By allowing students to receive visitors during their lunch hour, the school has created a limited public forum.  It would violate the 1st and 14th Amendments to deny visitation by a friend, just because it's a friend from church.  And it would be unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination to deny visits, just because religious matters are discussed during those visits.  That's the way I see it, anyways.

Minor children in a school environment do not enjoy the same level of constitutional protections as adults do.

That's true.  But free speech rights of students can be curtailed only if the speech materially and substantially disrupts the work and discipline of the school.  A private meeting at lunchtime between a student and a friend from church to discuss religious matters does not materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.

SkinnyHead: That's true.  But free speech rights of students can be curtailed only if the speech materially and substantially disrupts the work and discipline of the school.  A private meeting at lunchtime between a student and a friend from church to discuss religious matters does not materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.

Incomplete analysis. There is no speech being exercised by the students in this instance. Further, the issue of the school's power to regulate who can enter the campus during school hours (such as an adult) was not addressed - which is quite broad.

Do like in Mesa, AZ. The kids go across the street to the Mormon seminary. It's one of their scheduled class periods; a break where  they can leave campus.

Otherwise I want evolution lectured upon in Sunday school each week.

SkinnyHead: A private meeting at lunchtime between a student and a friend from church to discuss religious matters does not materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.

i would agree with this. however, when i was in high school, i remember campus crusade for christ (or whatever) sitting down at our lunch tables uninvited and proselytizing. one guy even told me i was going to hell. now that's bullshiat. of course, this was 1987, so hopefully that sort of god-bullying doesn't still go on in public schools.

GAT_00: Solon Isonomia: Incomplete analysis.

Yes, it was a SkinnyHead post.  Now punch yourself for quoting one of the most known trolls and taking it seriously.

He wants to play GED in law, I'm game for now. Shiat, I'm not even refuting, I'm just pointing out the holes in the argument. Dude needs to step up his game, plus it might lead to a genuine discussion w/others.

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Bring in some Pantheistic believers and let the kids decide for themselves.

"Alright kids, would you like to listen to Pastor Mark talk about Jesus or Berzerker Erik talk about channeling the warrior spirit of the gods?"

Indeed. If this was ANY religion besides Christianity being allowed exclusive access to children during the school day people would FLIP THE F*CK OUT.

fusillade762: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Bring in some Pantheistic believers and let the kids decide for themselves.

"Alright kids, would you like to listen to Pastor Mark talk about Jesus or Berzerker Erik talk about channeling the warrior spirit of the gods?"

Indeed. If this was ANY religion besides Christianity being allowed exclusive access to children during the school day people would FLIP THE F*CK OUT.

To steal from one of my favorite professors, a certain element of our population would like to pretend that Section 3 of Article VI of the Constitution doesn't exist.

If the school allows invited guests to visit students for lunch, there's no problem with religious representatives visiting students whose parents invited them. However, if those guests try to speak to children other than those by whom they were invited, that's a problem, not even because of religion. Would any parent want any adult not employed by the school to approach their children? What if instead of "Have you heard the good news?" the question is "Do you like gladiator movies?" or "Have you ever seen a grown man naked?"

Solon Isonomia: SkinnyHead: That's true.  But free speech rights of students can be curtailed only if the speech materially and substantially disrupts the work and discipline of the school.  A private meeting at lunchtime between a student and a friend from church to discuss religious matters does not materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.

Incomplete analysis. There is no speech being exercised by the students in this instance. Further, the issue of the school's power to regulate who can enter the campus during school hours (such as an adult) was not addressed - which is quite broad.

I'll try to do better.  I believe that right of free speech covers the discussion between the student and visitor.  The school's power to regulate who can enter the campus during school hours is addressed by the fact that the school has a policy that allows friends and family to visit students who consent to receive them.  Under that policy, pastors have been allowed to visit.

The only objection to these visits came from FFRF, which is a group that is hostile to religion.  Mere hostility to religion is not a valid reason to prohibit religious speech.  That's considered viewpoint discrimination. Good News Club v. Milford Central School, 533 US 98 (2001)

FlashHarry: SkinnyHead: A private meeting at lunchtime between a student and a friend from church to discuss religious matters does not materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school.

i would agree with this. however, when i was in high school, i remember campus crusade for christ (or whatever) sitting down at our lunch tables uninvited and proselytizing. one guy even told me i was going to hell. now that's bullshiat. of course, this was 1987, so hopefully that sort of god-bullying doesn't still go on in public schools.

We agree on that.  If these pastors are doing anything like that, then they're abusing the limited public forum and should be asked to leave.

BronyMedic: Well, it's a good thing you're not Supreme Court Justice SkinnyHead, otherwise your opinion - which is factually incomplete - would mean something.

Forget facts, it's incomplete in a legal sense. Like I said, if he wants to go down that line of thought he needs to step up his game. Someone as well known as him should have some standards.

Who gets "visitors" at school? It's not like you're in a jail, or hospital.
I don't recall anyone ever having someone stop by and say hi when I was in school.

Wait...WTH am I reading in this thread?  Is Skinnyhead engaging in a reasoned (though admittedly characteristically wrong) legal debate?

I feel dirty.

SkinnyHead: We agree on that. If these pastors are doing anything like that, then they're abusing the limited public forum and should be asked to leave.

Their is no reason for them to be there besides proselytizing. That is the stated goal of Christianity--go forth and spread the word.

I'm sure your cool with Muslims coming in just to chat with students.

SkinnyHead: I'll try to do better.  I believe that right of free speech covers the discussion between the student and visitor.  The school's power to regulate who can enter the campus during school hours is addressed by the fact that the school has a policy that allows friends and family to visit students who consent to receive them.  Under that policy, pastors have been allowed to visit.

Again, that's an incomplete, if not incorrect, analysis. You're making a freedom of association argument, not a speech argument, by limiting yourself to interaction between the requesting student and pastor. If the student was pronouncing his views (religious or otherwise) to others, then that would be free speech. If the pastor was pronouncing his views (religious or otherwise) to others, then that would be free speech as well. Moreover, the school also has the power to limit visitors in a much more restrictive fashion that you've laid out in a way that does not violate either speech or association rights, not to mention free exercise and establishment.

The only objection to these visits came from FFRF, which is a group that is hostile to religion.  Mere hostility to religion is not a valid reason to prohibit religious speech.  That's considered viewpoint discrimination. Good News Club v. Milford Central School, 533 US 98 (2001)

Good, you're moving to authority - unfortunately, you're citing only dicta and the authority is factually distinguishable.  Milford involved an after-hours program and a religion-specific regulation. In this case, you're dealing with visitors during school hours, thus the "limited public forum" situation does not apply. Further,  Milford cites three specific cases where establishment clause was violated because religious activities occurred - two of which were during school sponsored events (football game and graduation) and the other was during school hours (prohibition of evolution being taught in class). If you want to use  Milford, you need to explain why constitutional protections of free speech, association, or expression should be expanded and the establishment clause's protection should be decreased in light of  Milford and the relevant cases cited by the court.

Howie Spankowitz: Wait...WTH am I reading in this thread?  Is Skinnyhead engaging in a reasoned (though admittedly characteristically wrong) legal debate?

I feel dirty.

Like I said, he needs to step up his game if he wants to bring the GED in law out. Trolling or not, occasionally there are valid arguments that can be made by either side and it can be fun to find out what they are.

TommyymmoT: Who gets "visitors" at school? It's not like you're in a jail, or hospital.
I don't recall anyone ever having someone stop by and say hi when I was in school.

Parents of our elementary school students are known to stop by to have lunch with their kids on occasion.

Howie Spankowitz: Wait...WTH am I reading in this thread?  Is Skinnyhead engaging in a reasoned (though admittedly characteristically wrong) legal debate?

I feel dirty.

Reading those posts I'm tempted to ask WHO ARE YOU AND WHAT HAVE YOU DONE WITH SKINNYHEAD?!?

BiblioTech: TommyymmoT: Who gets "visitors" at school? It's not like you're in a jail, or hospital.
I don't recall anyone ever having someone stop by and say hi when I was in school.

Parents of our elementary school students are known to stop by to have lunch with their kids on occasion.

Wow, talk about separation anxiety.
They can't make it 6 hours without seeing each other?
I would have hated that, because lunch time was spark one up time, not family reunion time.

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Bring in some Pantheistic believers and let the kids decide for themselves.

"Alright kids, would you like to listen to Pastor Mark talk about Jesus or Berzerker Erik talk about channeling the warrior spirit of the gods?"

nah, just troll them by bringing someone to advocate for literal interpretation of the bible, you know stonings, making sure any teacher on their period has to leave the city walls, etc...

TommyymmoT: BiblioTech: TommyymmoT: Who gets "visitors" at school? It's not like you're in a jail, or hospital.
I don't recall anyone ever having someone stop by and say hi when I was in school.

Parents of our elementary school students are known to stop by to have lunch with their kids on occasion.

Wow, talk about separation anxiety.
They can't make it 6 hours without seeing each other?
I would have hated that, because lunch time was spark one up time, not family reunion time.

Smoking during lunch? Man, you went to one tough elementary school.

Spanky_McFarksalot: now now, I'm sure the parents and school would have no problem if muslims came to the school to preach.

right?

Hare Krishnas would be even better.

Solon Isonomia: Good, you're moving to authority - unfortunately, you're citing only dicta and the authority is factually distinguishable. Milford involved an after-hours program and a religion-specific regulation. In this case, you're dealing with visitors during school hours, thus the "limited public forum" situation does not apply. Further, Milford cites three specific cases where establishment clause was violated because religious activities occurred - two of which were during school sponsored events (football game and graduation) and the other was during school hours (prohibition of evolution being taught in class). If you want to use Milford, you need to explain why constitutional protections of free speech, association, or expression should be expanded and the establishment clause's protection should be decreased in light of Milford and the relevant cases cited by the court.

On the issue of whether lunch hour visitation constitutes a limited public forum, I would cite Prince v. Jacoby, 303 F.3d 1074, 1090-1091 (9th Cir.2002) as a case the recognized a "limited public forum" during school hours for purposes of free speech analysis, within the meaning of Good News Club v. Millford.

Prince v. Jacoby also answers the Establishment Clause concerns (1092-1094.)  "Like the Good News Club, the World Changers seek nothing more than to be treated neutrally and given access to speak about the same topics as other groups. Id. There is no question that requiring that the School District grant religious groups access to the ASB forum would ensure neutrality."  (1092)

pacmanchart.jpg