Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think this move was totally wrong. To tell you the truth, the little girl wrote a very moving impressive poem. She showed appreciation for her grandfathers service in the Vietnam War. The 1st grader wrote this:
‘He prayed to God for peace, he prayed to God for strength,’
Normally I am very quick to condemn religious endorsements or coercion of any kind in public schools, but I don't see that this qualifies. It's just a poem...the product of a six year old's (parents') mind(s). It's telling a story, not compelling others to believe a certain way. I think the school is overreacting.
According to the article, the family wrote a pretty impressive poem (From the parents own admission, it kinda sounded like the 6 year-old's input was marginal at best). The article doesn't say that the girl herself was scheduled to recite the poem (in fact, with this updated article ...and I noticed that many of the other articles floating around the web as well, have removed that explicit assertion as well), the ire was drawn over the printing of the poem on the program FOR the event, not the actual recitation (the mother admitted that the girl was having trouble with the entire concept, hence their involvement in helping her write it ...I find it highly unlikely they would ask her to stand in front of a large group and read it). Take note that the principal said there had been a lot of misinformation in the public, and he never mentioned anyone threatening to sue having any part in why they did what they did. Even the first amendment specialist (who was practically vilified in other articles for his original words on the matter) appeared somewhat perplexed in his own statement on the situation:
Quote:
Clearly the school was trying to avoid being sued, but its best bet was to let the young lady speak her mind. The likelihood of being successfully sued in this gray area was minimal; the likelihood of being decried as hostile to God and freedom of religion was pretty much guaranteed.
Yes ...they were wrong to edit it. They explained why they did what they did and said they will work to correct the misunderstanding. I don't see how anyone can ask for anything more than that unless they have a time-machine handy.
...from what I've seen from remarks about the subject, it seems kind of like the intolerant "PC police" may not be the ones everyone seems to think they are though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
