Student Writes Letter Concerning Christian Assemblies

[mississippi_jesus_chic]

I know that I haven't posted lately...i've been super busy, but I thought this was an important topic for discussion.  A student at my high school wrote the following letter to the editor of a newspaper.  There has been a lot of fuss over it and personally, I am outraged:



"I am a freshman at Greene County High School, and I am writing to express my concerns on several assemblies that we have had this year.

It is understood that we live in a region of the country called the "Bible Belt," and in this region Christianity does play a significant role in the lives and the views of many people. I not only understand this, but I also respect it.
   
This school year we have had three assemblies where the speaker was a religious figure. The first person was a local preacher. During this assembly he preached to us on the importance of making the right choices and accepting Jesus as our savior.

The next person was a biker-turned-preacher from the Gulf Coast. His program was focused on making the right choices. He didn't preach to us, but he did mention that turning to Christianity helped him turn his life around.

The other speaker was a preacher from Louisiana. He preached on the importance of living in a Christ-like manner.

These assemblies were all concluded in prayer. We were never given the option to not attend.

I respect all of these people and their commitment to the Christian religion just as much as I respect the Constitution and rights given to us by this document. This time, however, the two are at odds with each other.

The Establishment Clause of the Constitution has been interpreted in many court cases as a wall of separation between church and state.

Moreover, it states clearly in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 that no school official shall mandate or organize religious ceremonies.

I have no problem with the assemblies themselves, but public schools are not the place to preach a religion. The Constitution is the reason that this country hasn't crumbled into a chaotic state.

Now is not the time to overlook this important document. These assemblies, no matter how good of a message they bear, are still technically illegal."

END


I feel like there is something I should do.  This is all over the internet.  I googled it the other night and there are at least 5 or 6 forum and blog sites with pages of posts concerning this topic. 

I would like to put the link to the newspaper website this is located on, is that ok?

[Soldier4Christ]

Hi mjc,

It's great to see you here. Yes, it is alright to post the link to the news article.

A response from another student of the school objecting to these statements might be in order.

This student makes the statement about the Constitution and given court decisions but does not have his information correct nor does he take into consideration the very actions of the people that wrote the Constitution either. History speaks for itself when it is not twisted by atheists and precedence does hold high in court decisions. The precedence I am speaking of is the opposite of what this person thinks it is.

[mississippi_jesus_chic]

Thanks Pastor Roger!

Here is the link to the site:
http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080306/OPINION01/803060338

On the website above there are 13 pages of posts concerning this article.

The main thing that eats me up is that this boy claims that everyone is forced to attend.  That is not true.  We are all given the option of atttending the assemblies or going to the library.  The whole thing started because he and his friends wanted an option (according to his mom), but the fact is that they had the option all along!  I am very upset about this.  The whole thing has been blown out of proportion and our administrators are going to be made out as the "terrible people who beat kids with Bibles".  And the administrators don't even set up the events.  Everything is set up by a school club/organization called the Fellowship of Christian Students (FCS).

I think I put this under the wrong section.  I didn't mean to put it under "Prayer" (even though the situation needs a lot of prayer).  I should have put it under the "You Name It" section.

Either way, please be praying for our school and this situation.

MJC

[Soldier4Christ]

Yes, the situation in all of our schools need a tremendous amount of prayer. This subject fits quite well in the Current Events section so I will move it there. Perhaps it will be seen by more people.

The situation where the complaint is made in this manner is quite frequently the case in many law suits. The individual has something against Christianity and takes it to the limit, sometimes to get attention, other times to get back at someone, and others because they are sadly mistaken in thinking that they are going to get a lot of money out of doing so, under all these circumstances it is because they do not understand the context of the court decisions.

The U.S. Supreme Court has delineated the First Amendment to mean:

   1. individuals will have freedom of religious expression;
   2. the government and its agencies will not recognize one religious faith as more valid than any       
            other faith or secularism;
   3. the government and its agencies will not promote religion above secularism or vice versa.

Schools teach secularism when they teach evolution and other such subjects that are contrary to Biblical principles.

Another point here is that many court decisions have determined the right of Christian clubs to conduct and hold meetings in the schools as long as it does not prevent other such clubs to do the same thing.

This is the same thing that many other complaintants are doing and unfortunately are causing many difficult problems and sometimes even getting away with it.

[mississippi_jesus_chic]

Thank you for moving this for me.  I just wasn't paying attention to what I was doing! 

The boy claims that he has nothing against Christians or the assemblies, its just that he wants an option (which he already had), and supposedly its constitutionally illegal.  I don't know for sure though.  I would really like to do some more research about that.  Either way it has our entire community in an uproar. 

MJC

[Soldier4Christ]

Hi sister,

I am more than happy to help you out by giving you many court decisions in favor of schools allowing Christians to use public school facilities for such assemblies.

__________

Arkansas School Dist. Ends Discriminatory Policy Against Churches     Printer Friendly Forward to a Friend

May 31, 2002

(Little Rock, Arkansas) – The American Center for Law and Justice, an international public interest law firm, announced today it has reached an agreement with a school district in Arkansas that clears the way for a coalition of churches which was denied permission to use school facilities after-hours for a Christian youth retreat to now utilize school facilities.

“We’re delighted to resolve this issue in a manner that will ensure that churches and other religious organizations have the same access to school facilities afforded to other community groups and organizations,” said Stuart J. Roth, Senior Counsel of the ACLJ, which is representing the churches. “The school district has agreed to change its policy and remove its prohibition against religious organizations using school facilities after-hours. With this agreement, religious speech and the constitutional rights of our client are protected.”

The ACLJ filed suit in September 2001 in U.S. District Court in Little Rock, Arkansas against the Clinton School District on behalf of Friendship Baptist Church and First Assembly of God – two churches located in the city of Clinton, Arkansas that are members of a coalition of churches that were denied access to a school gymnasium and football field to hold a youth rally on Friday, September 21st and Saturday, September 22nd.

According to the complaint, the Clinton School District rejected a request from the churches to use the facilities to hold a youth retreat that would include Christian music, speakers, and a dinner – citing a policy that states: “Buildings may not be used for political or religious purposes.” Further, the suit contended the school district permits a wide variety of organizations to use its facilities – including the Boy Scouts and the American Cancer Society.

In a settlement agreement signed by the ACLJ and the Arkansas School Board Association and entered today by the U.S. District Court, the Clinton School District has changed its facilities use policy and removed the sentence that prohibited buildings from being used for religious purposes. Further, the school district agreed to permit the church groups to have the same access to school facilities as provided to other community organizations and agreed not to discriminate against any group that wishes to use the facilities for religious instruction, services, worship, or activities.

In conjunction with the agreement, the ACLJ agreed to have the court dismiss the lawsuit.

[Soldier4Christ]

Lamb's Chapel and the Use of Public Facilities
The victory obtained in the Lamb's Chapel case marked an important turning point for Christians obtaining access to the marketplace of ideas. In a unanimous decision, the Court held that religious organizations confronting contemporary issues from a religious perspective cannot be excluded from access to government property available to other groups. No longer can Christians be treated as second-class citizens.

What is the Lamb's Chapel case?

The facts in the Lamb's Chapel case were straightforward. An evangelical church desired to rent a school facility for an evening showing of a film series produced by Dr. James Dobson's Focus on the Family ministry. The film series, entitled "Turn Your Heart Toward Home," dealt with contemporary family issues from a biblical perspective. The church's request for use was denied by school administrators because it was "church related." Although the school facilities were available to community groups for social, civic, and recreational purposes, the rules and regulations specifically prohibited any religious use. The Supreme Court ruled against this prohibition, stating that the religious exclusion was unconstitutional.

What is the impact of the Lamb's Chapel case?

In many cities and counties throughout the United States, local school facilities are the town halls of the community. Access to these town halls is essential for Christians who want to have issues addressed from their perspective. Although many in a community may not feel comfortable going to a church to hear a presentation on a contemporary issue, people do feel at ease attending meetings held in community facilities such as school auditoriums and civic centers. The impact of the Lamb's Chapel case is significant. Every government agency, from school boards to city councils, that has access policies in place for its properties must now allow Christians to utilize those facilities as well. We must take advantage of this new openness in the marketplace the Lamb's Chapel case has created.

Does Lamb's Chapel only apply to churches?

No. Although the particular case before the Supreme Court involved the Lamb's Chapel church, now other community groups that want to address issues from a Christian perspective also have access to government facilities that are open to the public for use. For instance, in Mobile, Alabama, an evangelistic ministry known as "Strike Force International" is now entitled to have an evangelistic crusade at the public school in Alabama because of an access policy that had to be modified in light of Lamb's Chapel. Evangelistic events can now take place in school facilities in the evening as well as in city halls or other government facilities open to general use.

Does Lamb's Chapel only apply to school facilities?

No. The decision in Lamb's Chapel applies to any government facility, whether a town hall, civic center, or city hall, that is open to the general public for social, civic, or recreational uses. We have found that most cities across America have access policies to local government buildings for community use. We have also found that most of these cities specifically prohibit religious groups from utilizing these facilities. This religious exclusion is unconstitutional in light of the Lamb's Chapel decision.

What topics can be discussed when using government facilities?

In Lamb's Chapel, the Supreme Court specifically noted that the purpose of the James Dobson film series was to address contemporary family issues from a Christian perspective. But the decision goes much further. Family issues, baccalaureate services for students, evangelistic events, and discussion of contemporary Christian issues can now take place in government facilities because of the decision in Lamb's Chapel. No longer can the excuse of church/state separation be utilized to prohibit Christians from obtaining access to this new marketplace for the presentation of ideas.

What about policies that still prohibit use of government facilities by Christians?

It is time for Christians to go on the offensive and have our voices heard. This will require utilizing the rights that we just obtained from the Supreme Court decision. Unfortunately, many cities are slow to change, and there are still hundreds of policies on the books throughout the United States which specifically prohibit religious groups from utilizing government facilities that are open to the community at large. At The American Center for Law and Justice, we have undertaken a project to have these laws removed and modified so they conform with Lamb's Chapel.

The procedure to gain access to a public facility is straightforward. First, if you decide you are going to utilize facilities, you must fill out an application form that is available at the seat of the local city government. Be forthright in the application, and state specifically what purpose you are going to utilize the facilities for. If the policy still prohibits religious uses, ask the city administrators if they are familiar with the Lamb's Chapel case. If they are not, we would be happy to send a letter on your behalf to clarify for the city government what the decision in the Supreme Court means. If you continue to have problems gaining access, we have sent demand letters -- letters which state the law and inform the city officials what they must do to comply with the law -- to city officials in order to obtain access. Generally, the demand letter resolves the situation. However, if we find that the demand letter is being ignored and your rights are still being denied, we can then proceed immediately to federal court and obtain an injunction, which will require the city officials to allow you to utilize the facilities under their control.

We have already seen the fruit from the decision in Lamb's Chapel. As I said, in Alabama the Lamb's Chapel decision made it possible for an evangelistic event for teenagers to proceed in a local school facility. In Wisconsin, an organization that wanted to present a six-part series on the Christian heritage of our nation was also allowed to meet after the Lamb's Chapel decisions came down. By utilizing government facilities and inviting the public to attend meetings where our view is presented, we gain access to an important arena and marketplace where ideas compete for minds and hearts. This is where we need to be, carrying Christianity into the fray where it can go head-to-head with other world views and demonstrate its intellectual and practical superiority.

[Soldier4Christ]

Organizing National Days of Prayer Rallies
On the National Day of Prayer, I would like to coordinate a public prayer service on the plaza in front of the county courthouse and government center. I know this area has been used for arts festivals, craft fairs, and political campaign events, among other things. When I requested to use the plaza for an hour-long prayer service, my request was denied. I was told that "separation of church and state" would be violated if prayer were permitted on the county-owned plaza. I have some questions:

Will I violate the Establishment Clause of the Constitution if I sponsor a prayer service on the National Day of Prayer on the courthouse plaza?

No. Unless you are the government or its representative, you cannot violate the Establishment Clause. On its face, the Establishment Clause only restricts the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an Establishment of Religion." The Supreme Court has interpreted another part of the Constitution, the Fourteenth Amendment, to impose the same limitations on state governments which the Establishment Clause imposes on Congress. But the Supreme Court has never held, nor could it sensibly hold, that private persons can violate the Establishment Clause.

Moreover, when your county government bars you from using a public place, such as the courthouse plaza, because of the religious nature of your planned activity, your county is violating the Establishment Clause by showing hostility toward religion. If the plaza is open for public use and access, and if the plaza has been used for such things as art festivals, craft fairs, and political campaign events, then the county is barred from discriminating against your event because of religion.


In other communities, there isn't an open public space appropriate for the prayer service. Some of these towns have meeting rooms in public libraries or in government office buildings. Can we have access to such public meeting rooms?

Yes. In June 1993, the Supreme Court held that a New York school district violated the right to freedom of speech of a church and a pastor when it refused their request to use a school auditorium to publicly show a film series on contemporary family issues. [FN13] The school district directly stated that it was the religious nature of the planned activity that led to the denial of permission. The school district argued that its denial of a religious use of the public facilities under its control was necessary to avoid a violation of the Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court held that the school district had engaged in prohibited viewpoint discrimination. Based on the Supreme Court's holding, and assuming in your case that such public meeting rooms are open to citizen use for the purpose of discussing public issues of importance, there is no justifiable basis for excluding an event because of its religious nature.

[Soldier4Christ]

The Equal Access Act
The Supreme Court held, in Widmar v. Vinvent, that when colleges allowed student groups to use their facilities they could not discriminate against student religious groups. [FN10] In other words, Christian students have to be allowed to use a meeting room on campus with the same restrictions applied to any other student group. The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment is not violated when a government entity, such as a public university, treats all groups the same, without attempting to censor religious speech. The Mergens Court quoted from Widmar extensively as they explained why secondary students have the right to have religious clubs on their campus.

Congress enacted the Equal Access Act to cure pervasive antireligious bigotry exhibited by public secondary school officials in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's school prayer cases. Three factors determine whether the Equal Access Act compels official recognition of a Bible club by school officials: 1) does the school receive federal funds; 2) is the school a public secondary school; and 3) does the school allow any noncurriculum clubs to meet on campus?

When these factors are satisfied, federal law compels school officials to provide equal access to students who want to organize and conduct Bible clubs and student prayer groups. In Garnett v. Renton School Dist. No. 403, a Federal Court of Appeals ruled that the Equal Access Act must be complied with even in the face of a state constitutional provision to the contrary.[FN11]

Westside Community Schools v. Mergens
The United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Equal Access Act in Westside Community Schools v. Mergens (Mergens).[FN12] According to the Mergens Court, the above-mentioned factors should be employed in a standard three-prong analysis, as follows:

1. Federal Funding. Does the school receive any federal funds at all? This question is answered, simply, yes or no. If the answer is no, the Equal Access Act does not apply. If the answer is yes, it is necessary to examine the next prong of the Mergens-Equal Access Act test.

2. Secondary Schools. Is the school in question a secondary school as defined by state law? This information should be available from the local State Board of Education. If the school in question is classified as a secondary school, it is then necessary to examine the third prong of the Mergens-Equal Access Act test. While it varies from state to state, most states classify a secondary school as grades nine through twelve.

3. Noncurriculum Clubs on Campus. Does the school allow noncurriculum clubs to meet on campus? Here the Mergens Court was very specific. Schools cannot misrepresent the nature of clubs that are permitted to meet. The Court explicitly examined the intent of Congress concerning noncurriculum-related clubs:

[W]e think that the term ‘noncurriculum related student group' is best interpreted broadly to mean any student group that does not directly relate to the body of courses offered by the school. In our view, a student group directly relates to a school's curriculum if the subject matter of the group is actually taught, or will soon be taught, in a regularly offered course; if the subject matter of the group concerns the body of courses as a whole; if participation in the group is required for a particular course; or if participation in the group results in academic credit. . . . This . . . definition . . . is consistent with Congress' intent to provide a low threshold for triggering the [Equal Access] Act's requirements. [FN13]
Thus, the nature of the clubs currently meeting at the school is key. Service clubs, for example, such as the Key Club, the Lions Club, Zonta and Interact are not considered curriculum-related.

Additionally, clubs such as the Chess Club do not relate to the curriculum under normal circumstances. For example, only when a school teaches chess as an academic subject, for which students received a grade, would a Chess Club be considered related to the curriculum. The school district's argument, in Mergens, that chess was curriculum related because it enhanced logical thinking and the performance of mathematical calculations was rejected by the Supreme Court.

In Mergens, Justice O'Connor noted that "if a state refused to let religious groups use the facilities open to others, then it would demonstrate not neutrality but hostility toward religion. The Establishment Clause does not license government to treat religion and those who teach or practice it, simply by virtue of their status as such, as subversive of American ideals and therefore subject to unique disabilities." [FN14] When a public high school official refuses to allow student-initiated Bible clubs treatment equal to that given other noncurriculum clubs meeting on campus, it treats those students as second-class citizens. This attitude is precisely the one which the Equal Access Act prohibits.

Bible Clubs Must Receive Official Recognition
Official recognition means that the Bible club must be treated the same as other clubs meeting on campus. "Official recognition allows student clubs to be part of the student activities program and carries with it access to the school newspaper, bulletin boards, the public address system, and the annual Club Fair."[FN15] Under that view, Bible clubs are allowed to advertise on campus. Types of advertisement could include, but are not limited to: flyers distributed among other students, posters displayed on the school walls, notices in the school newspaper and announcements included during the morning or afternoon announcements. It is important to note that the Bible club is not responsible to make sure the students know that the club is student-initiated. Rather, this is a responsibility of school officials.

Once the Equal Access Act is triggered, the school must provide a room for the Bible club. The school must also make its resources available to the Bible club in the same way that those resources are made available to other clubs. Additionally, the Bible club must be allowed to meet at any time other clubs are allowed to meet. If there is a club period, the Bible club must be allowed to meet during that period.

If other clubs are allowed to have school-wide assemblies to espouse their views, then the Bible club must be allowed the same privilege. Secondary school officials are not allowed to discriminate against a student group because of its message. Neither is a secondary school official allowed to censor the speech of the Bible Club by requiring it to delete references to Christianity from the club's constitution, announcements, or other materials.

Sponsors v. Custodians: Faculty/Staff
The only difference between a Bible club and any other club allowed to meet on the school campus is the use of faculty members as club sponsors. The Equal Access Act specifically allows for a faculty/staff custodian as compared to a normal club sponsor. This means that the faculty/staff custodian does not have control of the Bible club. He or she is only there to ensure that the Bible club does not violate school policies.

The Bible club must be student-initiated. This means that students must create and lead the club. It does not mean that they cannot have outside speakers. It only means that a non-student cannot lead the club. Community leaders and others can be invited to speak occasionally.

[Soldier4Christ]

Literature Distribution
Students' First Amendment rights include the right to distribute Gospel tracts during non-instructional time, the right to wear shirts with overtly Christian messages and symbols, and the right to pray and discuss matters of religion with others. Further, schools may not prevent students from bringing their Bibles to school. In fact, school officials must allow students to read their Bibles during free time, even if that free time occurs during class. The standard that must be applied by the school is: Does the activity "materially or substantially disrupt school discipline?" Unless a student is participating in activities that are disruptive, the school must allow them to continue.

As a preliminary matter, it is a constitutional axiom that the distribution of free religious literature is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. Religious and political speech are protected by the First Amendment. [FN16] Furthermore, "advocacy and persuasive speech are included within the First Amendment guarantee if the speech is otherwise protected.[FN17]

The United States Supreme Court's consistent jurisprudence, for over 50 years, recognizes the free distribution of literature as a form of expression protected by the United States Constitution.[FN18] In Lovell, the United States Supreme Court put the case for constitutional protection of leaflets and pamphlets quite clearly:

The liberty of the press is not confined to newspapers and periodicals. It necessarily embraces pamphlets and leaflets. These indeed have been historic weapons in the defense of liberty, as the pamphlets of Thomas Paine and others in our history abundantly attest. The press in its historic connotation comprehends every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion. What we have had recent occasion to say with respect to the vital importance of protecting this essential liberty from every sort of infringement need not be repeated.[FN19]
Of course, the constitutional value of leaflets and pamphlets is not lessened by the fact that they address matters of religion. The materials at issue in Lovell were "a pamphlet and magazine in the nature of religious tracts. . . ."[FN20] Just five years after Lovell, in Murdock v. Pennsylvania, the United States Supreme Court said:

The hand distribution of religious tracts is an age old form of missionary evangelism -- as old as the history of printing presses. It has been a potent force in various religious movements down through the years. . . . It is more than preaching; it is more than distribution of religious literature. It is a combination of both. Its purpose is as evangelical as the revival meeting. This form of religious activity occupies the same high estate under the First Amendment as do worship in the churches and preaching from the pulpits. [FN21]
School officials may not lump a student's right to distribute free literature together with more disruptive forms of expression, such as solicitation. In a recent decision, a plurality of the Supreme Court noted the experience of thousands of "residents of metropolitan areas [who] know from daily experience [that] confrontation by a person asking for money disrupts passage and is more intrusive and intimidating than an encounter with a person giving out information."[FN22] In fact, distribution of literature is, inherently, even less disruptive than spoken expression. As the Supreme Court stated, "

• ne need not ponder the contents of a leaflet or pamphlet in order mechanically to take it out of someone's hand, but one must listen, comprehend, decide and act in order to respond to a solicitation."[FN23]

The applicable standard - material and substantial disruption - is not met by an undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disruption. In other words, it is not enough for school officials to fear that allowing religious speech will offend some members of the community. As the Supreme Court said, "in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression."[FN24] Where a student wishes to peacefully distribute free literature on school grounds during non-instructional time, there simply is nothing which "might reasonably [lead] school authorities to forecast substantial disruption or material interference with school activities. . . ."[FN25]

In fact, several courts have held that the distribution of religious literature by high school students is protected speech under the First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment. [FN26] Note that in Hemry school officials ultimately conceded that students had the right to distribute the religious material on campus both inside and outside the school building. [FN27]

As the Supreme Court clearly held in Tinker:

In our system, state-operated schools may not be enclaves for totalitarianism. School officials do not possess absolute authority over their students. Students in school as well as out of school are persons under our Constitution. They are possessed of fundamental rights which the state must respect, just as they themselves must respect their obligations to the state. In our system, students may not be regarded as closed-circuit recipients of only that which the state chooses to communicate. They may not be confined to the expressions of those sentiments that are officially approved. [FN28]
While school officials may seek to distinguish Tinker as inapplicable by arguing that a public school is not a traditional public forum, such assertions are unavailing because "[tlhe holding in Tinker did not depend upon a finding that the school was a public forum." [FN29] As the Tinker Court noted, when a student "is in the cafeteria, or on the playing field, or on the campus during the authorized hours, he may express his opinions. . . ." [FN30]

Further, as the Rivera court noted, "whether or not a school campus is available as the public forum to others, it is clear that the students, who of course are required to be in school, have the protection of the First Amendment while they are lawfully in attendance." [FN31] The Tinker Court also recognized that "personal intercommunication among students" in high schools is an activity to which schools are dedicated. [FN32]

Certainly, it is necessary to acknowledge that school officials have "important, delicate and highly discretionary functions" to perform. [FN33] These functions, however, must be performed "within the limits of the Bill of Rights." [FN34] "The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in a community of American schools." [FN35]

School officials need not fear that distribution activities of students may be imputed to them, and that the Establishment Clause would thereby be violated. This very argument has been reviewed and rejected by the United States Supreme Court. In Mergens, the Supreme Court stated, as a general proposition, that the activities of student evangelists in a public school do not present any Establishment Clause problem:

Petitioner's principal contention is that the Act has the primary effect of advancing religion. Specifically, petitioners urge that, because the student religious meetings are held under school aegis, and because the state's compulsory attendance laws bring the students together (and thereby provide a readymade audience for student evangelists), an objective observer in the position of a secondary school student will perceive official school support for such religious meetings. . . . We disagree. [FN36]
Of course, Mergens merely reflects the Establishment Clause's intended limitation - not on the rights of individual students - but on the power of governments (including school officials). As the Mergens Court stated, "there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." [FN37]

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

KNOWING YOUR RIGHTS MEDIA GUIDE
What happens when I am contacted by the news media? How do I respond?

In many communities, news reporters routinely cover local government activities, including school board meetings. For example, if you address a school board meeting, you may find that a reporter is in the audience. This presents an excellent opportunity to share your concerns with the school board and with the news media, which ultimately means the public. There are at least two sides to every story. You can bet the folks on the other side of the issue will take advantage of an opportunity to tell their story to a reporter. You should too.

How do I handle such a request? What do I say to a reporter?

The best way to handle a request from a news reporter is to be open and direct. Most reporters do not cover one topic. They bounce around, often covering a myriad of subjects in any given week. But even if they are covering a particular issue, they may still be unaware of your concerns on the issue and perhaps even ill-informed about the issue's intricacies. You can help educate the reporter, while at the same time taking advantage of an opportunity to express your side of the story. Be clear and concise. Make sure you know what you want to say and how you will say it. Get to the bottom line quickly. Focus on one or two key points. Keep it simple. Do not get bogged down with too many details. Try to explain the essence of your position in a sentence or two. Reporters work under tight time and space limitations. They often must condense a complicated issue into a few sentences or paragraphs. Why not help them by being clear and concise? When you do, you increase your chances that the news coverage will be fair, balanced, and accurate.

How can I guarantee that my position will not be misstated? If I do not talk to a reporter, then I cannot be misquoted, right? Isn't that the best thing to do?

There are no guarantees concerning the outcome of a news story. Believe it or not, most reporters are not conspiring to slant a story one way or the other. Most are professionals who strive to tell both sides of a story with balance and fairness. But, of course, you cannot be sure what information will be used and what information will be withheld. You certainly cannot be sure how it will be presented. But there is one thing you can know with certainty: If you do not offer your point of view and remain silent, you will have no input in the story. You will not be misquoted, but what could even be more damaging, you will not be quoted either. To compete equally in the marketplace of ideas, you must deal with the news media. You need to get your ideas and concerns into the marketplace, and one of the best ways to do that is through the media.

I do not want to be treated unfairly, though. How can I maximize the chances that my comments will be presented without bias? I just want to get a "fair shake."

Again, the best approach is one of openness and clarity. Tell your story in a concise manner. There is nothing wrong with asking a reporter, "Do you understand what I am trying to say?" By asking that question, you give the reporter an opportunity to tell you how they perceive your position. Remember, communication is the key. You need to be direct, honest, and concise. Do not be afraid to repeat yourself. State your position. Re-state it. Re-state it again, if necessary. As I mentioned earlier, reporters often learn about a story as they are covering it. Help the education process along. Be ready, willing, and able to provide a reporter with any additional information (written or otherwise) to help clarify and reinforce your position. Do not overload a reporter with a ream of documents, but a well-placed supporting document or two never hurts. In most instances, you will have just one opportunity to make your point. Take advantage of it.

All right, what happens if I participate and I am still misquoted? What do I do if the newspaper or TV news story is not accurate?

The first thing you should do is stop and take a deep breath. If you feel the story was biased or unfair, you will likely be upset, angry, or worse. Calm down before you do anything. Before you take any action, ask yourself these questions: "Was the news story fair? Were both sides of the story presented and given equal treatment?" Re-read the story or play back the videotape before you answer. Notice I said both sides of the story. Sometimes we have a tendency to overreact and think a story is unfair because it includes criticism or opposition. Remember, a story is fair and balanced if it includes both sides of a story and treats both equally. A fair and balanced story should never be an advocacy piece for either side, including your own. If after considering all this, you still come to the conclusion the story was unfair, you should contact the reporter who did the story. Express your concerns in a calm fashion. No one likes to get a phone call from a screamer. Discuss the story and explain why you felt your position was misstated or treated unfairly. Use specifics. Remember, keep the lines of communication open. Do not threaten a reporter with a line like, "I will never talk to you again!" That may make you feel better, but it does not accomplish anything.

Your goal should be to develop trusting relationships with reporters and editors. That is right, I said trusting. The newspaper, radio, or television station is going to remain part of your community, and unless you decide to move away, you will no doubt deal with the media again. It will be to your advantage to get to know a reporter or a news editor. You do not have to become best buddies, but you need to talk with them, even when they are not doing a story that concerns you developing a relationship with them, you will get to know them better, and more importantly, they will get to know you better. This builds trust. Trust helps keep the lines of communication open. And that is an important building block to fair and balanced news coverage.

By the way, if you think a reporter has done a good job with a story, pick up the phone and tell them. They like to hear that also.

If I have an interesting news story or would like some coverage about a specific event, what is the best way of going about contacting a reporter?

The more comfortable you become dealing with the news media, the more likely you will want to initiate the contact. Remember, equal access to the marketplace of ideas means learning how to deal with the news media, and that should include being pro-active. Reporters are always looking for news stories, and news stories center around ideas, issues, events, and people. You can alert reporters to potential news items and thereby become a valuable resource. So do not be afraid to initiate the contact. This is where developing a relationship with a reporter is very beneficial. If you know someone at the newspaper, radio or TV station, pick up the phone and give them a call. Let them know what is on your mind. Ask them who you should talk to about your potential story.

If you do not have a personal contact in the news department, try calling a news editor or an assignment editor. They are the decision-makers when it comes to covering a news story. Follow up the phone call with a letter or information that can be faxed to their attention. Remember, reporters have to work on tight schedules, so the faster they can get information, the better. Fax machines provide instant access. But do not abuse the opportunity. No news organization likes to be bombarded with a proliferation of lengthy news releases. Be selective of what you send, and keep it short.

One final note: Respect deadlines. If you call a reporter or an editor and he cannot talk to you, do not be offended. Chances are he is trying to beat a deadline. Ask him when it would be convenient for you to call back. As a general rule, avoid contacting news rooms in the late afternoon or early evening. That is when most reporters and editors are under the gun (particularly in the television industry). Generally, the best time to call reporters is early morning, after they have had their first cup of coffee.

[Soldier4Christ]

The following list are the specific court cases that the articles above reference. For more information on them you may do a web search on them. I am sure that you will find the acrual court documents that way.

1. United States v. Kokinda, 497 U.S. 720 (1990).
2. See Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District, 113 S.Ct. 2141 (1993).
3. Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization, 307 U.S. 496, 515 (1939).

6. Forsythe County, Georgia v. Nationalist Movement, 112 S.Ct. 2395 (1992), 505 U.S. 123.
7. See, e.g., Lovell v. City of Griffin, 303 U.S. 444 (1938).
8. Kokinda, 497 U.S. 720, 733-734 (1990).


11. Schneider v. State, 308 U.S. 147 (1939).

13. Lamb's Chapel, 113 S.Ct. 2141 (1993), 508 U.S. 384.
14. Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984); Allegheny County v. American Civil Liberties Union, Greater Pittsburgh Chapter, 492 U.S. 573 (1989).
15. Lynch.
16. Allegheny County.
17. West Virginia v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).

19. Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board v. Pinette, ____ U.S. ____, 115 S.Ct. 2440, 132 L.Ed.2d 650 (1995).


25. The Club Southern Burlesque, Inc. v. The City of Rome, Georgia and the First Presbyterian Church of Rome, Georgia, Case # 95-CV-2690-3.
26. City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, 46 (1986).

[Soldier4Christ]

The following is the Equal Access Act that is put out by the Dept of Education on this very subject. It outlines exactly what Christians can and cannot do on school grounds.





The Equal Access Act – from Student Rights in the Public Schools     Printer Friendly Forward to a Friend

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.

 

- The Department of Education's

guidelines for the Equal Access

Act were revised May 1998.

[Soldier4Christ]

This is put out by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ ) which is a legal group that handles many of these cases sometimes for free.


Student Rights Guaranteed Under the Constitution and Federal Law


Freedom to Meet with Other Students for Prayer, Bible Study, and Worship

Freedom to Wear Clothing Depicting Religious Messages and Symbols

Freedom to Express Religious Beliefs on Campus

Freedom to Share Religious Tracts on Campus

Freedom to Pray Voluntarily

Freedom to Carry a Bible or Other Religious Literature

Freedom to Prepare School Assignments and Projects From, and Expressing, a Religious Perspective

Freedom to Observe Religious Holidays on Campus

Freedom to Organize Religious Clubs

Freedom to Live According to Their Religious Beliefs While on Campus


The Equal Access Act and the Rights of Students

In a series of decisions in the early 1960's, the Supreme Court of the United States concluded that the Constitution prohibited states and local school boards from forcing students to pray. In the years following those decisions, some groups that oppose the enjoyment of religious freedom in public schools conducted organized programs of opposition to student religious activities. Such groups pressed school districts to prohibit religious clubs and organizations from meeting on campus, and they urged courts to order school districts to do so.

Over time, familiar campus organizations such as the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and Young Life became the target of political and legal pressure aimed at distancing these groups from the schools. Ultimately, student prayer groups and Bible Clubs became the focus of organized opposition and of court orders barring school districts from permitting such groups to meet on campus on terms equal to those enjoyed by other student groups like the Key Club, the Chess Club, and Odyssey of the Mind.

When school officials, often under the constraint of bad judicial decisions, barred religious student groups from meeting on campus and from enjoying equal rights on campus, President Ronald Reagan and the United States Congress responded. Congress enacted, and President Reagan signed, the "Equal Access Act."16 Congress enacted the Equal Access Act to cure pervasive anti-religious bigotry exhibited by some federal courts and some public school officials.

How Does the Equal Access Act Work?

Application of the Equal Access Act depends on three factors. When these factors are present, school officials are required by federal law to grant official recognition and equal treatment to religious student groups, such as prayer groups and Bible Clubs. Those factors are: (1) that the school involved is a secondary school under state law; (2) that the school receives money from the federal government; and (3) that the school allows any other student club or group, not related to the school curriculum, to meet on campus.

It is often quite simple to determine whether your school is obligated, under the Equal Access Act, to grant official recognition to a Bible Club or prayer group. As a practical matter, virtually all public schools in the United States are recipients of federal funds. Only slightly more difficult is the question of whether your school is considered a secondary school under state law. As a general principle, senior high school grades, ninth through twelfth, are secondary school grades throughout the United States. In some states, grades as low as sixth, seventh, and eighth are also treated as secondary schools.17

Finally, the Equal Access Act applies only to schools that either already have other student clubs not related to the curriculum or have adopted policies that allow student clubs not related to the curriculum to meet. In most high schools, this fact question is easily answered

A quick look in the yearbook, if it includes a section devoted to student clubs and organizations, can shed light on whether such clubs are being allowed to meet. You may also refer to the student handbook that most schools now distribute at the beginning of the school year. Often the handbook describes the extracurricular opportunities available to students at the school, including sports activities, curriculum related clubs (such as a French Club, Science Club, or Math Club), and non-curriculum student groups, such as Key Club, Zonta, and Interact.

If the yearbook and the handbook do not answer this question, you can probably get the answer from your school district's office. The district office will have a copy of its policies and procedures available for public review. Reviewing the school district's policy manual may allow you to determine whether a policy requires recognition of such clubs.

The Equal Access Act Upheld in Westside Community School v. Mergens

The Equal Access Act, welcomed by students and by advocates for religious civil liberties, was challenged in a case that went before the Supreme Court of the United States. That case, Board of Education of the Westside Community Schools v. Mergens,18 presented the Supreme Court with the question of whether the Equal Access Act violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution of the United States. The Supreme Court upheld the Act as constitutional.

After concluding that the Act was not an effort by Congress to improperly advance a religion,19 the Court conducted a straightforward review of the facts in Mergens. The school officials in the case denied recognition to a Bible Club proposed by Bridget Mergens. When they did so, a number of clubs were already meeting and enjoying official recognition from the school district. Those clubs included service clubs, such as the Key Club, the Lions Club, Zonta, and Interact. The fact that these clubs were meeting on campus and enjoying the school's official recognition led the Court to conclude that the school district was required by the Equal Access Act to recognize the Bible Club. In doing so, the Court rejected the school district's argument that such service clubs are curriculum related:

[W]e think that the term "non-curriculum related student group" is best interpreted broadly to mean any student group that does not directly relate to the body of courses offered by the school. In our view, a student group directly relates to a school's curriculum if the subject matter of the group is actually taught, or will soon be taught, in a regularly offered course; if the subject matter of the group concerns the body of courses as a whole; if participation in the group is required for a particular course; or if participation in the group results in academic credit . . . . This . . . definition . . . is consistent with Congress' intent to provide a low threshold for triggering the [Equal Access] Act's requirements.20

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Nor was the Court convinced by the school district's argument that the Chess Club, which enjoyed official recognition, was related to the curriculum. On this point, the Court noted that, in the legislative record, a Chess Club was offered as an example of a club that was not curriculum related, unless a student actually received academic credit for participation in the club. The school district's argument, that chess was curriculum related because it enhanced logical thinking and mathematical performance, was soundly rejected.21

Ultimately, the Court concluded on those facts that the District was obliged to grant official recognition, equal benefits and treatment to the Bible Club proposed by Bridget Mergens. The obligation of the school to provide equal benefits and treatment to religious clubs and organizations is an important component of the Mergens decision. In that case, official recognition entitled student groups "to be part of the student activities program [and to have] access to the school newspaper, bulletin boards, the public address system, and the annual Club Fair."22

In the more than fifteen years after enactment of the Equal Access Act, religious students in America's public schools continue to experience hostility and resistance to the proposed formation of student prayer groups and Bible Clubs. Now, with more than ten years having passed since the Supreme Court's decision in Mergens, the American Center for Law and Justice continues to receive a steady stream of requests for assistance from students whose reasonable and lawful attempts to form such clubs or groups have been frustrated by school officials as a result either of ignorance or hostility. When school officials deny recognition and/or equal treatment to student-initiated prayer groups and Bible Clubs, they treat the students who would form those clubs as second class citizens. That attitude is precisely the one which the Equal Access Act prohibits.

Equal Means Just That

Official recognition and equal treatment are not meaningless terms. These terms require school districts to treat a student prayer group or Bible Club just as they treat other clubs on campus. The fact that such clubs may be religious will not justify school districts' decisions to exclude a Bible Club or prayer group from the club section of the school yearbook, from the equal right to make announcements of upcoming meetings, or from the right to participate in Homecoming parades and talent shows. School districts must grant to religious student groups whatever privileges and benefits school districts grant to other clubs.

Once the Equal Access Act is triggered, secondary schools are barred from discriminating against religious student groups because of their religious identity. Secondary school officials may not control or interfere with the operation of a Bible Club. Nor may school officials condition the right of Bible Clubs and prayer groups to recognition and equal treatment on their deletion of references to Christianity from the club's Constitution, announcements, or other materials. In sum, school districts must make their resources available to Bible Clubs and prayer groups in the same way and to the same extent as they are made available to other clubs.

One Difference: Sponsors vs. Custodians?

The Equal Access Act imposes one difference in treatment between religious student groups and other clubs. The Equal Access Act prohibits faculty or staff from serving in any role with religious student groups other than as a custodial monitor. In other words, the teacher-sponsor of a religious group is present only to ensure that the group does not violate school policies or injure school property. Unlike the sponsor of a Chess Club, often himself a chess player, the sponsor of a Bible Club or prayer group is not permitted under the Act to actively participate in the club's activities.

Prayer groups and Bible Clubs must be student-initiated. Students must create the clubs, organize their activities, and lead their meetings. This requirement does not mean, however, that religious student groups cannot invite outside speakers. It only means that students must lead the clubs, not outside speakers. These groups, like other clubs on campus, may be permitted to invite community leaders and others to occasionally speak to their groups.

Conflicts Between Federal Law and State Law

Over the past twenty years, as the issue of religious student groups has worked its way through the Halls of Congress and the Courts of Justice, regional differences have become obvious. In some states, student prayer groups and Bible Clubs have organized and met without any difficulties. In other cases and other states substantial roadblocks are consistently thrown in the way of such student groups and organizations. In fact, some school districts have refused to recognize prayer groups and Bible Clubs because, they claimed, their state laws or constitutions prohibited such recognition. That assertion is without merit under the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution of the United States and the laws enacted by Congress under its authority are the supreme law of the land. As a result, objections to recognition of student prayer groups and Bible Clubs that are based on state law or state constitutions must give place to the requirements of federal law.23