Tag Archives: Montana

News

Court validates student’s right to freedom of religion

1 Comment

From One News Now. (H/T Caffeinated Thoughts via ECM)

Excerpt:

Montana’s highest court has ruled in favor of a former Montana high school valedictorian who was banned from speaking at her graduation because her speech contained religious references.

Among Renee Griffith’s planned comments were such statements as: “I didn’t let fear keep me from sharing Christ and His joy with those around me” — and “I learned not to be known for my grades…but for being committed to my faith and morals and being someone who lived with a purpose from God with a passionate love for Him.” She was ordered by school officials to replace “Christ” with the words “my faith”; and to amend the other statement to say she “lived with a purpose, a purpose derived from my faith and based on a love of mankind.”

Griffith, a co-valedictorian of her 2008 senior class, refused to do so and, consequently, was prevented from speaking at the ceremony.

[…]The Rutherford Institute helped to argue the case on behalf of Griffith.  “Renee wanted to mention Christ and God in her graduation speech, and the school said she couldn’t do it — then she insisted that she be able to do it,” explains Rutherford’s president, John Whitehead.

“She was actually forbidden from even participating in the graduation ceremony at all,” Whitehead continues. “So I think this [ruling] sends a shot across the bow of all these other cases that have happened across the country — and it’s a reaffirmation that we still have some freedom in the United States.”

A lower court had ruled previously that Griffith’s civil rights were not violated, and the school district had argued mentioning Christ or God in a speech is a violation of the alleged “separation of church and state.”

“But the [Montana Supreme Court] actually addresses that and says that’s not true — this is just basically free speech and students should have a right, as other students have a right, to mention what’s important to them and their lives when they’re up before the students speaking about graduation,” says the spokesman for The Rutherford Institute.

Whitehead says the ruling affirms to Christian students that mentioning the name “Jesus” in a speech is not taboo.

W. William Leaphart dissented from the majority of the judges – he ruled against Renee Griffith. He was opposed to Christians exercising their religious liberty in the public square.

This is a good lesson about how the public school system tries to force their secular worldview onto Christians. Can you believe that? The National Butte School District #1 actually told her what to say so that she could sound like them. They wanted her to pretend to believe what they believe. And they thought that suppressing her views would cause her no harm at all. That it was OK for her to be suppressed. That is was a good thing to silence her. That her rights could be breached so that their feelings would not be hurt. So that they wouldn’t have to realize that Christianity isn’t stupid, that it might even be true, and that smart people believe it.

The best thing Christians can do is to encourage their children to do well in school and to study apologetics. The atheists really hate the idea that smart people can be Christians. They really hate being confronted by smart Christians. Dumb ones they can accept, but the smart ones make them very angry. That’s what we want.

By the way, this censorship by the public schools actually happens a lot. I blogged about the last time this happened here.

News

Sex education for kindergarteners proposed in Helena, Montana

2 Comments

From the Family Research Council. (H/T Muddling)

Excerpt:

Unfortunately, sex education that indoctrinates children into a liberal sexual ideology is no longer being found just in big cities and liberal “blue states.” It’s reaching even small cities in the heartland, like Helena, Montana–where Tuesday night, parents and other citizens will have their first chance to respond to an outrageous new K-12 health curriculum (pages 45-50) that’s been proposed there.

It would teach kindergarteners the names of male and female sex organs, first graders about homosexuality, and fifth graders about “oral or anal penetration.” It would also teach sixth graders about sex changes, and high schoolers would be taught to “understand erotic images in art.” These lessons aren’t age-appropriate, and may result in more confusion than understanding. For example, in elementary school virtually all children like their own sex better than the opposite sex–we should not be planting the idea that this might mean they are “gay.” In fourth grade they would learn that “taunting” and “teasing” may be illegal sexual harassment. Sadly, teasing and taunting are sometimes a fact of life for fourth graders, but they have nothing to do with sex. And here’s the kicker–the program’s implementation may be paid for with federal “stimulus” money.

You can kind of get an idea of what their goals are for your children. They want your children to oppose chastity and oppose traditional marriage, etc. and they think that these attitudes are healthy.They want your children to normalize behavior that you might think is unhealthy and immoral. And they don’t ask parents for permission to indoctrinate your children. They take your money, and change your children’s beliefs to match their worldview. And they tell the children not to tell their parents anything of what goes on in the classroom. In some places, there is no parental notification, and no opt out.

Here’s a video with a sex educator squaring off against an FRC scholar.

There are real people pushing this on children – your children – and they’re not sorry! And these are the people who decide how MY tax dollars will be spent, and the rules by which my kids and the neighbor’s kids will be educated. This is what you get when you vote for Democrats.

Remember Kevin Jennings, Obama’s safe schools czar. A vote for Obama was a vote to sexualize children.