This is one of those ‘slippery slope’ decisions.
On the one hand, the Judges’ decision depraves the teacher of his First Amendment rights.
The kid might not like what the teacher has to say, but there is nothing saying the kid couldn’t ignore it, if his beliefs are strong enough.
On the other hand, the kid actually is aiding in the ‘Separation of Church and State’ nonsense pushed by Liberals.
So who actually wins?
The kid for ‘fighting for his rights’?
Or the teacher who just had a Judge say that ‘Separation of Church and State’ exists?
“On the other hand, the kid actually is aiding in the ‘Separation of Church and State’ nonsense pushed by Liberals.”
It may aid the case of people who (irrationally) want to purge the marketplace of ideas (in which the government participates at least as ardently as any other group) of all religious speech. However, the teacher wasn’t backing any Church; he wasn’t promoting any religious idea. Which makes this decision all the more incomprehensible.