Click here to view full article at www.teutopolispress.com
Dear Editor,
This past week in my little community, graduation took on deep significance. One of our favorite sons, our “Valedictorian,” was told that he could not give a speech he had lovingly prepared. Mr. Blackledge wanted to acknowledge his Christian faith as the source of his successes in school. Yet, upon review, our school’s administrators concluded that part of the speech would need to be edited. The closing paragraphs were deemed inappropriate for a formal educational function.
The paragraphs in question clearly expressed core Christian beliefs. For example, the speech stated, “The Cross of Jesus shows us our own evil hearts, that we put an innocent man up to die…. The Cross demonstrates to us the very love of God who died in our place.” It further
argued “the most important thing in your life is to find that intimacy with God,” and that “only God is big enough to provide” goodness, justice, love and forgiveness to the members of the audience.
Established and settled law disallows formal speeches at sanctioned school events from privileging one religion above other religions, and from proselytizing. Established law also protects people of differing moral traditions (including atheists) from being made to listen to religious beliefs that may contradict their own beliefs. Upon learning of their decision, Mr. Blackledge respectfully agreed not to reference Christian beliefs in his speech.
I know Mr. Blackledge and his family very well. They are good and decent people, indeed, pillars of our beloved community. I know he intended no harm whatsoever, and only wanted to show how his spiritual education complemented his secular education. However, to paraphrase the author of an ancient text, “there is a time [and a place] for everything, and a season for every activity under heaven.” (Ecclesiastes 3:1).
While some believe all speech regardless of content should be allowed in all settings, the Federal Courts have consistently ruled that in the social context of public education and explicitly in formal educational programs, speech can be restricted. Three notable rulings are:
Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) which allowed symbolic protests as long as […]