School Calls Sheriff On Seven Year Old For Sharing Bible Verses

A public school in California ordered a 7-year-old boy to stop handing out Bible verses during lunch – and they dispatched a deputy sheriff to the child’s home to enforce the directive.

“This is a clear, gross violation of the rights of a child,” said Horatio Mihet, a Liberty Counsel attorney representing the first-grader who attends Desert Rose Elementary School in Palmdale. They are also representing his parents, Christina and Jaime Zavala.

Mrs. Zavala made it a practice of including a Bible verse and encouraging note in her son’s lunch bag. The boy would tell his friends about the note and read them aloud at the lunch table.

It wasn’t long before children asked for copies of the notes and Mrs. Zavala obliged – including a brief note to explain the daily Bible verse.

On April 18 a teacher called Mrs. Zavala and said her son would no longer be able to share the Bible verses because he was “not allowed to share such things while at school.”

Liberty Counsel said the school would only allow the child to distribute the Bible verses outside the school gate – after the bell rang.

They say the teacher told Mrs. Zavala that her son “could no longer read or share Bible verses or stories at lunch” – citing “separation of church and state.”

So, Mr. and Mrs. Zavala complied with the school’s clearly unconstitutional edict.

But on May 9, the school’s principal decided to implement a complete ban on the Bible verse sharing.

Liberty Counsel alleges the boy was ordered to stop handing out notes because “it was against school policy.” The principal told the boy and his father to move to a public sidewalk. They complied with the principal’s demand.

It would be just a few hours later – when the Zavala family heard a knock at their front door.

“The deputy sheriff said he had been sent by the school,” Liberty Counsel attorney Richard Mast told me. “The deputy went on to tell the parents that the school was worried that someone might be offended by the Bible verses.”

Liberty Counsel said the deputy sheriff was not belligerent or threatening. The family was not served with any sort of legal documents. It appeared to be a “friendly” warning.

“It was outrageous and should shock the conscious of every freedom-loving American,” Mihet told me. “Apparently all the real criminals have been dealt with in Palmdale – and now they’re going after kids who share Bible verses during lunch time.”

Read Story

 

Facebook Comments

Previous

Next

94 Comments

  1. flfx

    Separation of church and state????? What, is this kid a congress-person trying to instill some sort of Christian governance into our system???? That teacher and whoever else was involved should be FIRED for not having a clue of the meaning of the term separation of church and state. My goodness….these are people that are supposed to have some sort of education.

  2. Bob

    Ignorant teachers abound.
    But hey, part of that was fear of loosing her paycheck.
    But the question is whether or not there was another bias in play.
    Betcha if the child shared a comic book or drawing daily there would be nothing said, even if it was about satanism. Fact is, America has been severely brainwashed in every direction falsehoods regarding the bible, the law, and role and truth in general.

  3. D Brown

    Our country is domed !

  4. Katrina

    What business is it of the school what the child does with his father on a public sidewalk? It isn’t something to call police for. Since they already have an attorney, perhaps he can come up with something. If I were the parents, I’d have an after-school snack time at my home complete with bible reading for any child whose parents didn’t object.

    • Shrdlu42theSecond

            The problem is there’s great ignorance of what Separation of Church and State means on both sides of this issue.

            Theists who believe in Creationism run around “teaching” their beliefs in public schools, and ridicule students who don’t share their beliefs or religion (such as telling a Buddhist Sixth-grader he was “stupid” in front of the class).

      http://www.rawstory.com/2014/01/dont-want-to-be-hassled-by-creationist-teacher-give-up-buddhism-louisiana-public-school-says/

            On the other side, we have stories like this one, where a teacher mistakenly believes any mention of religion on school property is forbidden.

            The real rule is quite simple. If a public official (such as a teacher) is doing it, then it’s wrong. If a private person (such as a student) is, then it’s not. Public school teachers can neither promote nor inhibit religion. So as long as the government isn’t involved, distributing Bible verses (or texts from other Scripture) is okay.

            Of course, there’s still the question of whether or not what the child in this case was doing disrupted school activities, or constituted harassment of the students receiving the verses, but it doesn’t sound as if that was happening. Therefore, the school actually violated his First Amendment rights, both to freely exercise his religion, and to exercise his freedom of speech.
           

      • Cam Ron

        You relinquish your freedoms for the privilege to attend a publicly funded school. You have no expectation of freedom of speech at school. You either obey the rules or you can be expelled. It’s called a social contract. Your argument equates to someone who wants to wear an offensive tshirt at school. Just because it doesn’t offend you doesn’t make it non-offensive. Just because it falls under free speech doesn’t negate the student and their parents obligation to follow the rules set by the school.

        • Nebqt

          It’s a very one-sided contract. The government FORCES parents to send their kids to school. If they can’t afford a private one, then they’re FORCED to go to a public one. And if the child or parent disagrees with the social engineering aspects, the government will take the kids away from the parents after so many expulsions that come from not following a contract the government FORCES you to sign.

          • Cam Ron

            Bullcr@p, homeschool is cheaper than public school. If you cant keep your insane religion from disrupting the school then maybe you need to do as all the other cults do and keep your kids home. https://www.hslda.org/laws/

          • Cam Ron

            Ok…. tell me more about how awful it is to teach your children about religion at home and learning actual science in school.

          • Nebqt

            Ha! You’re unhinged. I don’t have a problem with them not teaching Christianity (as long as they’re also not teaching other religions). I’d LOVE for them to stick to science (real science, not “I feel like I’m a girl though I have a penis” science), math, and reading/writing. But they don’t do that.

          • Cam Ron

            Sure I am. Please, reassess your positions from time to time. Review what you believe and why you believe it. Start from a position of skepticism. “Their results, published in 2013, showed that even before treatment the brain structures of the trans people were more similar in some respects to the brains of their experienced gender than those of their natal gender. For example, the female-to-male subjects had relatively thin subcortical areas (these areas tend to be thinner in men than in women). Male-to-female subjects tended to have thinner cortical regions in the right hemisphere, which is characteristic of a female brain.” ,” In a study published in 2014, psychologist Sarah M. Burke of VU University Medical Center in Amsterdam and biologist Julie Bakker of the Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience used functional MRI to examine how 39 prepubertal and 41 adolescent boys and girls with gender dysphoria responded to androstadienone, an odorous steroid with pheromonelike properties that is known to cause a different response in the hypothalamus of men versus women. They found that the adolescent boys and girls with gender dysphoria responded much like peers of their experienced gender. The results were less clear with the prepubertal children.” So when you say “science” what you really mean is science your church approves of? Or all true science? You don’t get to pick and chose.

          • Nebqt

            And I think we’re done here.

          • Cam Ron

            Exactly… facts show up and you cant demonstrate a single claim you’ve made is true…. I found that information in two seconds… you literally have to TRY not to understand something to be as ignorant as you’ve been.

          • Nebqt

            Nope, I just have no desire to keep up a useless conversation with someone who has a smaller brain than I do and can’t regulate their emotions as well as me. It’s science after all. I’m sure you’re all for teaching that protestant Christians have bigger hippocampus regions in their brain than non-religious people do. Right? It’s science, right? Took me one second to find this information. This is the absolute last time I’m wasting another second of my life replying to your peculiar rants. You post away, Cray-Cray.

          • Cam Ron

            lol, funny. You’ve still not demonstrated a single claim you’ve made true. You cite a study on depressed seniors where the study even, and I quote “more factors responsible for the correlation,”, “issues with small sample size”. Go on. Tell me more about your IQ and how it correlates to brain SIZE. The difference between us is I quoted two separate papaers both written in the last two years. But Cray-Cray your little heart out. It doesn’t change the fact that trans people’s brains are far more similar to those of the sex they feel they are than the one they are born as… that’s not even to address the chemical and hormonal differences. But for you the real problem is Common Core…. and gay people apparently. But tell me more about how you feel sorry for the kid who was told not to disrupt other students but still did and who’s father was standing outside the school harassing teachers and students.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Again you repeat that lie about “disruption” and “harrassing”, and you dare lecture others about the phony arguments they make?

                  I’ve said this many times on other forums: Extremists on either side of an issue are the mirror-image of each other. Thanks to both of you for proving this truth yet again!

          • Cam Ron

            I don’t care what you’ve said anywhere else. All you’ve done is decide you are right and p!ss on anything anyone else says that disagrees. The teacher had to ask him TWICE then call his parents to stop them from disrupting class. For fncks sake.. read some place other than your back-patting sites that already agree with you. Confirmation bias is making a fool out of you.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  I’ve said this many times on other forums: Extremists on either side of an issue are the mirror-image of each other. Thanks to both of you for proving this truth yet again!

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

            “Exactly… facts show up and you cant demonstrate a single claim you’ve made is true….”

                  Oh, the blatant hypocrisy in those words! Have you looked in the mirror lately? When it comes to the topic of this article (the boy passing out verses at school) you’re describing yourself! (“facts show up and you cant demonstrate a single claim you’ve made is true”)

          • Cam Ron

            Hyperbole and ad homonym. Do you reason non-fallaciously at all?

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  I hope so, but I doubt it.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Wow! Except for your last two sentences, I was going to “upvote” that Comment. You finally said something that’s rational, and provided evidence for it! (Though I wish you had provided links to where you got that, assuming it was online.)

                  I’m not ready to say what the “cause” of being Transgendered is. (I’m a retired Attorney, not a Biologist.) But I agree that there is evidence that in some cases (not necessarily all) it has a biological root.

                  On the other hand, as I indicated in response to Nebqt, I don’t see how any of this is relevant to the topic in question. Nobody was being taught anything since the teacher wasn’t the one passing out the verses! That means it was a completely private activity. The Constitution only limits what the government can do, not what individuals (with no connection to the government) can do.

          • Cam Ron

            You have no right to privacy in a school as a student. This is for the safety of all students. You, your locker, your backpack can all be searched. There is NO expectancy of privacy in a PUBLIC (publically funded might I add) school. When it disrupts class… as the teacher had to ask the kid TWICE to stop.. then its a problem. “My mom says geology is a lie, I don’t believe it and GOD says its a sin”… that’s disruptive. How about keep your crazy at home and leave the reasoned logic to the teachers. Unless you can cite a SCotUS ruling that isn’t vague and off point like the last time you tried then YOU simply have no evidence to prove what you believe is true. You and your child have NO right to indoctrinate my child into your cult. Sorry. That’s just how it is. You are defending religion… not rights.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  And why bring up the serious, and complex, issue of the Transgendered into a discussion where it’s completely irrelevant? You’re as bad as Cam Ron!

          • Nebqt

            You’ve made a good many accusations about my being “extreme” and “as bad as Cam Ron”. I’ll explain myself in this one response. If you’re respectful, I’ll continue the dialogue. At one point you said I was responding to nonsense with nonsense by pointing out that the government forces you to sign a figurative contract by way of forcing kids to go to school. That’s a simple fact that you yourself stated two days ago: “First, attending public school isn’t a “privilege”, it’s a legal right! (Actually, a legal requirement as well, in most cases.)” Government-tracked formal education is a compulsory activity. That’s a simple fact, not nonsense: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/statereform/tab5_1.asp . You then pointed out that I was incorrect in saying that homeschooling isn’t allowed. I never said this. But if I have to work I don’t have the option of letting my 14 year old stay home or apprentice with the local plumber. If I did this, yes, as the article I linked mentioned, I would get thrown in jail and children are removed from homes for not attending school. That’s just a fact…not “conservative” or “right-wing” “blind-ideology”. I was not off topic talking about public schools since the genesis of the exchange was Cam Ron insistance that public school attendance is a privilege. Again, you said I was right about this. What you call an anti-public school rant was me trying to point out to Cam Ron why it’s not a privilege. You can’t call conscripted activity a privilege. Public schools are usually the last (and often only) option for most parents and families. Do you know someone that can afford to send their child to a private school but chooses to send them to a public school because of the superior education? Public schools have become distracted from the basics of RRR to teaching social issues. The reason I brought up transgenderism is because it’s a current event that illustrates how public schools are being used as tools to further political agendas. I don’t think my faith should be taught in public schools but neither do I believe that federal funds (of which I contribute a great deal) should be withheld from public schools because a district won’t let a boy that thinks he’s a girl shower with actual, scientifically obvious females. My point about Christians better controlling their emotions was a counter to Cam Ron’s insistence that sometimes boys are scientifically girls. Both rely on “scientific studies”. There are too many unknowns about the human brain to be able to say how this study proves that or that study proves this. I object to things that are significantly disputed from being taught as scientifically undeniable in public schools. And again, we’re talking about public schools because Cam Ron insisted it’s a privilege to attend them. And again, if you are forced to do something under penalty of fines, imprisonment or loss of offspring, it’s not a privilege. And there are reasons other than laziness that give parents concern about sending their children to public school. Maybe that is an “anti-public school” rant but so be it.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Since no one was being taught religion at school in this case, how is that relevant?

          • Cam Ron

            Sending bible verses with your child to school to hand out to other students is not OK. Not because of church/state separation but because of equal access. If one child is allowed to bring in and share religious materials ALL are. You’ve still not addressed that. Good luck with your satanic verses.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Sorry, but most States accept homeschooling as a substitute for public education (provided the curriculum is followed). Cam Ron’s spreading enough nonsense, please don’t join him.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Yes, that first word certainly describes what you’ve been spouting, such as your entire second sentence. Again, where’s the evidence of the “disruption” you keep screaming about? There’s no mention of any in the article. Are we just supposed to take what you say on faith?

          • Cam Ron

            Yes… when you bring your faith to school and spread your mental disease to other students without their parents permission then yes, you on faith alone would expect that to be lawful and not become an issue with the faculty and law enforcement when you FAIL TO STOP.

            “The teacher then scolded the boy in front of his entire classroom on two occasions, then called his parents


            Your child is not a tool to spread ignorance in a place of learning.

          • Bob

            Because you’re property and all that you think you own you don’t.
            A beast system in action today.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Please don’t respond to his nonsense with nonsense of your own.

        • Shrdlu42theSecond

                First, attending public school isn’t a “privilege”, it’s a legal right! (Actually, a legal requirement as well, in most cases.)

                Second, you obviously know nothing about what “rights” students have at school. I’ve referenced this before (and you ignored it), but if you’re interested in the truth (and you’ve given multiple proof that you’re not), then I suggest you start by reading Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), and then continue from there.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Independent_Community_School_District

                While students have less Free Speech rights at school than adults in the “outside world”, they do have some. The teacher and school in this case were trampling all over them.

          P.S. – You see, there’s this “little” thing called the Constitution. Public schools can’t make or enforce rules which violate it. And the parents did follow those rules (until they went to Court to enforce their rights). Another “small” detail you don’t have the time to bother with.

          • Cam Ron

            Funny… you can get expelled from a public school. You are mistaking a requirement of not being arrested for neglect with a right. One right they don’t have is to disrupt the studies of other students or expose other students to materials others find offensive. Sorry if you don’t know how offensive is defined… Your child, under your tutelage, spouting ignorant fables is offensive. Schools are secular. Deal with it.

  5. ahaz

    Definitely something that LE should have not been involved. The school officials need some additional,training.

    • Shrdlu42theSecond

            Agreed. The problem is there’s great ignorance of what Separation of Church and State means on both sides of this issue.

            Theists who believe in Creationism run around “teaching” their beliefs in public schools, and ridicule students who don’t share their beliefs or religion (such as telling a Buddhist Sixth-grader he was “stupid” in front of the class).

      http://www.rawstory.com/2014/01/dont-want-to-be-hassled-by-creationist-teacher-give-up-buddhism-louisiana-public-school-says/

            On the other side, we have stories like this one, where a teacher mistakenly believes any mention of religion on school property is forbidden.

            The real rule is quite simple. If a public official (such as a teacher) is doing it, then it’s wrong. If a private person (such as a student) is, then it’s not. Public school teachers can neither promote nor inhibit religion. So as long as the government isn’t involved, distributing Bible verses (or texts from other Scripture) is okay.

            Of course, there’s still the question of whether or not what the child in this case was doing disrupted school activities, or constituted harassment of the students receiving the verses, but it doesn’t sound as if that was happening. Therefore, the school actually violated his First Amendment rights, both to freely exercise his religion, and to exercise his freedom of speech.

      • Cam Ron

        You relinquish your freedoms for the privilege to attend a publicly funded school. You have no expectation of freedom of speech at school. You either obey the rules or you can be expelled. It’s called a social contract. Your argument equates to someone who wants to wear an offensive tshirt at school. Just because it doesn’t offend you doesn’t make it non-offensive. Just because it falls under free speech doesn’t negate the student and their parents obligation to follow the rules set by the school. The fact that it came to the attention of staff means it was disruptive.

        • Timothy J. Williams

          The rules cannot be arbitrary, or directed against one class of citizen. And in public schools, they certainly are both. Reducing all communication to the “least common denominator” simply hands over the discussion to those who believe in nothing.

          • Cam Ron

            No. Nothing isn’t a belief, its an absence of being convinced. Secular does not equate to nihilism. Your fallacy is false equivocation.

          • Cam Ron

            Sorry when you disrupt class and you are asked to stop… you need to stop. When that action is from a parent and its directed toward other peoples children you are not only an asshole but are bordering on unlawful activity. You get to see the sheriff. Keep your hateful religion to yourself.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Sorry, but merely repeating the same lies over and over doesn’t make them true. (Whatever Joseph Goebbels might have said.) There was no “class” involved, and no “disruption”. When told (not “asked”) to stop passing out the verses requested by the other kids, the child stopped. There was no “direction” by any parent. (The verses were originally only in the child’s lunch box for him to read. Copies were only provided when the other children requested them!)

                  And no, such activity is not “unlawful”. The Constitution only prevents the government from engaging in such conduct, last I checked children aren’t part of the government.

                  Which is why the only “asshole” here is the person who keeps lying about what happened. In other words you!

            P.S. – And which “religion” do you mean? The child’s, mine, or yours? You don’t actually know what the child’s religion is, though it’s obvious you assume it’s some form of Fundamentalist and “Conservative” Christianity. It’s obvious you have no idea what my religion might be, or even if I have one. (At least not at the time you wrote your Comment, I’ve since stated what my religion is elsewhere on this page.) And it’s obvious what “religion” you practice: the one with nothing but contempt for facts, reason, or truth, and which treats with scorn all ideas contrary to or different from its own!

          • Cam Ron

            Lies over and over? You mean religion? Ok. Please don’t expect lies to be tolerated in a secular learning environment.

  6. Running Welder is my Bitch

    The dumbass Sheriff should’ve told the school to eat shit and die.. what a moron

    • Shrdlu42theSecond

            The problem is there’s great ignorance of what Separation of Church and State means on both sides of this issue.

            Theists who believe in Creationism run around “teaching” their beliefs in public schools, and ridicule students who don’t share their beliefs or religion (such as telling a Buddhist Sixth-grader he was “stupid” in front of the class).

      http://www.rawstory.com/2014/01/dont-want-to-be-hassled-by-creationist-teacher-give-up-buddhism-louisiana-public-school-says/

            On the other side, we have stories like this one, where a teacher mistakenly believes any mention of religion on school property is forbidden.

            The real rule is quite simple. If a public official (such as a teacher) is doing it, then it’s wrong. If a private person (such as a student) is, then it’s not. Public school teachers can neither promote nor inhibit religion. So as long as the government isn’t involved, distributing Bible verses (or texts from other Scripture) is okay.

            Of course, there’s still the question of whether or not what the child in this case was doing disrupted school activities, or constituted harassment of the students receiving the verses, but it doesn’t sound as if that was happening. Therefore, the school actually violated his First Amendment rights, both to freely exercise his religion, and to exercise his freedom of speech.

      • Cam Ron

        Except that the school can set rules that include not permitting evangelizing to other students.
        It will certainly result in unnecessary calls from other students parents who don’t share the same brand of belief as the other child. One call from a parent equates the student’s behavior to being disrupting to staff as they are now answering phone calls and possible law suits over one student and their parent deciding to spread their religion to OTHER students without prior permission by their parents.
        You relinquish your freedoms for the privilege to attend a publicly funded school. You have no expectation of freedom of speech at school. You either obey the rules or you can be expelled. It’s called a social contract. Your argument equates to someone who wants to wear an offensive tshirt at school. Just because it doesn’t offend you doesn’t make it non-offensive. Just because it falls under free speech doesn’t negate the student and their parents obligation to follow the rules set by the school.

        • Nebqt

          The PRIVILEGE to attend a publicly funded school? There’s no privilege there. It’s the slurry at the bottom of the educational choice barrel. Public education only exists by the brutality of the government. Most people I know would rather forgo such a “privilege” but they’re too financially strapped for private education and homeschooling and the mighty government has truancy laws that punish parents and children for not going to school, as well as IRS goons that punish you if you don’t finance their indoctrination camps, whether you partake of the privilege of public schools or not. If the person who pays, the parent who sends, and the child that attends a public school are all only participants out of fear, it can hardly be called a “privilege” with a straight face. It would be one thing if these privilege centers were churning out a product that can read/write/add/subtract and otherwise contribute well to society, but they’re more concerned with keeping the Bible out and the trannies in. And then society wrings its hands wondering why we’re circling the toilet bowl as it flushed generation after generation after generation down the “publicly funded education privilege” drain.

          • Cam Ron

            homeschool is cheaper than public school and usually free. Don’t act like anyone is making you do anything you don’t want to. You have the same right as anyone else to enroll your child in public school but if you cant keep your crazy religion from disrupting class then perhaps… you shouldn’t be raising kids in the first place. https://www.hslda.org/laws/

          • Nebqt

            Aaaah!! And there it is. I’M the problem thinking that my “crazy religion” is as justified in a publicly funded school (me being a member of the public that funds it) as are social lessons on how to masterbate, that communism does a lot of good in society, and how 6+7 doesn’t equal 13, it equals close to 15 (via common core). And yes, if I had kids (which I don’t) and had to work to pay the bills the government IS making me do something I don’t want to. As it is though, the government IS making me pay for their goose-stepping, mmm-mmm-mmm Barack Hussein Obama ode reciting, chophouses.

          • Cam Ron

            It becomes “Crazy” when you think everyone else MUST believe as you do and you completely lack any respect for the beliefs or disbeliefs of others. No one is forcing a religion on your children except you, be glad that’s the case.

            No one is forcing your children to take sex education, last I checked you could opt out. AGAIN, if you don’t like secular (without promoting a specific religion) school then go get a voucher to take them to a Christian school or Scientologist school or whatever crazy cult you belong to. No one else should be subject to your unfounded beliefs. If you cant prove its true with demonstrable evidence and falsifiable claims then you don’t know it…. why would we teach children something we cant prove? Thats insanity defined. You act like there are no programs to help insane people get their kids into schools that agree with their brand of insanity. http://www.privateschools.com/scholarships.phtml

          • Nebqt

            Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop. Where is the kid in this story or either of his parents forcing these children to be Christian? The mother sent a nice note to her child in his lunch and he shared with the other kids, who enjoyed it and wanted more. Where is there any kind of behavior here that warrants a call to the police?

          • Cam Ron

            Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop. You changed the subject, their behavior disrupted the other students and or staff from their one and only job at school…. learning. If the parents cannot follow the rules.. and persist at being a disruption they become subject to trespass and harassment law. Clearly they didn’t understand what “STOP” means…. No need for your red herring fallacy. Put yourself in the other childrens parents shoes…. and change that child’s “nice notes and scripture” to “nice notes and Quran verses”. If you are ok with YOUR child being indoctrinated into the Islamic faith without your consent then… no problem. But something tells me you’d NOT be ok with it. You’d throw a fit. So…. Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop.

          • Nebqt

            I did not change the subject. You insisted that Christians think “everyone else MUST believe as [we] do and [we] completely lack any respect for the beliefs or disbeliefs of others.” I asked that you show me how the characters in this story are doing that. How is it any more disruptive to share a note your mom leaves in your lunch than it is to tell a story about visiting the zoo? If someone at the school, another child’s parent or a teacher, doesn’t agree with what his mother’s note says, suck it up. Who is it that’s showing a total lack of respect for someone else’s beliefs and benign actions?

          • Cam Ron

            Bringing scripture to school… to pass out to CHILDREN who haven’t consented to indoctrination. . Did you even read the article? I made that perfectly clear. And another false equivocation. Bringing in religious literature and giving it to other students is NOT allowed. Again, if it was a muslim student doing it something tells me you wouldn’t call it “benign”. Again, stop with your presumptions that everyone shares your religions and understand that those that don’t feel its inappropriate for YOUR child under YOUR direction to be handing out religious materials to other students. I wont cite separation of church and state because it doesn’t matter but guess what… if they allow your Christian student to pass out scripture then the child of Satanists get to pass out their books and Muslims get to pass out the Koran and Krishnas get to pass out the Bhargava Gita. So… is that what you want? Your child coming home with his first book about satan? Because if you get to… everyone else gets too aswell. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/19/satanic-coloring-book_n_5846640.html

          • Nebqt

            Please type the fourth paragraph of this story….

          • Cam Ron

            Please make a cogent argument.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  His, or hers, was far more cogent than anything you’ve written.

          • Cam Ron

            Please make a cogent argument, your snarky bedwetting is getting old.

          • Cam Ron

            Please make a cogent argument, Your ignorance is showing.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Since you’re incapable of making one, how would you recognize when one is made? (Like the one he posted. Go back and read the fourth paragraph of this article. It refutes everything you claim.)

          • Cam Ron

            Go and find some place this is posted that isn’t a religious or rightwing slant to it. The facts are not as you assume they are. Again, all you’ve said is “Nuh Uhhh, no its not”. Well, I call BS. Prove me wrong.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  It’s abundantly clear you didn’t read the article. Here’s what you’d have seen if you had:

            Mrs. Zavala [the mother] made it a practice of including a Bible verse and encouraging note in her son’s lunch bag. The boy would tell his friends about the note and read them aloud at the lunch table.

            It wasn’t long before children asked for copies of the notes and Mrs. Zavala obliged – including a brief note to explain the daily Bible verse.

                  I guess you’re unfamiliar with the meaning of the word asked!

          • Cam Ron

            Perhaps you don’t understand the concept of parental consent. I don’t send my child to school to be taught unsubstantiated blood sacrifice myths from books of poorly sourced materials. Sorry, you don’t get to spread your brand of hate at school otherwise everyone can. Next week it’ll be the Mormons and the week after scientologists.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Perhaps you don’t understand the concept of Truth! (Not “religious truth”, but simple factual truth.) None of the things you claim happened in this case, so kindly stop lying about it!

          • Cam Ron

            Sorry, when a parents sends something to school with their child and other parents have not consented to their child’s indoctrination then… nope. Truth is not subject to what you believe.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  No, the proper response is for the other child to say he (or she) isn’t interested in the notes, and please go away. If the first child then persists in passing out the note to the objecting child, or otherwise discussing religion, then harassment is taking place, and the school can intervene to stop it.

                  There’s just no evidence that happened in this case. To the contrary, the article clearly says that the other students were quite interested in receiving the Bible verses, and asked for them! The school claimed it acted because it was concerned a parent might object. That’s not a good enough reason to trample on a student’s First Amendment rights.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Stop, stop, stop, stop, stop, lying, lying, lying, lying, lying. There is nothing in this article even suggesting there was any such “disruption”. (And where did you get that “they” nonsense? Only one child was doing this.)

                  And you obviously don’t know a thing about “trespass”, or what constitutes harassment.

                  You’re the one raising “red herrings”!

          • Cam Ron

            lol, no. no that’s not how it works. That’s not how any of this works. The parents were sending scripture to school for their child to pass out to other children. When those other children started disrupting class, as was described, the child bringing in scripture was asked to stop… and they didn’t. Believe it or not there is more than one article about this online.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Please stop repeating that lie. The parents originally gave the scripture only to their own child. They only provided copies to be past around when other children asked for them!. This happened in the lunch room, not in a “class”, and there’s no evidence of any “disruption”. Furthermore, when asked to stop, the child did!

                  You claim to be basing what you say on another online article? Fine. Provide a link to it, or be proven a liar!

          • Cam Ron

            lol. So children can be given religious and political instruction by other students in an elementary school without their parents permission? News to me. Please cite the SCotUS’s ruling on that. I’d love to see it. The parents where told to stop… then they showed up the school and kept giving OTHER PEOPLE’S CHILDREN religious materials. You understand that minors and adults are not the same thing right? And this isn’t a college class right? But tell me more about how its a lie… when that’s what happened.

          • Secular Yakking

            I wonder which verses she sent. I would like suggest some “nice” ones for her.
            Exodus 21:20-21 – “If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.”

            Deuteronomy 22:28-29 – “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.”

            1 Timothy 2:11-12 – “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.”

            Deuteronomy 25:11-12 – “If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.”

            Judges 4:21 – “But Jael, Heber’s wife, picked up a tent peg and a hammer and went quietly to him while he lay fast asleep, exhausted. She drove the peg through his temple into the ground, and he died.”

            Genesis 38:8-10 – “Then Judah said to Onan, “Lie with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother.”

            Those seem so appropriate for any 7 year old, especially if he shares them with other kids.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  How about one of my favorites? Micah 6:8

            It hath been told thee, O man, what is good,
            And what the Lord doth require of thee:
            Only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.

                  Alas, those qualities appear to be in short supply among both the religious and the anti-religious – particularly the part about humility!

          • flfx

            Those Old Testament rules and regulations do not apply anymore. Christ has come with a new covenant and the Old Conventional system has been done away with. We are under a new covenant now. Christians view Old Testament as a historical document, one that has beautiful accounts of faith and hope, along with difficult laws that were consistent with the culture of those times…that ensured the survival of the Jews in that age. We don’t live in the age anymore that punishes wrongdoing in those particular ways.

            It takes Bible believing parents to explain to kids about those times and help them understand. Just because kids today study the Civil War doesn’t mean they have free reign to start another Civil War. It’s the study of history…just like the Old Testament.

            Jesus taught to be at peace with all men, humility, the building up of one another, grace and most importantly…love. That doesn’t mean we accept rape, adultery, stealing and homosexuality….(the same stuff in the Old Testament) but we are to avoid them. We just don’t stone people for it anymore. The moral condemnation of immortality still stands and is clearly taught in the New Testament.

            My hope is that you would read the Bible and thoroughly study it’s contents, not just pick and choose verses at will to discredit.

          • Secular Yakking

            Are they in the Bible? Yes they are verses from the Bible.
            You can lie to yourself all you want, but those verses exist and were sanctioned by those that wrote the Bible.

            But let’s break your “Those Old Testament rules and regulations do not apply anymore” argument.
            It appears you are against homosexuality. So tell me how many times did Jesus condemn Homosexuality?

            Exactly zero.

            Yet you still follow that old testament law, don’t you. Who is picking and choosing?
            Look here is the deal either all of the laws apply the same or none of them do. You do not get to pick only the ones you agree with. That would be making your god in your own image.

          • flfx

            There is no lying to myself. This is very simple. Old Testament Law was given to the tribes of Israel, not to Christians. When Jesus dies on the cross, that ended Old Testament Law. Get out of the Old Testament if you’re going to have any type of intelligent argument. Jesus fulfilled the Law. It’s done.

            Here is New Testament Law. I’m sure you won’t look it up..but it’s Matthew 22:37-40 “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.”

            Just because Jesus didn’t condemn homosexuality doesn’t mean he condones it. He never said anything specific about bestiality either. So according to your logic, bestiality must be ok. Hey, he never said anything about pedophilia either. It’s still wrong.

            Actually Jesus many times condemned adultery, sexual immorality and fornication, which are terms of sexual intercourse or sexual deviance outside the confines of marriage between a man and woman. And yes, He did define marriage as between a man and woman. So you tell me, since homosexuality is outside the bounds of God designed marriage…and since Jesus condemns the act of practicing sexuality outside of God designed marriage, then by logic Jesus does condemn homosexuality. BUT, as a Christ follower I am called to love everyone…and I do my best. I have many gay friends. I don’t condone their lifestyle, but I love them as I do myself.

            I’m thinking you are the one that should rethink the lying to ones self argument. Read the Bible in context to understand its true meaning.

          • Secular Yakking

            Odd the old testament never mention pedophilia. How you know that is wrong since it was never mentioned in the Bible.

            My original point was why is it okay to quote only parts of the Bible that you agree with and toss away the rest under the guise of a new covenant.

            Frankly I find little moral teachings withing the Bible. And since it is so patently wrong on nearly every single thing it says, I find no reason to even move past Genesis.
            For a book that is supposed to have all the answers, It certainly starts off poorly.

            What bothers me is the fact that Christians still teach from the Old Testament and yet they say it no longer applies.
            Come on, get you story together. Either you teach or or just get rid of it.
            The absolute worst thing you said in there is this “I have many gay friends. I don’t condone their lifestyle, but I love them as I do myself.”
            You most certainly do not love them or you would be able to accept them fully, But your doctrine tells you that they are wrong. There is no love there, only judgement.
            And before you accuse me of judging you, You are correct, I am. I am judging you for holding onto despicable and untrue believes all the while lying to yourself about the “good parts” in your scriptures.

            I have zero respect for the “peace and love” Christians because they are really just being dishonest with themselves. At least people like Westboro are honest about what their Bible says. That I can respect.

          • flfx

            I just want to understand. You’re criticizing a group of people (Christians) whose doctrine is based upon a document of which you have only read the first chapter. How can you come to any type of conclusion on anything this way? You say that “it is so patently wrong on nearly every single thing it says” You’ve only read the first chapter. You don’t know “everything it says”. You have no idea what you’re talking about then. You can’t.

            You also have more respect for a group of hateful people, ones that scream “faggt” at the funeral of dead soldiers, than you do others who show unconditional love.

            You criticize me for loving people in spite of not agreeing with their lifestyle. You have kids? Any relatives? A loved one? I have son and many times don’t agree with the choices and lifestyle he’s chosen. That doesn’t mean I don’t accept and love him without condition. That goes for my friends as well. This is what Jesus teaches. Love, patience, tolerance, grace. You, by your own admission, seriously lack these qualities because if there is anything you don’t accept in the lives of your family or friends, then you don’t love or accept them. How can you? You said that about me so the same applies to you. Live by it or get rid of it right? Glad I’m not one of your friends or I’d be dumped at the first thing you don’t agree with in me.

            Judging by your comments, you just have a thing out for Christians. You can’t come to any logical reasons…only judgmental opinions since you haven’t read past the first chapter of the Bible. Especially the New Testament and the study of Christ whose life CHRISTians base ALL their beliefs. You don’t WANT to believe or understand…just criticize and condemn. That’s usually what people do that are uneducated in a subject.

            God gives us just enough evidence so that those who want Him can have Him. Those who want to follow the clues will. “Seek and you shall find”. It doesn’t say everyone will find Him, doesn’t say nobody will find Him. Some will find. Who? Those who seek. Those whose hearts are set on finding Him and follow the clues.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

            “It becomes “Crazy” when you think everyone else MUST believe as you do and you completely lack any respect for the beliefs or disbeliefs of others.”

                  Again, where’s your proof that any of that happened in this case? Answer: there’s none!

                  And given your “crazy religion” line, I wouldn’t talk too loudly about “completely lack[ing] respect for the beliefs” of others!

                  Oh, and where’s the proof for your position about religion being “crazy” or “false”?

          • Cam Ron

            lol… ok again, so if some kid in school starts handing out satanic scripture to your child, at school, you are going to be ok with that? Indoctrinating children that are not YOUR children into your religion by using your child as a hate vessel… that’s crazy. And for something to not be false… first it must be proven to exist at all. Yah… all that logic and reasoning we’ve been working on the last 11,000 years of civilized human existence, when religion is put to that standard its irrational and illogical. But, thanks. Your red herring is fantastic.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Once again you must lie about what happened, and ignore the actual facts.

                  No one was being “indoctrinated”, no parent objected. At most the teacher (and then the school) acted out of fear that someone would object (or, more accurately, out of complete ignorance of what Church/State Separation requires).

                  How would I feel if some kid at school handed out Satanic Scripture to my child? Well, since I don’t have a child, there’s no way to know. But based on the principles of Free Speech and the Free Exercise of religion, I’d be fine with it, provided it didn’t involve compelling or harassing an unwilling student who didn’t want to receive said Scripture. (And, so long as it didn’t include performing a Black Mass in the lunch room, especially if “my child” was to be the human sacrifice!)

                  Of course, it’s hilariosly hypocritical for you to assert “or something to not be false… first it must be proven to exist at all”. You keep asserting that there was “disruption” in the lunch room caused by the passing out of Bible verses, even though that’s never been proven to exist at all! (It has, however, been thoroughly disproven, over and over again, by the simple fact that the account of what happened doesn’t mention any such thing!

                  And sorry (speaking of Logic and Reasoning – none of which you demonstrate), but you’re simply misusing what’s known as “Occam’s Razor”. In its most basic form, the “Razor” is the statement that: All evidence being equal, the simplest explanation is to be preferred. Note that it doesn’t say the simplest explanation is correct, only that it is to be preferred.

                  How, then, to apply it to Religion? Well, almost by definition, Religion consists of matters of faith, of things that cannot be proven. Thus the Razor really doesn’t apply. (William of Occam who created it didn’t really apply it to Religion, or at least not his Religion.)

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor#Religion

                  The Razor is quite useful in Science (which we are not discussing), but even there it has its limits. For example, use the Razor in the wrong century and it will produce the entirely wrong result!

                  Imagine you’re called to treat the Roman Emperor for the Flu. Around him are other practitioners of the “Medical Arts”, each with their own explanation for what’s wrong. One says it is a punishment sent from the Gods, and that prayer to Aesculapius (the God of healing) will cure the Emperor. Another says it’s Witchcraft, and they must find and kill the witch. Another says it’s a case of demonic possession, or mischievous elves and fairies, while yet another blames planetary alignment.

                  You arrive and say the problem is invisible “animals” (too small for the eye to see), which haven taken up residence in the Emperor’s body, and are poisoning him with their waste products (using his blood stream as their sewer). You suggest giving the Emperor an infusion from the Penicillin mold, which will kill the animals without harming the Emperor.

                  Question: What evidence would you have for any of that? Answer: None (during the time of the Roman Empire). So, if we apply the Razor, we must decide that one of the simpler explanations is to be preferred. (The one only requiring prayers to one god seems the simplest.) Of course, we both know how useless that is! But only because in the 21st Century the evidence is not equal. Thanks to the invention of the Microscope, and the development of Germ Theory it led to, we know what causes the Flu, and we don’t need to use the Razor.

                  Sorry, but you don’t disprove something by screaming there’s no proof. You disprove it by proving the opposite. (For example, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity wasn’t proven until pictures taken during eclipses proved his prediction of “gravitational lensing” was correct. But his Theory was still correct even without said proof!)

                  You claim Religion is “crazy” or “false”. Therefore, you have the burden of proof! And your attempt to avoid that simple principle (along with your constant lies you keep telling about what happened in this case) is the Red Herring here!

            P.S. – Of course, these principles work in the opposite case too. Anyone who wants to impose their religious beliefs on other has the burden of proving that they’re true. That’s one of the reasons for Church/State Separation. The government cannot intervene in matters of religion (either to promote or hinder it) unless the government can prove it’s reasons for doing so are true. Since no one can prove the truth about Religion either way, that means the government must stay out of religious matters, and religion must stay out of the government!

          • Cam Ron

            Cool. Next time your kid comes home asking about why Jesus is fake and Mohammed is the lord you can have that conversation with them. Because if one group is allowed, thru their children, to evangelicalize in school to other children… then all are. You missed the point and I must assume cannot address it.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  More of your anti-public school ranting (which is completely off-topic). I’d ask for some proof of your accusations, but (as I said before) I’m not going to be drawn into that!

                  But what do you mean by religion being “justified” in a public school? If you mean the schools can teach about religion (such as in a Comparative Religion class), you’re correct. If you mean students, outside of class can discuss their faith with fellow students who want to hear, you’re correct again. But if you mean the schools and their employees can be used to proselytize (especially for any one faith), then you’re completely wrong!

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  Again, there was absolutely no proof that the child in question in this case was “disrupting” anything!

                  And how do you know someone’s religion is “crazy”? Who died and made you omniscient?

          • Cam Ron

            THE TEACHER told the parents it was inappropriate and was disrupting class. The end.
            I don’t care what religion it was…. don’t proselytize to my child. It becomes crazy when you try to indoctrinate someone else’s child into your religion without their parents consent. The parents where ACTIVELY sending scripture with their child to give to other students ON SCHOOL PROPERTY. Quit being a facetious d!ck.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  There you go again, making an argument that has nothing to do with the facts! (Which makes you the facetious penis here.)

                  Once again, go back and read what the article actually says (instead of making stuff up). All the teacher said was that their child “not allowed to share such things while at school”. No mention about “disrupting class”. (Since when is lunch a “class”?) No mention of any attempt to “proselytize”. (Originally, the notes were for the child alone. He made the decision to pass them out to willing children! And no mention of any other parent objecting!

                  What’s next? Students not being able to discuss a book about Darwin because their parents object to “indoctrination” in Evolution? Or what about people who believe the Earth is flat? Does that mean a kid can’t talk about Copernicus, Galileo, or Newton during lunch?

                  Had this been at attempt to proselytize (particularly to unwilling students) I’d agree with you. Though I’m an adult, I react very badly when strangers come up to me and try to convert me to their faith. (Even when it’s a fellow Jew trying to convert me to the Orthodox form of that faith.) But that didn’t happen here!

                  So stop being such a lying penis.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  I’m not going to get drawn into a “conservative” rant against public schools (which is irrelevant to the topic in this case). I’ll just say that almost everything you wrote is false (being the product of blind ideology, not fact and reason).

                  However, we agree on one thing, attending public school isn’t a “privilege”, it’s a legal right! And it doesn’t involve (as Cam Ron seemed to think) the surrender of one’s entire First Amendment rights.

                  In contrast, students at those private schools you’re so fond of have no First Amendment rights, since attendance there is a privilege!

        • Shrdlu42theSecond

                No, the school can’t, unless (as I already said) the evangelizing disrupts school activities (which since this was during lunch time wouldn’t apply), or if it constituted harassment (such as the student forcing his evangelizing on a fellow student who asked him to stop). Again, none of that appeared to have happened in this case.

                And obviously you never studied Constitutional Law. While students have less Free Speech rights at school than adults in the “outside world”, they do have some. I suggest you start by reading Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969), and then continue from there.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Independent_Community_School_District

          • Cam Ron

            A disruptive student at lunch is no less disruptive during class. The teacher said no. The parents didn’t listen. Again, that’s what happened in this “case”. I already explained how its nothing to do with the constitution…. no one was charged but they made it clear to the parents that their harassment of OTHER PEOPLES CHILDREN was not appropriate. How about address that. I’m 100% sure you’d throw a fit if this kid was handing out Koran verses.

          • Shrdlu42theSecond

                  One “small” problem with that tirade of yours: that’s not what happened! There was no “disruption” (in fact, other children asked for the bible verses), and when told to stop and “take it outside”:

            They [the parents and child] complied with the principal’s demand.

                  That you have to keep lying about this only demonstrates how invalid your argument is. (If this were a court of law, I’d make a motion against you seeking sanctions – fines – for such “frivolous conduct”, and I’d win!)

                  And of course this has everything to do with the Constitution, in particular the Free Speech and Free Exercise clauses of the First Amendment. I’ve already told you where to begin to learn about the former, and you can certainly easily research the latter – that is if you care to learn the truth! (Which I doubt you do.)

            “but they made it clear to the parents that their harassment of OTHER PEOPLES CHILDREN was not appropriate. How about address that.”

                  Again, more lies on your part. Kindly quote from the article (as I did) the parts which support your statement. You won’t because you can’t! There was no “harassment”, and the school didn’t claim there was. Its reasons for doing this were 1) “separation of church and state” (cited incorrectly by the teacher as her reason); and 2) the decision of the principal “to implement a complete ban on the Bible verse sharing”, claiming “it was against school policy”. Even the Deputy only gave this (pathetic) reason: “the school was worried that someone might be offended by the Bible verses”.

                  Just in case your problem is with the English Language, those two emphasized words (“worried” and “might”) clearly indicate no one was “offended”, only that the school worried someone “might” be.

                  So, once again we see the actual facts are contrary to and refute what you say. I might add, that the reason the Deputy gave is what’s known in First Amendment Law as a “heckler’s veto” – the idea that we can suppress speech merely because someone finds it offensive (or might as in this case). Sorry, but (absent the real threat of immediate violence) such censorship is a big constitutional no-no! (And even in such circumstances, the government might not be allowed to act.)

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler%27s_veto

                  Again, in this case there was no such threat (immediate or otherwise), so the child’s Free Speech and Free Exercise rights were violated by the teacher and the school.

                  How about you address all that!

            P.S. – And you’re 100% wrong about how I’d react had the kid been handing out verses from the Koran. Don’t confuse me with some of the “conservative Christians” here (and in America) who believe they deserve “special rights” because they’re “justified by faith”. I believe the Constitution applies to everyone equally. Which is why I would uphold a Muslim student’s right to do this (provided the facts were the same). Which is why (to take a contrary example) I have repeatedly cited on this page (with disapproval) an incident in Louisiana where a Christian teacher humiliated a Sixth-grader in front of his class for being Buddhist. And where, when the parents complained, they were told by the school: “This is the Bible Belt. Move.” That was as much a violation of the Constitution by the teacher and school as what happened in this case!

Submit a Comment

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our mailing list to receive the latest news and updates from Law Officer.

You have Successfully Subscribed!