Court Cases
All of these cases began being filed because of the first case that was talked about; Engel v. Vitale. It seems as though these other cases didn’t realize the seriousness of the problem that was at hand until this case came into existence. Only because parents didn’t sue the school as soon as they were enrolled in the school, they waited after a period of time to question the request the schools were asking of the students. This case was the key that unlocked the door to a symphony of others. “This was the first in a series of cases in which the Court used the establishment clause to eliminate religious activities of all sorts, which had traditionally been a part of public ceremonies,” (Justice Hugo L. Black) was the conclusion of the Engel v. Vitale case. It’s impact was greater then expected.
If it wasn’t for this case a lot of other cases of the same background wouldn’t have came to the light. It went from a small case trying to free kids that didn’t know any better to helping out parents that should have known better. Now because of it students can create religious groups on their own and be free to their religion even in school, even though some people are oblivious to that point. It helps students express their religion in a way they didn’t know how to previously. People are free to practice religion in school, however teachers or student officials can’t be apart of it. Staffs that represent the school are not allowed to be over religious activities. And it makes sense because nobody wants to be told what to do and how to do it.
But if students in school don’t mind it then are the officials still in trouble? If a student doesn’t mind it and actually likes conversing with the official about religion and things of that nature what is the penalty? Is it still against the law if people who do not want to be there do not have to be? Everything that happened in the court cases was optional except for Abington School District v. Schempp. The student was not pressured into doing this because it wasn’t a requirement, they didn’t have to say the prayer or recite verses if it was against their religion and if they didn’t want to. If this is the case why did the schools get sued, the students didn’t get disciplined if they didn’t do it.
Students weren’t beaten nor were they suspended or given detention. If they didn’t want to then they didn’t have to, so why was it so important that parents sue the school? It didn’t violate their freedom because they weren’t pushed to do it. “Despite the passage of time, the decision is still unpopular with a majority of Americans, ” (Justice Hugo L. Black) because it was nothing wrong with what was going on. Nobody was being forced nor were kids being punished. And because officials cannot have their opinion in a religious activity or topic public schools have wiped out religion totally. It wasn’t meant to be this way it’s just the way of the people because with things this way no adult will have to be present and give his or her input on a topic. It won’t seem as though the adult is being biased by giving an opinion or degrading the student of his or her freedom of religion.
If it wasn’t for this case a lot of other cases of the same background wouldn’t have came to the light. It went from a small case trying to free kids that didn’t know any better to helping out parents that should have known better. Now because of it students can create religious groups on their own and be free to their religion even in school, even though some people are oblivious to that point. It helps students express their religion in a way they didn’t know how to previously. People are free to practice religion in school, however teachers or student officials can’t be apart of it. Staffs that represent the school are not allowed to be over religious activities. And it makes sense because nobody wants to be told what to do and how to do it.
But if students in school don’t mind it then are the officials still in trouble? If a student doesn’t mind it and actually likes conversing with the official about religion and things of that nature what is the penalty? Is it still against the law if people who do not want to be there do not have to be? Everything that happened in the court cases was optional except for Abington School District v. Schempp. The student was not pressured into doing this because it wasn’t a requirement, they didn’t have to say the prayer or recite verses if it was against their religion and if they didn’t want to. If this is the case why did the schools get sued, the students didn’t get disciplined if they didn’t do it.
Students weren’t beaten nor were they suspended or given detention. If they didn’t want to then they didn’t have to, so why was it so important that parents sue the school? It didn’t violate their freedom because they weren’t pushed to do it. “Despite the passage of time, the decision is still unpopular with a majority of Americans, ” (Justice Hugo L. Black) because it was nothing wrong with what was going on. Nobody was being forced nor were kids being punished. And because officials cannot have their opinion in a religious activity or topic public schools have wiped out religion totally. It wasn’t meant to be this way it’s just the way of the people because with things this way no adult will have to be present and give his or her input on a topic. It won’t seem as though the adult is being biased by giving an opinion or degrading the student of his or her freedom of religion.
