Running head: Religion and public schools 1

Religion and Public Schools

Adrienne Plummer

College of Southern Nevada

Religion and public schools 2

Religion and Public Schools

When a kindergarten teacher switches her religion to Jehovahs Witness, it has the effect

of changing her ability to actively participate in certain functions with her students. The teacher,

Karen White, subsequently communicates to parents and students that she is no longer able to

take part in any holiday events or birthdays. Afterward, parents complain to Principal Bill Ward.

He and the school district, are put in the position of having to let White go on the basis that she is

not able to meet her students needs. This situation raises the issue between a teachers free-

exercise and free-speech rights against a schools need to avoid violating the U.S. Constitutions

Establishment Clause.

White, as citizen of the United States, has her rights to free-exercise of her religion. The

individuals freedom to choose his own creed is the counterpart of his right to refrain from

accepting the creed established by the majority (Wallace v Jaffree, 1985). The parents of the

students in her classroom may desire that White take part in the observances of their religious

activities (such as Christmas, or birthday parties). However, the individual freedom of

conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or

none at all (Wallace v Jaffree, 1985). If White does not wish to partake in anothers religious

actions, she should not have to.

Another factor in this situation is her role as a public school teacher. There remains an

issue of not compromising the school districts establishment clause and giving the perception

that the school, a government entity, is endorsing Whites religion. That being said, The

Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state; it affirmatively mandates

accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any (Lynch v

Donnelly, 1984). For the school to dismiss White for following the precepts of her new religion
Religion and public schools 3

is undeniably a breach of her First Amendment rights, and this can constitute a move for

reparations. Additionally, the parents who complained to the principal are showing hostility

towards Whites religious affiliation - which, as quoted above, the Constitution prohibits. Lynch

v Donnelly (1984) also states, Our history is pervaded by official acknowledgment of the role of

religion in American life, and equally pervasive is evidence of accommodation of all faiths and

all forms of religious expression and hostility toward none. White has mentioned no intent to

push her religious views onto her students, but has only expressed her desire to follow her own

spiritual views.

Nevertheless, because White is in direct supervision of a young and impressionable group

of students, she cannot avoid advocating her faith to them. The children will be curious as to why

she does not celebrate any holiday or wish the students happy birthday anymore. It will bring

attention to her, whether she wishes it to or not.

For his part, the employee must accept that he does not retain the full extent of

free exercise rights that he would enjoy as a private citizen. A school risks violation of the

Establishment Clause if any of its teachers activities give the impression that the school

endorses religion (Marchi v Board of Cooperative Educational Services of Albany,

1999).

The school district has a duty to make sure its teachers are not sharing their religious views with

the students in their care, either intentionally or unintentionally.

In Helland v. South Bend Community School Corporation (1996), the 7th Circuit Court

stated, A school can direct a teacher to refrain from expressions of religious viewpoints in the

classroom and like settings. Because teachers are acting in a capacity for a government entity,

it is reasonable and necessary to keep religious affiliations behind closed doors, so as not to
Religion and public schools 4

endorse any particular religious viewpoint. This gives the entire population the freedom to not be

inhibited in their own religious views.

The school must keep separation between church and state. It is a difficult line to

traverse, but in this case, White is forcing her religious views onto a classroom of children who

are too young to understand her position. It is a shame for White that she must relinquish her

desire to actively show her religious views in the classroom, but it is necessary in order to not

disturb the students in their public learning environment.

Ifthe conduct endorses a particular religion and is an activity that students,

parents, and members of the public might reasonably perceive to bear the imprimatur of

the school, creating the requisite state action, then the activity infringes on the rights of

others and must be prohibited (Roberts v Madigan, 1990).

White could let the students celebrate their national traditions, such as Christmas and birthdays,

without taking an opposing stance against them. If she is adamant about her refusal to let the

children have their holidays because she is a Jehovahs Witness, then she is now infringing upon

their rights. Being an employee for a government agency prohibits that type of transgression, and

I believe her removal to be just and imminent.

Religion and public schools 5

References

Helland v South Bend Community School Corporation, 93 F.3d 327 (7th Cir. 1996).

Lynch v Donnelly. 465 U.S. 668 (1984).

Marchi v Board of Cooperative Educational Services of Albany, 173 F.3d 469 (2nd Cir. 1999).

Roberts v Madigan, 921 F.2d 1047 (10th Cir. 1990).

Wallace v Jaffree. 472 U.S. 38 (1985).