School Blocks Wind Ensemble from Playing ‘Ave Maria’ at Graduation for Church/State Fears

The Rutherford Institute ^ | 6/27/06

[LostInBayport]

Have we lost ALL REASON?

We (conservatives) have not. But liberals never had it, which is why we now suffer through stories like this, which are becoming more and more common.

I find it astonishing how the Establishment Clause has been so grossly misinterpreted over the years, not only by the general public (who think it includes the phrase 'separation of church and state') but by the Supreme Court, who have made application of it a procedure that Rube Goldberg would shake his head at in amazement.

And Sandra Day O'Connor was a big offender in that area...glad to see her step down!

[gov_bean_ counter]

I wonder how many in the crowd would even know the name of this piece, much less its lyrics.

[art_rocks]

Are they banning test so kids won't pray in school?

[muawiyah]

The school superintendent's job description does not contain any clauses that require him to determine what is or is not religious in nature. After all, that sort of thing is prohibited by the Constitution.

[F-117A]

In a related story, Dr. Carol Whitehead, superintendent of Everett School District No. 2, refused to accept money from city, state, federal or private sources because she believed "In God We Trust" to be religious in nature.

[Texas_Jarhead]

"This crap has got to be stopped."

Ah come on man. It is obvious that the playing of an instrumental arrangement of “Ave Maria” at the school’s graduation ceremony is the State establishment of a church. And that, as we all know, is unconstitutional.

[Helinda]

This case and many like it point to much confusion on the law and the constitition. Both sides of the popular left and right usually get it wrong.

This was a school function. It was not a classroom being used by a religious community group or student prayer club. Free speech in this setting is very well protected by established case law. And it is well determined that the Establishment Clause does not prohibit schools from using the facility this way.

But at a graduation, as a school function, the rights narrow slightly. The superintendent is under no obligation to ban any speech simply because it has religious content. The law is very clear on that. So if Hindu or Buddist or Muslims want to speak in praise of their gods, the Christians in the room cannot demand the superintendent to stop them.

But being obligated to ban something is different than not being able to ban something and here the law is a little murkier.

First, just as a superintendent can ban speech that contains lewd language or obscenities, he can also ban speech that calls for "Death to the infidels", "To Repent Now!", "Ms Whitehouse is a Whore!", or anything that is disruptive or disturbing the the purpose and intent of the school function. In short, the law generally supports letting the superintendent run the school as he wishes to keep good order and make learning happen.

So the issue the courts will be looking at is if this song, even without lyrics, would offend people in the gathering so much that from a largely PRACTICAL matter (not constitutional matter) the intent and purpose of the event would be diminished. The fact that the students have traditionally picked the music and that the song was played at another school event will have bearing, but are not the determining factor.

[ArGee]

Was it Mozart who dedicated all his works "to the Glory of G-d?" Will he have to be bannned next?

Shalom.