Religion Free-Zone

Can a school classroom be deemed a religion free zone? The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) argues absolutely not.  The ACLJ recently challenged a college where one teacher was firmly against religion in her classroom. This was brought about by a student who wrote an essay on friendship that included the friendship a Christian might have with Jesus.  The student was reprimanded by the teacher for the religious content in the essay. The teacher stated that everyone does not necessarily believe in God and asked the student to refrain from talking about religion with her. The student’s response was that as a practicing Christian it is his duty to share his faith, however he did agree that he would refrain from further discussing religion with his teacher.  Despite the student’s agreement, the teacher filed a harassment complaint with the college and the student had a disciplinary hearing. As a result, the student was prohibited from discussing religion in any form in the teacher’s class, including when responding to any assignments.

Following this decision, the student and the ACLJ complained that this was infringing on the student’s freedom of speech, while the conduct officer maintained his position that the student must treat the teacher’s classroom as a “religion free zone”.  After issuing a letter to the college’s administration regarding the student’s right to speak from a religious viewpoint, demanding that the student be permitted to respond to class material and assignments from a religious perspective, the college responded and permitted the student to speak about religion in class. The college stated that the student would no longer be at risk for negative consequences as a result of him speaking about or responding to assignments from a religious perspective.

This case addresses two fundamental constitutional issues: Freedom of speech and free exercise of religion. Freedom of speech allows both the teacher and the student to have their own opinions on religion and to express them in the classroom. The teacher does have the right to not engage personally in discussions of religion if she is not religious, however in the classroom it is not her right to take away someone’s freedom of speech because she feels uncomfortable about the topic.  Freedom of speech will and should be protective over the feelings and opinions of those who have to listen to the speech. In 1969, the Supreme Court in Tinker v Des Moines Independent Community School District ruled in favor of the First Amendment and protecting children’s freedom of speech. The ruling prohibited censorship so long as the speech does not substantially interfere “with school discipline or the rights of others". In this case, the speech and written assignments does neither.  The author of this article, Carly F. Gammill, wrote that the teacher by stating that not everyone believes in God is asserting her own anti-religious opinion. I do think the teacher has every right to have an opinion, as long as she is not preaching to the class. The teacher's freedom of speech must be protected as well, even though in this situation I do not think she was being anti- religious, rather just pointing out that not everyone believes in God.

The Free Exercise clause is also at risk in this case. The exercise of religion needs to be protected and that is what is at question in this case. The teacher does not want the student to exercise his religion by sharing his faith, while the student believes it is his obligation as a Christian to share his faith. The student deserves the right to practice his religion regardless of the teachers belief. This can be a slippery slope, particularly if the student wanted to preach all class long and was disruptive to the teacher. I do think that someone should not be allowed to disrupt the whole class to preach their religion, however that is not the case here. The student even realized that the professor did not want to talk about religion in personal conversation so he respected this and chose to practice his religion in a respectful way when it could be applied appropriately to an assignment.  The student is not being disruptive by responding in appropriate context with his religious beliefs. The school made the right decision in the end by prefrancing religious freedom over restriction.

This case is important as it brings up recurring issues seen in our nation's history, including cases like Snyder v. Phelps.  In that particular case, free exercise is not addressed but the Supreme Court upheld the protesters freedom of speech at a military burial.  Courts in the United State’s have continued the long standing precedent of supporting freedom of speech in most situations. In the case of this college, the place of religion in the classroom is addressed, which has been questioned and debated countless times in different cases. The issues of teaching evolution vs creationism and prayer in schools have been the subject of several cases and have continued to form the role religion has in public education. I believe that in the end, this school made the right decision and the student’s freedom of speech and free exercise were protected.