Montgomery School officials announced that the Bush administration in partnership with  a national religious group is seeking the power to force the Montgomery County school district to put recruitment fliers for an afterschool Bible club in elementary school children's backpacks
On June 11, 2003, the U.S. Justice Department's civil rights division filed an amicus brief in supporting the effort of the Child Evangelism Fellowship (CEF) of Maryland to promote its Good News Clubs. (The Bush Administration has already won a similar suit on behalf of CEF in New Jersey.)
The Bush administration brief,
"CEF offers students educational, cultural, and recreational                         opportunities that are similar to activities offered by other                        community organizations that submit fliers for inclusion in the                        [students'] take- home folders.
"Through its Good News Clubs, CEF strives to foster                        self-esteem in youth and to instill morals and character in                        children while providing a positive recreational experience.                        .  . . That CEF does these things from a religious viewpoint                        does not change the fact that its activities meet the [school]                       board's criteria for inclusion in the take-home folders."
The school district is fighting this suit 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The school's attorneys argue,
"An integral part of CEF's evangelical mission is to locate                         children who have not yet accepted Jesus Christ as their                        Savior," the school district's attorneys wrote. "Requiring                         teachers to force students to accept and distribute CEF's                         materials would result in the unconstitutional coercion of                         the students to proselytize on CEF's behalf."
The district has allowed the religious group to post notices on school property.
Generally, U.S. courts rule that if a school district provides an open forum for many different groups, religious organizations must be allowed to use it.
According to CEF's attorney, Nathan Adams, chief litigation counsel for the Christian Legal Society in Annandale,  other school districts are surrendering without a contest. The Fairfax County School Board voted unanimously in January to allow religious groups to distribute fliers after being told that courts were moving in that direction.
Fairfax County schools spokesman Paul Regnier said all groups are allowed to send one flier through backpacks at the beginning of the school year, but any others require the principal's permission. Other Virginia  counties follow or report they plan to follow similar rules.
The Child Evangelism Fellowship has already persuaded the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001 to allow religious-oriented clubs to meet after class in public school buildings.  According to Myron Tschetter, vice president of USA Ministries for the organization, there are already more than 1,800 Good News Clubs in the country, almost all of which are in public schools.
Eliott Mincberg, spokesperson of  People for the American Way, opposes the Bush administration's effort to open public schools to religious organizations. He said, "They are trying to evangelize kids."
Prayer in the Public Schools
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require that the Secretary of Education issue guidance to school administrators every 2 years on how to comply with constitutional protections of prayer in public schools.  In addition, the 2001 Act requires that each school certify its compliance in writing by March 15, 2003 to receive federal funds. On Feb. 7, 2003, the Dept. of Education issued this guidance for schools.
Opponents argue these new "guidelines" are based on a biased reading of case law. Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State argued "Federal courts have split over the legality of some religious activities in public schools, such as so-called 'student-initiated prayer,' at public school events. Yet these guidelines flatly state that such activities are legal."
Supporters claim the rules appropriately clarify and add an enforcement element to policies that were established in 1995 and revised in 1998.
American Atheists, Inc. press release NEW BUSH RULES FOR SCHOOLS PROMOTE RELIGION, "PRAYER BULLYING"  Feb. 14. 2003
New guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Education concerning religious activity in public schools give a "green light for prayer bullying" and do nothing to protect students who do not wish to participate in such events, American Atheists charged today.
The new DOE rules go beyond previous guidelines by permitting teachers to participate in religious activities with students such as the "see you at the pole" gatherings, and mistakenly inform school districts that "student led" religious exhortations during official events are permissible.
"Students are going be under more pressure to join in religious activities, especially when they see teachers participating," warned Ellen Johnson, President of American Atheists. "And the Bush guidelines say nothing about the problem of 'prayer bullying' in schools by religious students trained and unleashed on the student body by off-campus ministries."
Ron Barrier, National Spokesman for American Atheists, said that the new Department of Education regulations ignore Supreme court decisions the Bush administration does not agree with. "The court has struck down the bogus practice of so-called 'student led' prayer at high school football games and other athletic events," said Mr. Barrier. "And it is still highly questionable whether 'student led' prayer or other religious choreography  at official school ceremonies pass constitutional muster."
"With 350,000 churches, temples and other houses of worship in this country, religious groups have plenty of opportunity to practice their faith," added Mr. Barrier. "The push for religious expression in public schools is due to the fact that religious groups insist on turning our public schools not only into supernatural recruiting grounds, but religious battlefields also."
For more information, please contact: Ellen Johnson, President   (973) 334-5110 Ron Barrier, Nat'l. Spokesman  (718) 967-6453
[According to the regulations below, there is nothing schools can do to limit "student led" prayer programs which enable students to increase their peer pressure on other religious groups homosexuals, and agnostics. Emphasis mine. -- cl.]
Section 9524 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act ("ESEA") of 1965, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, requires the Secretary to issue guidance on constitutionally protected prayer in public elementary and secondary schools. In addition, Section 9524 requires that, as a condition of receiving ESEA funds, a local educational   agency ("LEA") must certify in writing to its State educational agency      ("SEA") that it has no policy that prevents, or otherwise denies  participation in, constitutionally protected prayer in public schools as set forth in this guidance.
Office of Elementary and Secondary Education Attention: Jeanette Lim U.S. Department of Education 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.  Washington, D.C. 20202
The SEA's submission should describe what investigation or enforcement action the SEA has initiated with respect to each listed LEA and the status of the investigation or action. The SEA should not send the LEA certifications to the Secretary, but should maintain these records in accordance with its usual records retention policy.
Enforcement of Section 9524
LEAs are required to file the certification as a condition of receiving funds under the ESEA. If an LEA fails to file the required certification, or files it in bad faith, the SEA should ensure compliance in accordance with its regular enforcement procedures. The Secretary considers an LEA to have filed a certification in bad faith if the LEA files the certification even though it has a policy that prevents, or otherwise denies participation in, constitutionally protected prayer in public elementary and secondary schools as set forth in this guidance.
The General Education Provisions Act ("GEPA") authorizes the Secretary to bring enforcement actions against recipients of Federal education funds that are not in compliance with the law. Such measures may include withholding funds until the recipient comes into compliance. Section 9524 provides the Secretary with specific authority to issue and enforce orders with respect to an LEA that fails to provide the required certification to its SEA or files the certification in bad faith.
Overview of Governing Constitutional Principles
The relationship between religion and government in the United States is governed by the First Amendment to the Constitution, which both prevents the government from establishing religion and protects privately initiated religious expression and activities from government interference and discrimination. [ 1 ] The First Amendment thus establishes certain limits on the conduct of public school officials as it relates to religious activity, including prayer.
The legal rules that govern the issue of constitutionally protected prayer in the public schools are similar to those that govern religious expression generally. Thus, in discussing the operation of Section 9524 of the ESEA, this guidance sometimes speaks in terms of "religious expression." There are a variety of issues relating to religion in the public schools, however, that this guidance is not intended to address.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer. [ 2 ] Accordingly, the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals, and the line between government sponsored and privately initiated religious expression is vital to a proper understanding of the First Amendment's scope. As the Court has explained in several cases, "there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." [ 3 ]
The Supreme Court's decisions over the past forty years set forth principles that distinguish impermissible governmental religious speech from the constitutionally protected private religious speech of students. For example, teachers and other public school officials may not lead their classes in prayer, devotional readings from the Bible, or other religious activities. [ 4 ] Nor may school officials attempt to persuade or compel students to participate in prayer or other religious activities. [ 5 ] Such conduct is "attributable to the State" and thus violates the Establishment Clause. [ 6 ]
Similarly, public school officials may not themselves decide that prayer should be included in school-sponsored events. In Lee v. Weisman [ 7 ], for example, the Supreme Court held that public school officials violated the Constitution in inviting a member of the clergy to deliver a prayer at a graduation ceremony. Nor may school officials grant religious speakers preferential access to public audiences, or otherwise select public speakers on a basis that favors religious speech. In Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe [ 8 ], for example, the Court invalidated a school's football game speaker policy on the ground that it was designed by school officials to result in pregame prayer, thus favoring religious expression over secular expression.
Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer, students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," [ 9 ] and the Supreme Court has made clear that "private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression." [ 10 ] Moreover, not all religious speech that takes place in the public schools or at school-sponsored events is governmental speech. [ 11 ] For example, "nothing in the Constitution ... prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day," [ 12 ] and students may pray with fellow students during the school day on the same terms and conditions that they may engage in other conversation or speech. Likewise, local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, [ 13 ] but they may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against student prayer or religious speech. For instance, where schools permit student expression on the basis of genuinely neutral criteria and students retain primary control over the content of their expression, the speech of students who choose to express themselves through religious means such as prayer is not attributable to the state and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious content. [ 14 ] Student remarks are not attributable to the state simply because they are delivered in a public setting or to a public audience. [ 15 ] As the Supreme Court has explained: "The proposition that schools do not endorse everything they fail to censor is not complicated," [ 16 ] and the Constitution mandates neutrality rather than hostility toward privately initiated religious expression. [ 17 ]
Applying Governing Principles in Particular Contexts
Prayer During Noninstructional Time
Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction, subject to the same rules designed to prevent material disruption of the educational program that are applied to other privately initiated expressive activities. Among other things, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other noninstructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities. While school authorities may impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, they may not discriminate against student prayer or religious speech in applying such rules and restrictions.
Organized Prayer Groups and Activities
Students may organize prayer groups, religious clubs, and "see you at the pole" gatherings before school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other non-curricular student activities groups. Such groups must be given the same access to school facilities for assembling as is given to other non-curricular groups, without discrimination because of the religious content of their expression. School authorities possess substantial discretion concerning whether to permit the use of school media for student advertising or announcements regarding non-curricular activities. However, where student groups that meet for nonreligious activities are permitted to advertise or announce their meetings-for example, by advertising in a student newspaper, making announcements on a student activities bulletin board or public address system, or handing out leaflets-school authorities may not discriminate against groups who meet to pray. School authorities may disclaim sponsorship of non-curricular groups and events, provided they administer such disclaimers in a manner that neither favors nor disfavors groups that meet to engage in prayer or religious speech.
Teachers, Administrators, and other School Employees
When acting in their official capacities as representatives of the state, teachers, school administrators, and other school employees are prohibited by the Establishment Clause from encouraging or discouraging prayer, and from actively participating in such activity with students. Teachers may, however, take part in religious activities where the overall context makes clear that they are not participating in their official capacities. Before school or during lunch, for example, teachers may meet with other teachers for prayer or Bible study to the same extent that they may engage in other conversation or nonreligious activities. Similarly, teachers may participate in their personal capacities in privately sponsored baccalaureate ceremonies.
Moments of Silence
If a school has a "minute of silence" or other quiet periods during the school day, students are free to pray silently, or not to pray, during these periods of time. Teachers and other school employees may neither encourage nor discourage students from praying during such time periods.
Accommodation of Prayer During Instructional Time
It has long been established that schools have the discretion to dismiss students to off-premises religious instruction, provided that schools do not encourage or discourage participation in such instruction or penalize students for attending or not attending. Similarly, schools may excuse students from class to remove a significant burden on their religious exercise, where doing so would not impose material burdens on other students. For example, it would be lawful for schools to excuse Muslim students briefly from class to enable them to fulfill their religious obligations to pray during Ramadan.
Where school officials have a practice of excusing students from class on the basis of parents' requests for accommodation of nonreligious needs, religiously motivated requests for excusal may not be accorded less favorable treatment. In addition, in some circumstances, based on federal or state constitutional law or pursuant to state statutes, schools may be required to make accommodations that relieve substantial burdens on students' religious exercise. Schools officials are therefore encouraged to consult with their attorneys regarding such obligations.
Religious Expression and Prayer in Class Assignments
Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Such home and classroom work should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school. Thus, if a teacher's assignment involves writing a poem, the work of a student who submits a poem in the form of a prayer (for example, a psalm) should be judged on the basis of academic standards (such as literary quality) and neither penalized nor rewarded on account of its religious content.
Student Assemblies and Extracurricular Events
Student speakers at student assemblies and extracurricular activities such as sporting events may not be selected on a basis that either favors or disfavors religious speech. Where student speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content. By contrast, where school officials determine or substantially control the content of what is expressed, such speech is attributable to the school and may not include prayer or other specifically religious (or anti-religious) content. To avoid any mistaken perception that a school endorses student speech that is not in fact attributable to the school, school officials may make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech (whether religious or nonreligious) is the speaker's and not the school's.
Prayer at Graduation
School officials may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation or select speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech such as prayer. Where students or other private graduation speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, however, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content. To avoid any mistaken perception that a school endorses student or other private speech that is not in fact attributable to the school, school officials may make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech (whether religious or nonreligious) is the speaker's and not the school's.
Baccalaureate Ceremonies
School officials may not mandate or organize religious ceremonies. However, if a school makes its facilities and related services available to other private groups, it must make its facilities and services available on the same terms to organizers of privately sponsored religious baccalaureate ceremonies. In addition, a school may disclaim official endorsement of events sponsored by private groups, provided it does so in a manner that neither favors nor disfavors groups that meet to engage in prayer or religious speech.
[ 1 ] The relevant portions of the First Amendment provide: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech . . . ." U.S. Const. amend. I. The Supreme Court has held that the Fourteenth Amendment makes these provisions applicable to all levels of government-federal, state, and local-and to all types of governmental policies and activities. See Everson v. Board of Educ., 330 U.S. 1 (1947); Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940).
[ 2 ] See, e.g., Everson, 330 U.S. at 18 (the First Amendment "requires the state to be a neutral in its relations with groups of religious believers and non-believers; it does not require the state to be their adversary. State power is no more to be used so as to handicap religions than it is to favor them"); Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001).
[ 3 ] Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 302 (2000) (quoting Board of Educ. v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226, 250 (1990) (plurality opinion)); accord Rosenberger v. Rector of Univ. of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819, 841 (1995).
[ 4 ] Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) (invalidating state laws directing the use of prayer in public schools); School Dist. of Abington Twp. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) (invalidating state laws and policies requiring public schools to begin the school day with Bible readings and prayer); Mergens, 496 U.S. at 252 (plurality opinion) (explaining that "a school may not itself lead or direct a religious club"). The Supreme Court has also held, however, that the study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education (e.g., in history or literature classes), is consistent with the First Amendment. See Schempp, 374 U.S. at 225.
[ 5 ] See Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 599 (1992); see also Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985).
[ 6 ] See Weisman, 505 U.S. at 587.
[ 7 ] 505 U.S. 577 (1992).
[ 8 ] 530 U.S. 290 (2000).
[ 9 ] Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Community Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969).
[ 10 ] Capitol Square Review &amp; Advisory Bd. v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753, 760 (1995).
[ 11 ] Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 302 (explaining that "not every message" that is "authorized by a government policy and take[s] place on government property at government-sponsored school-related events" is "the government's own").
[ 12 ] Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 313.
[ 13 ] For example, the First Amendment permits public school officials to review student speeches for vulgarity, lewdness, or sexually explicit language. Bethel Sch. Dist. v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 683-86 (1986). Without more, however, such review does not make student speech attributable to the state.
[ 14 ] Rosenberger v. Rector of Univ. of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995); Board of Educ. v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226 (1990); Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001); Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384 (1993); Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981); Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 304 n.15. In addition, in circumstances where students are entitled to pray, public schools may not restrict or censor their prayers on the ground that they might be deemed "too religious" to others. The Establishment Clause prohibits state officials from making judgments about what constitutes an appropriate prayer, and from favoring or disfavoring certain types of prayers-be they "nonsectarian" and "nonproselytizing" or the opposite - over others. See Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421, 429-30 (1962) (explaining that "one of the greatest dangers to the freedom of the individual to worship in his own way lay in the Government's placing its official stamp of approval upon one particular kind of prayer or one particular form of religious services," that "neither the power nor the prestige" of state officials may "be used to control, support or influence the kinds of prayer the American people can say," and that the state is "without power to prescribe by law any particular form of prayer"); Weisman, 505 U.S. at 594.
[ 15 ] Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 302; Mergens, 496 U.S. at 248-50.
[ 16 ] Mergens, 496 U.S. at 250 (plurality opinion); id. at 260-61 (Kennedy, J., concurring in part and in judgment).
[ 17 ] Rosenberger, 515 U.S. at 845-46; Mergens, 496 U.S. at 248 (plurality opinion); id. at 260-61 (Kennedy, J., concurring in part and in judgment).
The following emails (posted here with permission of writer, mother, and daughter) tell a story with a happy ending. Magick happens!
From: Monica Romero Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003  Subject: religious-Wiccan freedom infringed in MS
A friend of mine's daughter is 11 years old and is Wiccan. Her mother is Roman Catholic but is fully supportive of her daughter's choice and religion. This is no ordinary 11 year old-she has an IQ of 172, an attends accelerated classes.
She attends public school in Lafayette Co. MS. Yesterday, in class they were discussing various religions and cultures. The teacher made the Statement that Jews were going to Hell because they don't believe in Jesus -- that's when the "fun" started. The child raised her hand and stated that the teacher shouldn't be proselytizing, this is a public school.
The teacher later asked if anyone knew of any other religions. The child raised her hand and stated that there is monotheism, polytheism, paganism, and my religion. The teacher asked what her religion was, Wicca. The teacher asked if that meant she was a Witch, she answered that some would call her a Witch. Then the teacher physically removed her from the classroom with 2 police officers (who patrol the school). You can imagine how humiliating/intimidating this was for an 11 year old girl.
They bring her to the principal's office and call in a therapist (not the guidance counselor) from Ole Miss University (without the parent's consent -- mom was home). The therapist tells her that Witches are pretend and are not a religion. The child answers that Wicca (spells it) is a valid and federally recognized religion, and the therapist needed to do some research.
The therapist then asked her if she thought Harry Potter was real-- the girl stated "that's a stupid question, he is a fictional character in books and movies." The therapist continually told her she had to live in reality and quit living in a fantasy life.
My friend's daughter was very upset and came home crying. She talked to her mother, who in turn, called the school and went off on them.
She is scheduled to have a meeting/inquisition at the school tomorrow afternoon. Five of the child's teachers want her removed from class. They are saying that her fantasy life is interfering with schoolwork. As I stated earlier this is no ordinary 11 year old, she is in all accelerated classes, and complains when their work is too easy.
The teacher asked her what religion she was, and she told her. She is being persecuted because she isn't a Christian in a public school. The child didn't proselytizing. She even advised the therapist that she didn't practice spell casting yet, she is still studying, but that Wicca definitely is her religion and faith.
Please direct me towards anyone in the pagan-religious rights community. Or if you know a lawyer who practices in Mississippi who would be sympathetic to the cause, that would be great, I could direct my friend to them. I know I am taking this personally, being Wiccan, but the mother wants to fight this too. Her mother is VERY supportive, and does lots of research herself with her daughter.
Any help you have will be greatly appreciated. Brightest Blessings- Monica
Subj: Re: religious-Wiccan freedom infringed in MS  Date: 1/26/03
I would like to thank EVERYONE for ALL the information, love, energy, support, advice, and phone calls, on behalf of my friend and her daughter. Please post this message wherever the original message (see below) was posted. Thanks!
Here's the latest update. After a bombardment of phone calls, and mailed information on religious freedom, legal precedents, and information on Wicca/Paganism in general, the meeting was postponed and rescheduled by the school for this past Friday. January the 24th.
Thanks again for everyone's advice/support/energy/light/love, mom kept her cool and stayed logical. All involved apologized to the child, and acknowledged that asking children what they believe (religion) and telling them whether it is right or wrong has no place in the school.
The teacher who was the source of the incident has been required to attend two college courses on religious tolerance and diversity. I believe the board decided this in part because of the statement the teacher made about Jewish people got back to the Jewish teacher next door. These courses were designed for educators. The registration for the classes was already closed, but when the professor of the classes was contacted, he was alarmed enough to make sure the teacher was squeezed in. The professor is making a special point to focus on Wicca and Earth Based religions, and the professor will be assisted by two Wiccan associates at the University.
A point was also made that if child wanted, she could have a Wiccan club or simple meeting during lunch or recess, since the Christian children are allotted a Bible club during lunch/recess/after school. This has been a problem in the past, when the child is simply sitting in a circle with 3 friends, or meditating (alone) at recess by an Oak tree. This will not be stopped any more since the children are on their free time, and no one is trying to "convert" anyone.
PS- According to the School Board there were a several phone calls received from an individual where the caller stated whoever was responsible for the child's persecution would be going to hell. The child's mother informed them, that Wiccan's don't believe in hell.
Whoever made that phone call, we understand and appreciate your fury and rage at the child's plight, but making that type of phone call not only makes us look crazy; it actually hinders the progress of tolerance at the school and could make the child's experiences at the school more uncomfortable.
Again thanks to Everyone, if the situation changes - for the better or worse, I will update everyone ASAP. Any responses to this will be forwarded to the Mother and Daughter.
Pinellas schools ponder a $2-million system that would require students to use their thumbprint to get on the bus.
By NORA KOCH, Times Staff Writer Published February 28, 2004
The Pinellas school system is ready to approve a new technology that uses student fingerprints to keep track of who is riding school buses.
Beginning in the fall, the fingerprint system would identify students as they board and leave. The goal is to ensure they are getting on the right bus and getting off at the right stop.
School officials say the $2-million project will save money and dramatically improve safety for students, whose fingerprints will serve as authorization to board and disembark.
If the School Board approves the proposal March 9, Pinellas will become one of four Florida school districts in the process of implementing Global Positioning Systems with a student-tracking system.
"This is Management 101 in transportation. Now we will have good, factual information that we can use in a very timely manner to make our services as good as humanly possible," said Terry Palmer, the district's transportation director.
But some parents and national organizations are concerned about the implications of fingerprinting 45,000 bus riders, some as young as 5.
"This is probably a really good idea, but in my mind it was just this terrible feeling, like they're watching my kids wherever they go," said Nancy McKibben, mother of three teenagers at Palm Harbor University High School and president of the school's PTSA.
Critics say programs of this nature raise significant privacy concerns and teach students at a young age to accept what amounts to a "Big Brother" surveillance society.
"We are conditioning these children to understand that they have no personal space, no personal privacy," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Program on Technology and Liberty.
The School Board has given administrators a preliminary go-ahead, which allowed the district to put the proposal out for bid. Last week, the district sent schools a brief outline of the project to include in school newsletters.
"If my child was in elementary school, I would welcome this with open arms and say, "please, please, tell me my kid got on the bus and got off the bus,"' said School Board chairwoman Jane Gallucci.
Gallucci said the district plans to cover the system's $2-million price tag with savings from construction projects that came in under budget and from sources that are separate from monies for classroom costs and teacher salaries.
Superintendent Howard Hinesely said the district also plans to apply for a federal Homeland Security grant that could reimburse some of the cost.
In three years, the expense should be recouped through efficiency savings, Palmer said.
The state reimburses local districts for some transportation costs, based on the number of students riding the bus. With more accurate computerized accounting, Palmer said, the district will get more money from the state.
Palmer said the closer monitoring of bus routes and timetables will reduce driver costs by shaving 15 minutes per day per driver. That will lead to at least $432,000 in annual savings, he said.
School bus safety has been getting more attention since a January 2002 bus hijacking in Pennsylvania. A Berks County school bus carrying 13 students was overtaken by a man with a rifle, and found in Maryland six hours later when the hijacker turned himself into police.
Now districts want to keep track of where students are at all times. Many schools require identification cards with sensors or bar codes to log students in and out of schools, and some have started using similar devices on school buses.
Fingerprints, which can't be loaned out or traded between students, are the latest bus identification tool.
Under the Pinellas plan, the district's nearly 700 buses will be equipped with GPS transponders, student identification devices and communications equipment and software.
The system will allow the district to monitor the fleet's safety performance, watching out for speeding, railroad crossing procedures, stops and compliance with route assignments. The program also will provide detailed data on how many students use specific stops, and the efficiency of routes, particularly useful as the district adapts to the choice program.
Michelle Bianco of St. Petersburg put her three young children on a bus for the first time last week. Until then, she had been driving Travis, a kindergartener, and Trevor and Erika, third- and fourth-graders, to Jamerson Elementary School.
"I was a nervous wreck," she said. "I even followed the bus to school the first day."
Bianco felt she had reason to worry. On its morning trip, the bus drops off children at another elementary school before taking the rest to Jamerson. There have been times when kids have gotten off at the wrong school and a school official has had to go pick them up.
She thinks a fingerprint system would be a good idea. Not only would it prevent children from getting lost, she said she has no qualms about her children's privacy being compromised.
"I wouldn't be concerned about a privacy issue, because I know the School Board is very concerned about not letting anyone get hold of that information," she said.
School officials and the software company, GeoSpatial Technologies Inc., said student data will be safe. Fingerprints will be encrypted into a binary number, which will be linked to the student's school ID number. The bus database will be password protected, and kept separate from the database that holds a student's personal information.
But the privacy implications of such programs are "nightmarish," said Erich Wasserman, executive director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit group in Philadelphia that advocates for civil liberties in schools and colleges.
"All over the country you have all sorts of infringements on privacy for the under-18 crowd. And those are time and time again substantiated for public safety," Wasserman said. "It's protection run amok."
But school officials say the safety benefits of the project far outweigh concerns about civil liberties.
"I think that's just another safety factor so we know the child was on the bus and got off the bus," said School Board member Lee Benjamin, who supports the project but said he wants to consider it further.
- Staff writer Donna Winchester and Times researchers Caryn Baird and Cathy Wos contributed to this report. Nora Koch can be reached at 727-771-4304 or nkoch@sptimes.com
RIDING THE BUS Pinellas schools are expected to send parents this explanation of the proposed system for school bus security:
"Next year our school system will install a new Global Positioning System (GPS) that will make riding the bus safer, more efficient and will provide parents with a new sense of security about their child riding the bus.
The new system (similar to what is already being used in private automobiles today) will allow the transportation department to know if a student is riding the bus, if he or she is riding the right bus, whether the student got on or off the bus at the right location and, in the event a child doesn't come home, where the last stop was when the child left the bus.
If a bus is late for pick up or drop off of students, transportation will be able to pinpoint the exact location of the bus and be able to keep schools and parents informed about arrival times. In addition, if a bus has an emergency, there is a driver "panic button" that will immediately alert the dispatchers to the problem and allow them to get assistance to the driver quicker.
By using a simple thumb printing process, each student will be accounted for on each bus in the district and that information will allow us to monitor the location of each child during the ride to and from school.
While the primary use of the GPS system will be to ensure the safety of our students, the system also will provide valuable information regarding the performance of our buses on the road and the efficiency of our drivers. It will also assist us in providing data required by the state for purposes of financial reporting for the students who ride our buses every day.
We are excited about this new system and hope that you will be too. Additional information will be coming out soon to schools and parents as we prepare for next school year."
WHAT ARE THEY SAYING?
"This is Management 101 in transportation: Now we will have good, factual information that we can use in a very timely manner to make our services as good as humanly possible,'' said Terry Palmer, Pinellas school district transportation director.
"This is probably a really good idea, but in my mind it was just this terrible feeling, like they're watching my kids wherever they go,'' said Nancy McKibben, mother of three teenagers at Palm Harbor University High School, and president of the school's PTSA.
"We are conditioning these children to understand that they have no personal space, no personal privacy," said Barry Steinhardt, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Program on Technology and Liberty.
"If my child was in elementary school I would welcome this with open arms and say "please, please, tell me my kid got on the bus and got off the bus,'?'' said School Board Chairwoman Jane Gallucci.
A primer on prints
Q: Does the Pinellas school system want to thumbprint all 112,000 students?
A: No. It wants to thumbprint the 45,000 students who ride buses. The prints will be encrypted into a database and tied to the student's identification number. The system will be used only to track students as they get on and off school buses.
Q: Who will have access to the thumbprints? Will they be public records?
A: Only school district employees managing the databases will have access to the prints and student data. The prints will not be public records.
Q: What if I refuse to have my children thumbprinted? Can they still ride a bus?
A: Yes. While parents can opt out, the district intends to explain to reluctant parents that there is no risk to printing their children. The database holding the prints will be password-protected and kept separate from another district database that holds student information.
Q: What happens to the thumbprints if the student drops out, transfers out of the district or graduates?
As our past stories chronicled, 14 year old India Tracy was harassed,  assaulted, and finally battered over a three year period in her public school.  "When was it too hard? I don't know. On a couple of occasions it was too hard and then it got easier and then it started getting bad again and I would come home bawling my eyes out."
Classmates called India a "Satan worshipper" and accused her of eating babies. She was taunted, found slurs painted over her locker and was injured when classmates assaulted her and slammed her head into the locker. After Christmas break in early 2002, India said three boys chased her down a hall at Horace Maynard Middle School, grabbed her by the neck and said, "You better change your religion or we'll change it for you."
She broke free and fled into the girls' bathroom. A teacher stopped the boys from following her. The lawsuit said school officials took no disciplinary action.
India's father, Greg Tracy said, "That was pretty much the last straw because she was terrified"  The Tracys took India out of school on Feb. 26, 2002.
They then filed a federal lawsuit against Union County schools, claiming the crusade, prayers over the loudspeaker, a Christmas nativity play, a Bible handout and other proselytizing activities in the rural school system have become so pervasive they are a threat to safety and religious liberty.
In a May 2 legal response, school officials said they acted appropriately, denied the attacks happened, or said they were unaware of them.
It all started when Tracy declined to attend Baptist Pastor Gary Beeler's annual crusade because of her family's pagan religion. For the past 6 years Union County TN students are excused from class, loaded onto school buses with teachers and sent to Christian revival meetings for three days.
The AP story quotes an Rev. Beeler, evangelical leader speaking to students before they boarded the bus: "I am going to ask you a question. If you are glad to be here, say amen!"  The students shouted back: "AAAA-men!" with what the reported described as "the ardor of a pep rally." On April 30, the crusade's final day this year, more than 1,300 of the school system's 3,000 students attended. The officials argue that the revival is just like any other field trip, with parental permission required to let the children attend. After the two-hour meetings for each of three mornings, the children return to class for the rest of the day.
Beeler reports that he has been contacted by communities around the country wanting to set up similar crusades, and sees nothing wrong with children getting time off from school to attend them. "The principals, the teachers, the bus drivers all have told us that they have less behavior problems after this crusade than they do before. So that tells us the positive effect."
Union County school spokesman Wayne Goforth claims, "We do not endorse, promote or prohibit" evangelical rallies on school time. The school officials argue that their system is neutral when it comes to religious activities, because the crusade is voluntary, teachers chaperone on their own time and school buses are operated by private contractors.
Christy Ballard, legal counsel to the Tennessee Department of Education, "All local boards of education have the authority to allow students to voluntarily attend these types of events. She acknowledged that "it is very clear in the statute that they can't harass a student or coerce them to participate ... and, of course, they can't be school-sponsored."
According to Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at the Freedom Forum's First Amendment Center in Arlington, Va., the school officials need a "crash course on the meaning of the First Amendment - especially the part that separates church from state."
India Tracy was a model middle school student: She belonged to the leadership-service organization Beta Club, chess club, and band. She was a straight-A student and the only girl on the middle school football team.
Now she takes Internet courses at home and hopes to transfer to a public school in Knoxville, 25 miles away.
Union Co. Schools hit with religion-related lawsuit; action claims student was beaten  harassed student was beaten, harassed for being different
By JENNIFER LAWSON , lawson@knews.com This originally appeared in the News-Sentinel and is used here with permission.
February 14, 2003
India Tracy came to expect being sent to the principal's office even though she was a well-behaved, straight-A student.
But the Union County youngster knew she'd probably be the only student with "no" written on the permission slip to attend a tent revival during school hours. When she declined to portray Mary in a Christmas play, she also was sent to the principal's office.
India and her parents, Greg and Sarajane Tracy, allege other students taunted her, beat her and ridiculed her religion for years. Fed up with the treatment, her parents filed a federal lawsuit on her behalf Thursday.
The lawsuit claims the Union County school system violated India's civil rights by promoting and endorsing religious activities, denied her right to freely exercise her religion and failed to protect her from harassment and physical and verbal abuse.
The first time the Tracys declined to allow their daughter to attend the two-hour, fundamental Christian services held over three days was in 1999, when she was in the fourth grade. The family had bought 11 acres in Union County because they thought the area was beautiful.
"The principal had called me to the office because mine was the only slip that said no," said India, now 14. "He asked me why I didn't want to go. He asked my religion. I told him I didn't want to talk about it and for him to call my parents."
Sarajane Tracy told the principal that she also did not want to discuss religion because she didn't think it belonged in school, she said. The family could be anything - Buddhist, Jewish or Islamic - and it shouldn't matter, she said. The family follows the ancient religious tradition of Paganism, which embraces kinship with nature, positive morality and acknowledges both the female and male side of Deity, according to the Pagan Federation.
India was the only student left in her class during the Area Wide Crusade in April 1999, so her classmates knew she hadn't gone. The crusade was begun in 1998 by a Union County Baptist pastor and is planned for this April as well.
While declining to comment on the lawsuit, school system Director James Pratt said the ministry rents school buses for transporting the students and some teachers act as chaperones but they must use a personal day to do so.
He referred other questions to Nashville attorney Charles Cagle. Cagle declined comment because he had not seen a copy of the lawsuit Thursday afternoon.
The name-calling and rumor spreading began soon after the 1999 revival, India and her parents said.
Between 1999 and February 2002 when her parents removed her from Horace Maynard Middle School, the lawsuit alleges:
&gt; That India was repeatedly called "Satan worshipper," "witch" and other derogatory names. She was     accused of eating babies and of being a lesbian because she wasn't a Christian, the lawsuit said.
&gt; That India was forced to attend regular Bible study classes during the school day, and urged to lead     the school and her class in prayer.
&gt; That derogatory names were written on her locker in permanent ink and the school refused to paint     over the graffiti or move her locker.
&gt; That India was repeatedly attacked as she knelt in front of her bottom-row locker. Her head was     bashed at least 10 times, cutting her lip, above her eyes and bloodying her nose.
&gt;That a teacher told India to "keep quiet because you'll get in trouble" after she wrote a paper about    religious freedom.
&gt; That a bus driver regularly asked India in front of other students if she had gone to church yet and if     she'd like to come to church.
The Tracys' Knoxville attorney, Margaret Held, said the family did not want to sue. They just wanted their daughter to attend a safe school without persecution.
"They tried being quiet about it and that didn't work," she said. "I would hope that the people in Union County who have been killing their goats and beating up their kid are a minority. If there's one thing that Christ taught, it was tolerance."
During her years at Sharps Chapel Elementary School and later at the middle school, India maintained top-notch grades. She also was one of the few girl players on the football team, played in the band and belonged to the Beta Club and Chess Club.
Her parents pulled her out of public school nearly a year ago, after a friend of hers called to say she'd been suggesting suicide. She was diagnosed with anxiety and has been home-schooled since then.
The suit seeks $300,000 in damages to pay India's tuition to a private school, legal fees and the cost of psychological counseling. The suit also seeks a court prohibition against "the school system's continued religious indoctrination of children."
"Maybe it will be a harsh enough lesson so the next child in Union County who's different can continue through school and graduate and feel safe," Sarajane Tracy said.
"As a matter of fact the UU churches in the area are already offering their support and help !!! We thought we were going to be all alone in this and instead we've been receiving sooooo much Love !!
Keep in touch and thanx,
With Love and Laughter, Sarajane Tracy]
Pagan Conservatives Respond to Issues Raised by Prayer Bullying in Union County, TN  By D'Arcy Matson
Pagans are politically and economically diverse, so when a Pagan Conservative message board discussed this case, their perspectives are interestingly different.
One said that they didn't mind that the kids went to this rally but what happened to the girl should not have been tolerated at all. Another said that although zero tolerance definitely applies in this place, they have a slight problem with usage of common sense when applying zero tolerance to much lesser situations.
I find it extremely frustrating that people are still so intolerant when it comes to differences in religion and spirituality (or lack thereof), race, and gender.
The school is saying they neither condone or oppose (I don't remember the exact words) this rally. Hmm, are they sending field trip permission slips home with the kids for their parents to sign? I'm pretty sure they are, and they probably have a little more advertisement on them then just your run of the mill "my child has permission to attend this fieldtrip" on them. This, to me, would be a form of advertisement, which means they not only condone it but they support it.
No, they don't pay for the buses, but you can bet they called to reserve these buses and got a good deal on the cost. I would say that's condoning it.
The kids get an excused absence for this two hour time period during these three days. Sounds pretty supportive to me.
Then I believe they made another oops. What happened to that girl, either they "weren't aware of it" or "it didn't happen." Well folks, which one is it? If they weren't aware of it, who dropped the ball? She said she told someone in authority. It didn't happen? I'm sure whoever said that has kept an eagle eye on that girl that they know what happens minute by minute in that school. Right.
My question here though, is, were the parents being advocates for their daughter when all this was happening? If they weren't able to advocate for her, for whatever reason, did they have a support group so someone else could have advocated and maybe enlightened the school board on some diversity issues? (Personally, my advocating would be more like a Mama bear enlightening someone who's doing harm to her cubs.) [Editor's note: Since the battering, at least, the mother contacted the local UUs who are now a support group for her and her daughter.] Do these people only single out Pagans, or are they the same way with Muslims, Jews, etc.?
Everybody has opinions, be it on religion or whatnot. And they do have a right to voice their opinions, that is in the constitution. But, when the opinions become threats, and the threats become physically harmful.... that is assault and battery, and assault and battery are criminal acts! And isn't a person that knowingly stands by and allows it to happen considered to be an accomplice? If kids today are not taught this by parents, peers, teachers, standers-by, whoever....this will not only continue, it will escalate. At 2-10 years of age we can tell them, "hitting is not ok." After that age, they need to know that it is not only "not ok" it is assault and a really hard way to learn about the court and legal system, and "time out" is now served with a bunch of really scary people that would love nothing better than to.... well, now I'm rambling.
Maybe it's time Pagans should barrage the Family, Children and Happy Place administration with an onslaught of letters, emails, etc. letting them know that we are Proud, we are Pagans, our children are in your (our) schools and we are not going to "fly silently into the night." It is time for them to act accordingly. We pay education taxes (and the levees), too. Talk about your Pagan Unity Campaign!
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require that the Secretary of Education issue guidance to school administrators every 2 years on how to comply with constitutional protections of prayer in public schools.  In addition, the 2001 Act requires that each school certify its compliance in writing by March 15, 2003 to receive federal funds. On Feb. 7, 2003, the Dept. of Education issued this
Opponents argue these new "guidelines" are based on a biased reading of case law. Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State argued "Federal courts have split over the legality of some religious activities in public schools, such as so-called 'student-initiated prayer,' at public school events. Yet these guidelines flatly state that such activities are legal."
Supporters claim the rules appropriately clarify and add an enforcement element to policies that were established in 1995 and revised in 1998.
BIRDS AND BEES 101 -- it gives examples of lies and scientific inaccuracies being taught to our teens by Bush's federally-funded abstinence-only program -- and to act to correct the situation.  http://www.naral.org
In the meantime, consider enrolling your child in the Unitarian Universalist sex education program, Our Whole Lives (OWL) for accurate information, a positive attitude about sexuality, and support for diversity.
In February 2003, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the recitation of the Pledge with the words "under God" in public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (see below).
The parties have been asked to brief this issue as well as to address an issue of legal standing. Michael Newdow, the parent who objects to his daughter's school policy of requiring the daily recitation of the Pledge, is not married to his daughter's mother, Sandra Banning, who had sole legal custody of the child at the time of the Ninth Circuit's rulings. Banning has said that she supports the school's Pledge policy. Because of the custody status, there is some question as to whether the father has a sufficient standing (stake in the outcome) to bring the case.
There's an effort afoot to amend the California constitution to make California school systems give King James Bibles to every public school student, unless parents specifically filed an objection. These Bibles would then be used as textbooks in literature classes "without devotional or denominational purpose."
If Matt McLaughlin collects 598,105 valid signatures by May 24, voters would then decide whether to amend the state's constitution authorizing the voluntary use of the Authorized or King James Version Bibles for classes in elementary, middle and high schools. This will cost the state and local school district about $200 million,.
McLaughlin, an attorney from Huntington Beach, claims to be chair of a group composed mostly of friends and family. He denied that the group was sponsored by any religious organization.
Is the average school teacher qualified to teach the Bible as literature to children grades 1-12? Do they understand how to do so without representing the Bible as a devotion or denominational instruction? This is normally taught at the college level. Could the average high school student grasp the distinction? How about the average first grader?
The People of California add and amend Art. IX   7.7 to the California Constitution, entitled "Authorized or King James Textbook" as follows:
  7.7 Whereas the Authorized or King James Bible of 1611, was one of the supreme achievements of the English Renaissance, and is rightly regarded as one of the most influential books in the history of English civilization, which has served as a model of writing for generations of English-speaking people, and is an acclaimed literary work of great historic importance, and whereas it is commendable in the study of such secular disciplines as history, literature, culture, poetry, law, language, ethics, science, and philosophy, such that familiarity with the work broadens the education of the mind, and can, and for this statute shall, be done without a devotional purpose nor any denominational instruction to accept or reject its religious components , for as the general education of the populace, and not the establishment of any sectarian religion nor doctrinal instruction, shall be the purpose or effect herein (and such avowed purposes are to be clearly announced), the People therefore direct that the King James Bible, without apocrypha, conformable in spelling, capitalization, and typeface to modern text, and including the translators' preface to King James, the translators' introductory remarks to the reader, a standard concordance, a glossary defining only archaic words and pronouns, and without commentary, footnotes, or margin notes, is to be provided henceforth as a textbook for grades one through twelve to be furnished without cost to each of those pupils whose parents do not opt-out by specific objection. The reading and study of the book shall be voluntary.
This statute shall be interpreted and applied consistent with these statements by the United States Supreme Court: "[I]ntegrated into the school curriculum, where the Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, or the like." ( Stone vs. Graham , 449 U.S. 39 (1980)), and, "It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment." ( School District of Abington Township vs. Schempp , 374 U.S. 225 (1963)).
Federal Appeals Court Won't Reconsider "UNDER GOD" Phrase in Pledge By Khrysso Heart LeFey February 28, 2003
A panel of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals announced on February 28 that it will not reconsider its decision that the Pledge of Allegiance endorses religion and violates the separation of church and state because of the phrase "under God."
This affirmation by the Ninth Circuit means that in states under its jurisdiction--Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington--the "under God" portion could be dropped from the official pledge recitation.
Michael Newdow, a California physician with a law degree, filed his original suit as a challenge to a 1954 action by Congress that inserted the phrase "under God" into the original pledge.  A related dispute involved a custody battle between Dr. Newdow and the mother of his 8-year-old daughter, who disputed Newdow's standing in the case. In a decision announced in the January 2003 issue of the CUUPS-TC News, the court said that Newdow did have proper legal standing.
The Bush Administration, which was behind the unsuccessful appeal, must now take its case to the Supreme Court.
The following is apparently close to what the author of the original author wanted:               "I pledge allegiance to my Flag,                and to the Republic for which it stands,                one nation, indivisible,                with equality, liberty and justice for all."
And here are some pages on this subject, including some more background about the legal requirements (or lack thereof)
The American Humanist Association  Supports the court's decision. Their site has talking points, news releases, information and links to other organizations. http://www.americanhumanist.org
The transcript from the Pew Forum's recent event, " Under God? A Discussion of the Constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance , " is now available online. Featured speakers were Doug Laycock (Counsel of Record for 32 Christian and Jewish clergy, urging the Court to affirm the 9th Circuit's ruling) and Jay Alan Sekulow (Counsel of Record for United States Senators and Congressmen and the Committee to Protect the Pledge, urging the Court to reverse the 9th Circuit's ruling). E.J. Dionne Jr. moderated the discussion, and respondent Michael Newdow contributed comments.
In February 2003, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the recitation of the Pledge with the words "under God" in public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (see below).
The parties have been asked to brief this issue as well as to address an issue of legal standing. Michael Newdow, the parent who objects to his daughter's school policy of requiring the daily recitation of the Pledge, is not married to his daughter's mother, Sandra Banning, who had sole legal custody of the child at the time of the Ninth Circuit's rulings. Banning has said that she supports the school's Pledge policy. Because of the custody status, there is some question as to whether the father has a sufficient standing (stake in the outcome) to bring the case.
Press Release from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life Under God?  The Pledge of Allegiance Debate
The transcript from the Pew Forum's recent event, " Under God? A Discussion of the Constitutionality of the Pledge of Allegiance , " is now available online. Featured speakers were Doug Laycock (Counsel of Record for 32 Christian and Jewish clergy, urging the Court to affirm the 9th Circuit's ruling) and Jay Alan Sekulow (Counsel of Record for United States Senators and Congressmen and the Committee to Protect the Pledge, urging the Court to reverse the 9th Circuit's ruling). E.J. Dionne Jr. moderated the discussion, and respondent Michael Newdow contributed comments.
On June 11, 2001, the Supreme Court ruled on Good News Club v. Milford Central School . They ruled that a community religious club could not be prevented from holding after-school meetings which included prayer and Bible instruction, as long as any other community organizations were permitted similar access. Subsequently, a number of other cases have been settled.
Tract Wars: The Radical Right's Propaganda Aimed at Youth
Press Release from The American Tract Society FYI: A Halloween Christian Tract
Spiderman leaps from the big screen to the cover of American Tract Society's gospel tracts for Halloween to swing through the cities and suburbs across the country on gossamer cords of faith capturing the attention of damsel and demon.
The popular super hero promises to save the day for thousands of Christians who look to Halloween as the opportune time to share their faith by handing out gospel tracts with  candy treats at seasonal carnivals and festivals and from their own front porches to throngs of trick-or-treaters. On the heels of Spiderman looms Bibleman, fighting the dastardly with doses of Scripture.
"Steelroots," a tract release written by Ben Cerullo on skateboarding and extreme athletics, makes the Halloween jump for youth and teens. ATS Halloween tract pamphlets and assembled tract-n-toy treat bags spin the gambit of catchy themes, colorful graphics, scripture and text to connect tract readers with Jesus, and link daily life with faith and salvation for "kids" of all ages and backgrounds, according to ATS  President Dan Southern."
This year's selection combines popular favorites with a variety of new tract themes,  and includes an array of toys with tracts that add a sweet flavor of faith -- without the sugar -- sure to brighten the traditionally dark holiday with the light of Christ," Southern said.
Summer at ATS marks the beginning of their busiest evangelism tract season as churches and individuals order more than three million Halloween pieces annually --between summer and October 31.
Spiderman joins Nemo from the movie "Finding Nemo," Bibleman, and Harry Potter as some of the most popular gospel tracts for Halloween this year, according to Southern.
Spiderman treat bags include two Spiderman rings. A bright Nemo fish toy bobs about in the Nemo tract-n-treat bag.  Other popular toys include "Scared Yet's" little green dinosaur, spiders and pumpkin toys with joke tracts, and a "Buried Treasure"  tract-n-treat bag with shiny coin treasures. The "Better Than Gold" tract gives a Christian perspective to the Olympics and to life's challenges. The Olympic-like medallion inside this treat bag makes it a sure winner, Southern said.
Halloween resources can be viewed and ordered from the ATS website www.atstracts.org and ordered by phone 1-800-54-TRACT.
Curriculum content is contested. Advocates of creationism demand that "creation science" should be taught alongside evolution in public school science classes. The debate about how to teach evolution rages in  Alabama , Georgia , Nebraska and Ohio . Advocates of evolution argue that "creation science" does not follow accepted scientific standards and therefore is not a science and should not be taught in science classes. While they accept the idea that scientific critiques of traditional evolutionary theory may reasonably be taught in public schools, they oppose the teaching of religiously based theories.
History of the Law 1968  Epperson v. Arkansas   The Supreme Court ruled that state laws favoring creationism and banning the teaching of evolution in public schools are unconstitutional, because they were based on Christian interpretations of biblical passages, and so establish religion.  1987 Edwards v. Aguillard The Supreme Court ruled that requiring that whenever the theory of evolution was taught in public schools, creation science had to be taught as well did not serve a clear secular purpose and therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Currently unchallenged in court: 2002 Ohio state school board adopted science standards requiring students to learn about criticisms of biological evolution.  2002, Cobb County, GA School Board endorsed the "discussion of disputed views of academic subjects...including the study of the origin of species."
Georgia State Schools Superintendent Kathy Cox apologized for taking the word "evolution" out of Georgia's science middle and high school curricula. Critics included  the National Science Teachers Association, Gov. Sonny Perdue and former President Jimmy Carter, who said he was embarrassed for Georgia. Cox said she would recommend its restoration and claims that she had removed the word in an effort to AVOID controversey.
But she did not commit to reinstating other deleted national teaching standards in the biology curriculum, which scientists say are needed if Georgia students are to fully understand evolution. Good science requires more than merely replacing "biological changes over time" with the word, "evolution."
Cox seems to advocate the teaching of "intelligent design," an idea that life came about through a planned sequence by a higher being, which dates from XIIIth century science. Intelligent design is code for "creationism."
Over the past year an advisory panel of teachers and scientists have been revising the state science standards and had recommended that evolution be taught thoroughly, in accordance with national teaching standards prepared by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Cox deleted
the word "evolution;"   &gt; a de tailed explanation of natural selection --- how organisms with inherited     advantages are more likely to survive and reproduce; &gt; "Life on Earth is thought to have begun as simple, one-celled organisms about 4      billion years ago.   During the first 2 billion years, only single-cell microorganisms      existed, but once cells with nuclei developed about a billion years ago, increasingly      complex multicellular organisms evolved."
Cox's curriculum does not specify that Georgia teachers will discuss "intelligent design," which last week Cox called an alternative "scientific theory," or any other view of the origin of life; but comments about "intelligent design, about balance, and alternate theories" seem to allow public school teachers to introduce other ideas to explain the evolution of living things.
Original story: February 6, 9, 2004 - The Atlanta-Journal Constitution
" Superintendent says her 'effort to avoid controversy' backfired" By Mary MacDonald , with Patti Ghezzi and Dana Tofig
Curriculum content is contested. Advocates of creationism demand that "creation science" should be taught alongside evolution in public school science classes. The debate about how to teach evolution rages in  Alabama , Georgia , Nebraska and Ohio . Advocates of evolution argue that "creation science" does not follow accepted scientific standards and therefore is not a science and should not be taught in science classes. While they accept the idea that scientific critiques of traditional evolutionary theory may reasonably be taught in public schools, they oppose the teaching of religiously based theories.
History of the Law 1968  Epperson v. Arkansas   The Supreme Court ruled that state laws favoring creationism and banning the teaching of evolution in public schools are unconstitutional, because they were based on Christian interpretations of biblical passages, and so establish religion.  1987 Edwards v. Aguillard The Supreme Court ruled that requiring that whenever the theory of evolution was taught in public schools, creation science had to be taught as well did not serve a clear secular purpose and therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Currently unchallenged in court:
2002 Ohio state school board adopted science standards requiring students to learn about criticisms of biological evolution.
2002, Cobb County, GA School Board endorsed the "discussion of disputed views of academic subjects...including the study of the origin of species."
Teaching ABOUT religion is permitted in public schools, but drawing the line between academic teaching ABOUT religion and devotional teaching OF religion is problematic, especially since teachers are rarely trained to make such distinctions themselves. Such study is normally done at collegiate or graduate level, normally preceded by learning about religions utterly foreign to the community.
The 1995 Education Department guidelines state: "Public schools may not provide religious instruction, but they may teach about religion, including the Bible or other scripture: the history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature, and the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries all are permissible public school subjects. Similarly, it is permissible to consider religious influences on art, music, literature, and social studies. Although public schools may teach about religious holidays, including their religious aspects, and may celebrate the secular aspects of holidays, schools may not observe holidays as religious events or promote such observance by students."
The test case came in 2002, when a role-playing course about Islam was held in a 7th grade class. Students took on Muslim names, acted out Islamic religious rituals and dressed up in traditional Muslim outfits. Parents sued Byron Union School District near Oakland, California, alleging that a role-playing exercise violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The case is still pending
LEGAL SMARTS FOR PAGAN PARENTS Jeannette K. Waldie This has been making the rounds on pagan e-mail lists and may be in the public domain, but we haven't been able to locate  the author. If you know the author, please have her contact us so that we may obtain permission and verify the contents.
Part I: LEGAL SMARTS FOR PAGAN PARENTS
I have been open about being a witch for over twenty years and the only instance I faced of intolerance was having old Italian women cross themselves when they saw me coming out of The Occult Shop in Toronto, Canada. I have had employers know about my faith and was even able to take personal time off for sabots. But until now I had also always lived in large cities on the east coast. So when I moved here to Texas, I was surprised by the horror stories I heard and the general atmosphere of fear that is prevalent among many pagans here in the south.
Pagan parents were afraid of having their children taken away. "Don't drive in this county with a pagan bumper sticker." "If they find out I'm Pagan, I'll get fired." These were things I heard frequently. And the fear was contagious. I found myself wondering if I could loose my children simply because I am a public witch. I found myself starting to go back into the broom closet.
When I realized what I was doing, I decided it was better to become even more public, time to learn the facts and become involved. What I found out surprised and reassured me. In most cases involving government agencies, if a pagan has lost custody of children, there were other major factors involved. It may have been emotional abuse, neglect caused by alcoholism or drugs or very poor living conditions. Usually, there has had to have been a history of some kind consisting of at least one other complaint. It is very unlikely for a state agency to remove children from a home on the first visit. Custody fights started by ex-spouses or relatives because of religion are more complicated.
But as the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in January, 1992; "Courts have repeatedly held that custody cannot be awarded solely on the basis of the parents' religious affiliations and that to do so violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution."1 But, if the judge is prejudice or uninformed, he may not automatically do this, so it is important to have supporting documentation supporting this ruling. Even if religion has not been raised, always discuss your religion with your attorney if you are involved in a child custody case. Your attorney may unexpectedly need to file a motion excluding religion.
Many times, a lawyer will use religion as a basis if they think it might help win the case of their client. Religious rights also appear to be supported by the courts in Texas. A San Antonio Pagan was able, without an attorney, to have a judge rule that religion could not be discussed in a custody case presented by her ex-spouse. Indeed, he even ruled that the plaintiffs could not use the word "evil." In a recent Houston case, when an over enthusiastic CPS (Child Protective Services) worker removed children from the home partially on the basis of "the mother practiced Wicca as a religion," the social worker was removed from the case and none of her evidence was presented in court.
Often, having a ordained pagan clergy going to speak to CPS on your behalf about paganism as a positive religion is enough to settle a CPS investigation. But, unfortunately, there are people out there who will try to use the courts to support their religious bias. So here are some steps pagan parents can take to prevent such things from happening. None of this should be interpreted as giving legal advice. Always consult your attorney.
Part II: THINGS TO DO NOW
Become involved with the pagan community, even if you are a solitaire. This can help provide you with support and contacts when the going gets rough. This way you can obtain information and connections that can help your case. As mentioned above, sometimes having an ordained pagan minister or other well connected person talk with the government agency involved call resolve problems satisfactorily.
If you have children, consider joining your local Universal Unitarian (UU) church. They recognize paganism as a legitimate path (and have a pagan specific organization called CUUPS.) They also have a wonderful comparative religions course for their Sunday School. This is one way you can say "I go to church" without compromising your religious beliefs. The UU Church is also very well equipped in dealing with religious rights issues.
Become involved in your community, or at least become acquainted with your neighbors. People are less likely to accuse you of nasty stuff if they know you. Or if someone does lay such claims or rumors, it will have less fertile ground to grow in.
Provide your children with some sort of religious teaching even if you believe the child should decide. The courts may tend to favor a parent who does teach some sort of religious ethic over a parent who doesn't.
Remember that the same rights that protect you protect ex-spouses and relatives and their beliefs. So don't blow a gasket when dear old Grandma wants to take their grandchild to their church. Instead look on it as an educational opportunity for your child. This will be an opportunity to teach your child religious tolerance. Kids are very smart and will, on their own, pick up any discrepancies. After they return, sit down and discuss what they saw and heard and what they felt about it. If you let relatives take your children to their church occasionally, they are less likely to give you a hassle about your faith.
Keep a press file of positive articles from newspapers about paganism. This can be used as evidence supporting your claim that paganism isn't about devil worship.
Part III THINGS TO DO IF YOU SUSPECT OR HAVE A PROBLEM
Write things down. Take notes. If you can't do so during a conversation, do so as soon as you can afterwards. Note date, time and witnesses; add any information that can help your case. Include as much detail as possible. Send all letters by certified mail or Return Receipt Requested. Only send faxes if you can verify the fax was sent and received. Always copy your lawyer.
Keep your temper! Be polite and gracious at all times.
Get an attorney even if no legal action has happened yet. It will save you more money and headache in the long run. Make sure they are experienced in family or constitutional law.
Write things down! (Did I say that already?)
Answer only the question asked. Do not, for any reason, offer any extra information especially when dealing with the police or CPS. What you think may be helpful, may actually prove to be harmful. Remember: Everything you say can and will be used against you!
Write things down! (Yes, it is that important!)
If you expect CPS or the police are going to come visit your home, try and have a witness present. Find out NOW from an attorney what the state laws are governing illegal search and seizure. You need to find out if inviting law enforcement or social services into your home without a warrant, waives your right under illegal search. If it does, don't let any official in your home without a warrant.
Get an attorney. Tell the lawyer everything, including your religion, any past history, etc. Be willing to follow their advise and offer to help in any way you can. By doing some of the footwork, you may save yourself some money.
Call a religious rights organizations for help. Even if you have an attorney, call one of these organizations. They can save you time and money by providing research supporting religious rights for your attorney. This will save your attorney from having to do the work and will save you money.
If you have to go to court or before CPS or an attorney, dress conservatively. Wash your hair. Wear NO occult jewelry. The object is to appear "normal."
Don't create a media circus. Most judges despise that kind of thing and it can backfire. If media attention is> required, let your attorney or religious rights organization that you are working with handle it, so everything is done in an organized manner.
Part IV: ABSOLUTE DON'TS
Don't volunteer any information. Only answer the question asked.
Don't mention magic of any kind. (Face it, magic is vastly misunderstood. You don't have the luxury or time to educate in these circumstances.)
Don't sign anything without the advice of an attorney. Even if signing a form means you'll get your children back immediately, it is still in your best interest to consult with an attorney. You may end up signing something which will create serious problems or headaches down the road.
Remember, it is illegal for an government agency to insist on a child regularly attending a Christian church. Remember, religious freedom is a right in this country, even if we still have to fight for it. The good news is that the courts and government agencies are starting to acknowledge that fact.
There are now several religious rights organizations who can lend assistance and sometimes refer lawyers. But it is important for pagan parents to know the law, know what resources are available and how the system works. Knowledge is power.
Blessed be!
Before Bush's  Theocracy
These no longer apply, but are included for comparative purposes.
Press Release from American Jewish Congress printed here for historical purposes; alas, establishment of religion is now encroaching on religious minorities.
The following is a very brief summary of a comprehensive report by AJCongress, titled "Religion in the Public Schools." Copies of that report, which includes citations for decisions on this topic, are available from AJCongress.
School Prayer:
The Supreme Court first held in Engel v. Vitale (1962) that the practice of having a prayer recited daily in the classroom, even if non-denominational, is unconstitutional. This holding has been repeatedly reaffirmed, most recently in Lee v. Weisman (1992). The prayer at issue in Engel was composed by the state. Although the opinion makes it appear as if that fact alone decided the case, subsequent cases have held that all school-sponsored prayers and religious exercises are unconstitutional. That includes, for example, opening exercises consisting of the reading of passages from the Bible, even where participation in such exercises is "voluntary."
This rule against officially-sponsored religious exercises is thus not overcome by requiring students to choose between attending the prayer session or going to another classroom.
Nor is it permissible to permit student volunteers to select the prayers for public recitation, either in the classroom or at school assemblies. Lower courts have generally extended the ban on school prayers to include all regular school functions, including assemblies and athletic events. In one case, an appellate court held that a school district could not constitutionally delegate the task of offering prayers at high school football games to the local Ministerial Association.
Equally unconstitutional was an "equal access" plan under which student volunteers could recite prayers of their own choosing as part of a pre-game ceremony. Similarly, the common practice of high school coaches leading a team in prayer, or calling upon a team member to do so, is unconstitutional.
Individual students, however, may engage in private, quiet, religious activities, so long as the conduct is not disruptive and does not interfere with the right of others to be left alone. Contrary to what is sometimes said by advocates of prayer in the public schools, the Supreme Court has not prohibited students from reading the Bible, praying, reciting the rosary, or informally discussing religious subjects with classmates. On the contrary, any official interference with such activities would itself be unconstitutional, unless demonstrably necessary to maintain order in the school or to protect the rights of other students. Thus, a teacher may not insist on teaching creationism, or resist teaching evolution, on the theory that evolution is a religious viewpoint. And public school teachers may not pray with, or in the presence of, their students. A teacher who abuses his or her position in this way may be terminated.
The extent to which school authorities may set aside a moment for silent prayer or meditation remains unclear, as courts have continued to send mixed signals in this regard. Moment-of-silence statutes not mentioning prayer will likely be found constitutional. But even if a statute is not unconstitutional as written, it can be implemented in an unconstitutional way, e.g., if students are told to bow their heads or stand for the moment-of-silence, or if a teacher urges that the time be used for prayer.
Teaching About Religion:
The Constitution permits objective teaching about religion. In fact, one cannot teach the history of civilization without teaching about religion. Neither can art or music be taught without reference to religion. Objective teaching about religion has given rise to numerous difficulties, among the most intractable of which are those arising from the teaching of "Bible as Literature" classes. It has been suggested, by one court, that only regularly certified public school teachers, not uncertified ministers, can teach such courses. And, at the secondary school level, modern critical Bible scholarship should be included in the curriculum. In short, to pass constitutional muster, any course on the Bible must be devoid of denominational bias.
Public school libraries may include significant religious literature, provided that no one sect's literature is favored, and the library as a whole does not show any preference for religious works. Similarly, the Ten Commandments may not be displayed on classroom walls. Neither may a student painting depicting the crucifixion be left on permanent display in the school auditorium.
Use of Classroom Space For Student-Initiated Religious Activities:
Constitutional Claims for Student Religious Clubs. Student religious groups have often requested permission to meet in vacant public school classrooms during school club periods held either before or after school, or, less frequently, during free periods during the school day.
The Supreme Court has held that a public university which allowed secular extracurricular student groups use of empty classrooms could not deny access to student religious groups.
Since the university was a limited public forum (a place deliberately set aside for members of the student body to express and exchange views), the university's rule distinguishing between secular and religious groups constituted an impermissible discrimination against speech based on the content of the speech. The Court concluded that the bare granting of access to religious clubs did not amount to the university aiding or endorsing religion. It therefore invalidated the university's rule against the use of its premises by religious clubs.
The lower federal courts have divided on the question of whether this ruling should be applied to elementary and secondary schools. However, this unanswered constitutional question is now of practical import only in those cases in which the Equal Access Act does not apply; that is, in the case of non-elementary and non-secondary schools or during instructional time. Those cases are far less likely to involve limited public forums, and therefore, present a far easier case for excluding religious speech.
The Equal Access Act:
The Equal Access Act provides a statutory basis for claims for and against extra-curricular religious clubs. As a result, constitutional claims are now of secondary importance. The Act is a complex piece of legislation. In brief, the Act provides that a secondary school that chooses to allow non-curriculum related student-initiated groups to meet before or after, but apparently not during, the school day may not discriminate against any other student-initiated club based on its philosophic, religious or political content. Thus, the Act confers a right upon all student clubs to meet, but only if school officials permit non-curriculum clubs to meet. Curriculum-related clubs (e.g., the Spanish Club) do not trigger the provisions of the Act. Schools are free under the Act to insist that each meeting be attended by a school employee, who may only maintain order, preserve discipline, protect the rights of other students, or prevent illegal acts.
Teachers' Rights to Hold Religious Meetings:
Unless a school permits teachers to use empty classrooms for meetings on whatever topic they choose, teachers have no right to hold religious meetings in an empty public school classroom, before or after school, even when only other teachers will be in attendance. However, teachers may informally discuss religious topics among themselves, provided those discussions do not interfere with their duties and do not take place in the presence of students.
Rental of School Facilities:
The question of equal access to student clubs must be distinguished from the question of whether school officials may make school facilities available for after-hours use by religious groups, even if no religious symbols are displayed when the public schools are in session. If broadly available to community groups, school facilities probably must be made available to religious groups on a less-than-permanent basis upon the payment of a fee approximating either the cost of the facilities (heat, light, maintenance) or, perhaps, the fair rental value. At a minimum, religious groups may not be excluded because school officials disapprove of the viewpoint they express.
Holiday Observances:
In the leading decision on public school celebrations of religious holidays, an appellate court upheld school board rules which permitted the observance of holidays with both a secular and religious basis, provided that the observances were conducted in a "prudent and objective manner." The court was careful to point out that the rules adopted by the school board were, as written, constitutional; however, particular events conducted under the authority of the rules might nevertheless be unconstitutional.
The rules in question permitted the display of religious symbols as teaching aids, and provided that religious works of drama and music could be performed as well as studied. Students who objected to participating in Christmas observances were to be excused. In a similar vein, it has been noted by the Supreme Court that the singing of carols at Christmas time is a common occurrence in the public schools. In general, however, the constitutional problems with public school holiday observances are not cured by observing the holidays of all faiths, although they are exacerbated when the schools observe only the holidays of one faith.
Baccalaureate Services and Graduation:
The Supreme Court recently held that school officials may not invite a clergyman to begin or end a graduation ceremony with a prayer, even though the prayer may be non-denominational and even though attendance at graduation is voluntary. One appellate court has held that the graduating students may choose to have a prayer offered, although other courts - and the weight of authority disagree. Because attendance at baccalaureate services is not compulsory, and frequently takes place away from the public school, some authorities have refused to interfere with the practice.
Official sponsorship of baccalaureate services is impossible to reconcile with the Supreme Court decision mentioned above.
Of course, the Constitution does not prohibit a purely private baccalaureate service. Two courts have permitted privately sponsored baccalaureate services to take place in rented public school facilities if appropriate disclaimers of public school involvement are posted. Certainly no student may be compelled to attend such a service, or be penalized for a failure to do so.
Compulsory Attendance and Religious Holidays:
School officials are required, by federal statute, to accommodate students' religious practices unless the officials can demonstrate that they have a compelling interest in not doing so.
Two types of conflicts arise from conflicts between the school calendar and religious holidays. The first of these is excusal from compliance with compulsory attendance laws, and is usually covered by a statutory exemption. Where no statutory exemption exists, the student must be excused, at least for a reasonable number of days. However, a policy of excusal must be available equally to members of all faiths . The second problem is whether schools may or must close on religious holidays so as to avoid a conflict with students 'religious practices. While public schools need not close on religious holidays, they may do so as a matter of administrative convenience, where, for example, large numbers of teachers or students are absent.
When a school chooses not to close on days observed by some students as religious holidays, conflicts between scheduled events and religious holidays will exist. One court has held that school officials may, without unconstitutionally establishing religion, prohibit the scheduling of extra- curricular activities on Friday night, Saturday and Sunday morning to avoid conflicts with students' religious observances. And another court has held that penalties (such as the refusal to provide make-up examinations or the lowering of grades) cannot be imposed on students absent for religious holidays. A school need not, however, reschedule graduation in order to avoid a conflict with the Sabbath (&amp; Sabbats) observed by some of the graduates.
Dress Codes:
Students may not be compelled to wear gym clothes which, for religious reasons, they consider immodest. Two key decisions on this matter are in conflict as to the appropriate remedy. One Court held that such students must be offered excusal from mixed gym classes in order to avoid exposure to those wearing what they consider to be immodest clothing.
The other Court held that, while students themselves must be allowed to dress modestly, they would not be allowed to absent themselves from the class to avoid viewing others dressed immodestly or to avoid ridicule for their chaste dress.
Students with religious objections to mixed gym classes, but only such students, may be offered sex-segregated gym classes without violating federal law.
How to Win: A Practical Guide for Defeating the Radical Right in Your Community
Copyright 1994 by Radical Right Task Force
Permission is granted to reproduce this publication in whole or in part. All other rights reserved. For more information contact: Pat Lewis National Jewish Democratic Council 711 Second Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20002 (202) 544-7636
Teaching ABOUT religion is permitted in public schools, but drawing the line between academic teaching ABOUT religion and devotional teaching OF religion is problematic, especially since teachers are rarely trained to make such distinctions themselves. Such study is normally done at collegiate or graduate level, normally preceded by learning about religions utterly foreign to the community.
"Public schools may not provide religious instruction, but they may teach about religion, including the Bible or other scripture: the history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature, and the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries all are permissible public school subjects. Similarly, it is permissible to consider religious influences on art, music, literature, and social studies. Although public schools may teach about religious holidays, including their religious aspects, and may celebrate the secular aspects of holidays, schools may not observe holidays as religious events or promote such observance by students."
The test case came in 2002, when a role-playing course about Islam was held in a 7th grade class. Students took on Muslim names, acted out Islamic religious rituals and dressed up in traditional Muslim outfits. Parents sued Byron Union School District near Oakland, California, alleging that a role-playing exercise violated the First Amendment's Establishment Clause. The case is still pending
American Atheists, Inc. press release Historic 1963 Murray/Abington Decision   Ending Compulsory Prayer, Bible Reading in Public Schools         "A landmark in affirming First Amendment rights"
This Tuesday, June 17, 2003, marks the 40th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision ending mandatory prayer and Bible verse recitation in our nation's public schools.
The combined cases of MURRAY v. CURLETT and ABINGTON TOWNSHIP  v. SCHEMPP were decided by the high court on June 17, 1963. The Abington suit was brought by a Pennsylvania Unitarian family, the Schempps,  MURRAY was filed by Atheist Madalyn Murray,  Baltimore housewife, social worker and political activist.
"This anniversary commemorates four decades of legal protections on behalf of the First Amendment, and the right of  children to be free from sectarian religious proselytizing in our public school classrooms," said Ellen Johnson, President of American Atheists.
Johnson noted that since the 1963 case, political interests and religious groups have made numerous efforts to circumvent  the law, amend the U.S. constitution, or openly defy the ruling.  "There are still people who want to turn the public schools into religious indoctrination centers or recruiting grounds for faith-based groups."
"The MURRAY case, which was combined with the ABINGTON suit, is especially significant for Atheists," said Johnson.
"Millions of Americans profess no religious belief, and the MURRAY petition was the first to openly declare that it was being filed by an Atheist who did not believe in a god.  Back in 1959, when Madalyn Murray began her long trek through the legal system, that stance required a great deal of intellectual integrity and courage."
Today, all Americans, including public school youngsters, benefit from the legal standards set forth in 1963 Supreme Court ruling.