Question about religion (or non religion) in schools........

[cougarfreak]

I'm on the Site Based Decision Making Council at the school I teach at. A student tonight, is proposing an atheist club at the school. The mission of the club is to promote non religion, and free thinking. What say ye?

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'd first ask you about the status of other religious clubs at the school.

edit (quickly) to add: I'd then ask you what the existing guidelines concerning the acceptable purpose/mission/goal of school clubs are.

[Lathum]

I think we need more information. Are there currently any clubs with a religious background/ message/ ideology at the school?

[gstelmack]

Yup, if there are other religious clubs, yes. If there are not other religious clubs, no. My guess since the question came up is the answer is "yes", and I think you have to allow this one.

[cougarfreak]

The only one is "Fellowship of Christian Athletes", and it meets off campus.

[Lathum]

The only one is "Fellowship of Christian Athletes", and it meets off campus.

But does the school have any affiliation with it? For example, do they get a picture in the yearbook or have staff members attend meetings?

[cougarfreak]

The problem I have is that is a very, very slippery slope to go down. Morally, I object to any religion being promoted in schools, and I am a Christian. I was asked at one time to head up Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and I declined.

[cougarfreak]

But does the school have any affiliation with it? For example, do they get a picture in the yearbook or have staff members attend meetings?

No staff members attend, I'm not sure on the yearbook thing.

[Calis]

Most schools around here have a Fellowship of Christian Athletes, or did when I went through, so if that's the case then sure.

Personally I don't like either of them. If you want to meet outside school and do whatever, go for it. It begins blurring lines.

Although maybe something like a Freethinker's Club would be helpful for schools, encourage delving into issues and questions, which is something that seems lacking in pre-College.

I'm just glad I'm not in charge of a school district.

[Ronnie Dobbs2]

I'd be wary of giving any religion-based group official sanction. If the student wants to organize something on his own unofficially, then fine.

[molson]

I think it just has to be all or nothing.

The school isn't promoting anything if they allow christian groups, muslim groups, and atheist groups to have meeting on school property, etc, assuming all are working under the same rules. If the atheists are only allowed in the basement, after 10PM, and the Christiams have more access, that's another thing.

I would always try to learn towards letting kids get involved in stuff any way they can. I'd allow maybe any group that doesn't engage in or promote illegal activity (there's probably a hypothetical exception out there that would make this problematic but I can't think of one).

[JonInMiddleGA]

FTR (because I figure someone is surely wondering), what I say or might recommend would be heavily weighted about not putting a district in the position of defending an unwinnable case in court.

[Lathum]

I was asked at one time to head up Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and I declined.

I went with having no proble based on this. If they are asking teachers to be a part of their group it is only fair IMO an athiest group should have rights to a presence in the school.

[Karlifornia]

I would have no problem with any religious/non-religious groups meeting in a school as long as they are all treated the same. Let the kids find like-minded people. It would be a great way to make new friends and acquaintances.

[chesapeake]

Assuming this is a public school and already allows unaffiliated non-profit groups to use the facility after hours, you likely can't deny any group the right to use it as long as the activities it might engage in are legal.

[CamEdwards]

I'd point a crucifix at him and shout, "Get behind thee, Satan!"... but I'm probably in the minority on this one.

[Ryan S]

I would have no problem with any religious/non-religious groups meeting in a school as long as they are all treated the same. Let the kids find like-minded people. It would be a great way to make new friends and acquaintances.

Many athiests will have nothing more in common than the fact they don't believe in god. I can't see how that would be an interesting group. What the hell would be discussed?

I am an athiest, and I can't think of much I would enjoy less than an athiest club. I imagine that the people who would join it would be the kind of people that would drive me up the wall.

[PurdueBrad]

Assuming this is a public school and already allows unaffiliated non-profit groups to use the facility after hours, you likely can't deny any group the right to use it as long as the activities it might engage in are legal.

This is actually the correct answer, legally. Equal access law basically allows that if you have other non-curricular clubs meeting in the building, then you can't discriminate against the atheism club and need to allow them access.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Assuming this is a public school and already allows unaffiliated non-profit groups to use the facility after hours, you likely can't deny any group the right to use it as long as the activities it might engage in are legal.

I don't know that we can assume this however, since all (I can tell) we know is that FCA exists but meets off campus.

The other distinction here, based on the original wording at least, is that the proposal is for a club "AT the school". That at least implies to me that they're seeking to have it with the same status as the Chess Club or whatever. Otherwise they would be an outside group (like FCA) requesting permission to use the facility after hours under equal access which is governed by a different set of rules much as PurdueBrad mentioned.

In all honesty, I would hope that there are enough guidelines in place to make this a very easy call for cougarfreak's council. I'm going to take a leap that those guidelines have already undergone enough legal review to be in good shape (although my experience is that I'm probably taking too big a leap there)

1) What are the rules governing school sanctioned/sponsored/promoted clubs? What guidelines exist for approving/denying those? That should take care of the first part one way or the other.

2) If the group does not meet those criteria, then what are the rules governing the use of facilities for outside groups? Equal access means if you let the Catholic League or the ADL or Harmony Creek Baptist Church use it then you gotta let the atheists use it too.

I'll admit that I'm fuzzy without reviewing on what categorical limits you can or can't put on that; i.e. whether you could allow non-political/non-religious non-profits use the facility but restrict political/religious/for-profit entities.

In the event there aren't any rules, then I really hope the school council & district has a good lawyer, a good p.r. firm, and is ready for all hell to break
loose because no matter what the group decides if they're doing it arbitrarily without firm enforceable policy to back them up then I'd say they're likely to end up fucked no matter what they decide.

[claphamsa]

No religous activity that school can control should be allowed.... if they pray during tests you cant help that... but as soon as you even let them use an empty classroom, your sponsoring it, and are wrong.

[Karlifornia]

Many athiests will have nothing more in common than the fact they don't believe in god. I can't see how that would be an interesting group. What the hell would be discussed?

I am an athiest, and I can't think of much I would enjoy less than an athiest club. I imagine that the people who would join it would be the kind of people that would drive me up the wall.

Well, I don't really ever befriend religious people (Sorry) , and in a small town where the church just might hold the biggest social events, it could be nice to have.

Oh, and nobody's forcing you to go to the club, Ryan. You can still spend your lunchtimes huffing paint under the bleachers.

[Pumpy Tudors]

We have the internet. Why not just start an Sparky McPingpong High School atheist group on Facebook and leave it at that? You get the same effect without the shitstorm... unless people are trying to start a shitstorm.

[Young Drachma]

Yeah, my thought was it's kids trying to show out. All it's going to do is piss over an evangelical parent who then demands several Christian clubs (you know, one for each schism that's bound to occur) to counterweight this act of heresy.

It's just not worth the trouble, because by the description you gave "non religion and free thinking" is just a loaded description that would surely just translate to "pissing on your religion because we're young and mad."

They should save that stuff for college and outside the school walls.

[Shkspr]

... unless people are trying to start a shitstorm.

This makes no sense. What are the chances that someone might ever make a request of a school regarding a minor issue like religious identity for the purpose of creating something for someone to be outraged about?

I certainly hope nobody blogs about this.

[KWhit]

Yeah, my thought was it's kids trying to show out. All it's going to do is piss over an evangelical parent who then demands several Christian clubs (you know, one for each schism that's bound to occur) to counterweight this act of heresy.

It's just not worth the trouble, because by the description you gave "non religion and free thinking" is just a loaded description that would surely just translate to "pissing on your religion because we're young and mad."

They should save that stuff for college and outside the school walls.

If it pisses off an evangelical parent then that's their problem, not the kids' problem. They should be allowed to do whatever it is that the Christian Club does (it's not clear to me what that is though - they are somehow affiliated with the school but they meet off-campus).

[Pumpy Tudors]

If it pisses off an evangelical parent then that's their problem, not the kids' problem. They should be allowed to do whatever it is that the Christian Club does (it's not clear to me what that is though - they are somehow affiliated with the school but they meet off-campus).
But I think the point is that they're basically doing it for the purpose of pissing off an evangelical parent.

Edit: I mean it appears that way to me. I do not know if that is their purpose.

[DaddyTorgo]

But I think the point is that they're basically doing it for the purpose of pissing off an evangelical parent.

Edit: I mean it appears that way to me. I do not know if that is their purpose.

doesn't matter what their purpose in doing it is...they have the right to do it - the purpose for which they are doing it is immaterial in the eyes of the law

[JonInMiddleGA]

FWIW, there seems to be a pretty good handbook on the subject, with what looks to be thorough court ruling citations to go with the assertions, from the FCA at
http://image.teamfca.net/siteuploadfiles/FCA/59D89C1C-74BF-4C4F-978D811000467BC8/432A85C5-0108-4489-BD013CD1DBD4F824.pdf

While it's an FCA document & written from & for that perspective, it looks like a lot of the information could be applied to the atheist club or what have you with just a little common sense.

[Tigercat]

Atheism as an important belief is a religion, so I would say if it is going to be a positive group like FCA, let them do it but under the same exact guidelines/restrictions as FCA.

[cougarfreak]

Ok, the issue was tabled until next month. The membership is officially listed as the Secular Student Alliance, and is a mostly college based club. The club caused a little uproar right up the road in the Creation Museum a little while ago, and one of the parent members brought that up. Not sure how the vote is going to go next month.

[DaddyTorgo]

doesn't matter if they have caused uproars at other places if the legalities of it are on their side, that's the issue

[Lathum]

Ok, the issue was tabled until next month. The membership is officially listed as the Secular Student Alliance, and is a mostly college based club. The club caused a little uproar right up the road in the Creation Museum a little while ago, and one of the parent members brought that up. Not sure how the vote is going to go next month.

What type of uproar?

It is their constitutional right to assemble and protest peacefully. Seems to me if certain parents weren't so closed minded and blinded by their own beliefs this could actually be quite the educational exercise.

[Drake]

"Educational exercise" could be claimed by religious parents bringing their kids to protests in front of abortion clinics.

[Lathum]

"Educational exercise" could be claimed by religious parents bringing their kids to protests in front of abortion clinics.

It certainly could. What is your point?

[RainMaker]

Atheism isn't a religion so a club centered around it is not an issue with separation of Church and State. However, if the clubs purpose is to discuss their non-belief in other religions, then it should be considered a religious club.

I don't see a problem with it or any religious group wanting to meet on campus. I don't think the school should be a part of it or necessarily fund it, but I see no problem with giving students time and space on campus for their group and activities. As long as there isn't violence, illegal drugs, or gangbangs taking place, I'd much rather have high school kids hanging around a school in their free time than getting into trouble elsewhere.

[revrew]

You mean there really is NO policy in place about student clubs at this school? WTF?

If there's no policy ... then heck, no, you don't allow this one. You don't start with a major controversy and you don't take a vote and you don't go with your gut. If there aren't other student clubs, then you don't allow this one - end of story. You should definitely consider writing a policy, though - 'cause this could really blow up in your school's face.

But if there is a policy, then you follow it. The freethinker movement explores issues of philosophy, theology, ethics, etc., etc., -- all the stuff any religious club would also explore. Truthfully, it's pretty hard to distinguish (or, I'll use the scary word - "discriminate") between religion and philosophy these days, hence the common word "worldview" that's becoming more common. Freethinking is a worldview every bit as much as deism, naturalism, secular humanism, biblical Christianity, communism, etc. etc.

But if the policy allows for a "Student Muslims" group or a "Socialists United" group or a "Christian Club," then by all means, YES, you allow an atheist group.

Don't make this complicated. Either there is a policy or there isn't. Either your school has clubs or it doesn't. Going with what "seems right" or what the board votes on is surefire way to get SOMEBODY to sue you.

[Drake]

It certainly could. What is your point?

My point is that I consider it uncouth behavior from all perspectives. I get the right of free assembly. Freely assembling to just be an assbag because you don't like the way other people choose to to think or believe just offends me on principle. It's sort of an educational experience in the same way that rubbernecking a multi-car pileup is educational.

Maybe I should organize a protest. :lol:

In the interest of full disclosure, I came to this opinion as the kid of parents who used to drag me to religious abortion protest rallies. My educational experience with that taught me that I don't really give a fuck about abortion either way and any time the topic comes up, I just roll my eyes. I didn't mean to sound like I was challenging your point, Lathum. Just building off of it. :)

[Flasch186]

Gargoyles!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Don't make this complicated. Either there is a policy or there isn't. Either your school has clubs or it doesn't. Going with what "seems right" or what the board votes on is surefire way to get SOMEBODY to sue you.

Amen to that (no pun intended).

The issue of whether there is or isn't policy sent me looking for the rules that govern these "School Based Decision Making Councils" and it appears to me that there almost has to be something in place on the subject, or at least there does if the Council is in compliance with the statute that created them.

Apparently Kentucky authorized the creation of these councils with a legislation back in 1990 that you can find at
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/KRS/160-00/345.PDF

And within that statute is 160.345-2(i) which reads in part
"The school council shall adopt a policy to be implemented by the principal in the following additional areas ...
8.Selection of extracurricular programs and determination of policies relating to student participation based on academic qualifications and attendance requirements, program evaluation, and supervision ...

The italics are mine, since everything I've ever been taught on the subject highlighted the importance of the word "shall" and its role in making what follows mandatory rather than optional. It's a much more restrictive & commanding word than "may" for example.

There's another part in the statute that talks about various policies being consistent with district level policies so I'm left to think that
1) Either there's a district policy on clubs, student led or otherwise or there isn't. If there is, then follow it. If there isn't then:

2) There should already be policy in place under the rules for SBDM
If there is,then follow it. If there isn't then: this council is about to be fucked no matter what they do, and possibly in more ways than one

This actually brings up a whole different subject which is separately interesting to me, the notion of such localized control down to the school level on things like budget allocations (spelled out in the statute). What a fascinating way to handle things, I can't say I've ever run across anything remotely like it before.

There's some similar sort of parent-teacher-admin committees in Georgia but they're notoriously clusterfucks that can barely agree on when to meet or what to talk about much less actually do or mean anything more than giving a tiny handful of parents the illusion that anyone actually cares what they think about anything. Even the simplest matters, like the proscribed makeup of these committees, are routinely ignored, so the notion of something of this sort being given actual authority or responsibility is really bizarre to me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing cougarfreak or the State of Kentucky for doing it or anything, it's just such a foreign notion that anything like this would/could actually function it really becomes more interesting to me than the original topic.

[stevew]

I'd just take the easiest path. Probably whomever is throwing this together is just looking for attention, and it will die out within months.

[chesapeake]

This is actually the correct answer, legally.

You sound surprised, PB. I'm hurt.

[Pumpy Tudors]

doesn't matter what their purpose in doing it is...they have the right to do it - the purpose for which they are doing it is immaterial in the eyes of the law
Sure, people have the right to start shit just for the purpose of starting shit. Doesn't make it noble or revolutionary. It just makes it confrontational, which I guess gets some people's rocks off. Whatever works for them. Don't really bother me one way or the other. I just don't get it because it's not my nature to rock the boat unless I absolutely have to.

[DaddyTorgo]

Sure, people have the right to start shit just for the purpose of starting shit. Doesn't make it noble or revolutionary. It just makes it confrontational, which I guess gets some people's rocks off. Whatever works for them. Don't really bother me one way or the other. I just don't get it because it's not my nature to rock the boat unless I absolutely have to.

oh i know - i think it's silly too. just wanted to point out that from a legal POV it doesn't matter

[cougarfreak]

I spoke with one of the students today, and told him this is how I feel:

I don't have a problem with a "student atheist" club at all. However, I did tell him I would have a problem if they affiliated themselves with the "Student Secular Alliance", and I didn't think that this particular group fulfilled what I think these students are trying to do. I looked at one of their "introductory" videos on their website, and it definitely made fun of, and ridiculed religion. I didn't think there was a place anywhere for that.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I spoke with one of the students today, and told him this is how I feel:

I don't have a problem with a "student atheist" club at all. However, I did tell him I would have a problem if they affiliated themselves with the "Student Secular Alliance", and I didn't think that this particular group fulfilled what I think these students are trying to do. I looked at one of their "introductory" videos on their website, and it definitely made fun of, and ridiculed religion. I didn't think there was a place anywhere for that.
Wow, didn't see that coming.

/sarcasm

[Drake]

Are you trying to get your district sued?

Your comments are the rough equivalent of telling the FCA that you don't mind religious groups as long as they don't associate with Jews or Catholics.

[DaddyTorgo]

Are you trying to get your district sued?

Your comments are the rough equivalent of telling the FCA that you don't mind religious groups as long as they don't associate with Jews or Catholics.

yeah coug...you shouldn't go "off the cuff" with this, or offer any sort of personal commentary.

fact of the matter is you have no right to impose any sort of restrictions on them like that, and just offering them "advice" like that could end up with you guys in hot water

[CamEdwards]

If Coug is a member of the "Site Based Decision Making Council", then why should he face a lawsuit for expressing his opinion about the decision that he's been tasked with making?

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I tried to start an apathy club, but nobody really cared about showing up.

[JonInMiddleGA]

If Coug is a member of the "Site Based Decision Making Council", then why should he face a lawsuit for expressing his opinion about the decision that he's been tasked with making?

Decent point here. The really actionable area would be an actual decision, not an opinion about that decision.

Same sort of thing came up when I sat on a zoning board, members more than once railed against a proposal that they ultimately had to approve because of legal requirements but not once did I hear even the most litigious applicant take issue with statements that amounted to "I hate the law behind this but we have no choice but to approve X".

[cougarfreak]

Are you trying to get your district sued?

Your comments are the rough equivalent of telling the FCA that you don't mind religious groups as long as they don't associate with Jews or Catholics.

Or keeping kids with being charged with the new bullying law in the state of Kentucky (in which the school must report every incident of a kid making fun of another kid). Read my post, that group makes fun of other religions in their introductory video. And there is no way a school is going to let that happen. That does nothing but invite these kids getting their asses kicked. My comment is the equivalence of telling the FCA not to associate with extremist groups who make fun of Muslims in an introductory video.