Interesting ethical dilemma...

[cyan_blue]

Thanks to kimuchi for this link...

Freedom of Speech and Separation of Church and State square off in a high school yearbook photo

Goodness, that's a hard one. My own thought is that there should be two official photos taken.

One photo can be about self-expression - the Jesus kids could wear their shirts; other kids could wear other expressive stuff; kids who really felt it to be against their conscience to participate could be allowed to step out of that photo.

The other photo would be one where there were no slogans (and I suppose, to be fair, students would have to be given a chance to not participate in that one too).

Then both photos could be printed in the yearbook, as official photos; and people could order prints of whichever one (or both) they pleased.

Comments

[danaeris.livejournal.com]

See, I'm just wondering if anyone has sat these students down and had a conversation sort of like this:

"Name some political or religious cause that makes you very uncomfortable"

"Foo Bar Baz"

"OK. You get one yearbook group photo. How would you feel if supporters of Foo Bar Baz wore t-shirts in your one and only senior yearbook group photo which was in favor of Foo Bar Baz?"

It's not about christianity or even freedom of speech. A lot of people attach a lot of emotional significance to their senior yearbook photo, and I suspect these christian kids would feel just as uncomfortable if someone else had decided to put some other message in it that was objectionable to THEM. It's about being considerate of others and not ruining this special thing for them.

And yeah, your solution would probably work from a fairness point of view, but the school seems to be concerned from a legal point of view, and those concerns may be valid. This is in the gray area and who knows what a judge will say about it.

[kimuchi.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think it's the consideration issue, more than the rights issue, that got me. Since I grew up in a small midwestern town (my sister and I call it Pleasantville), I just can't imagine someone trying to impose on the larger group like that.

[spoothbrush.livejournal.com]

It's definitely a hard question. I feel like there's no good reason to ban it based on the pre-existing rules... but I can see how, particularly having the students sitting in the middle of the front row, it would give the impression to someone who isn't aware of all of this that the school is endorsing the message. Contextually, with something that organized and with that large a group, it could very well look like the entire class was espousing the same Christian message.

I wonder if the students might accept leaving their T-shirts out of a full-senior-class picture, but having separate posed pictures with the message they want to express -- similar to your suggestion, I guess, but making it clear that it's their view and that the rest of the class isn't involved. In this case the school wouldn't be refusing to let the students express their religious convictions, but would be keeping them clearly in the context of being a subset of the class.

And I really can't see what the justification for this might be: Last year, a Salem, Ore., high school principal banned a senior girl's photo that included her pet rat.

Not a big dilemma to me

[rampling.livejournal.com]

I strongly suspect that since the students were already members of a school group (the campus club Brothers and Sisters in Christ), they were already to be featured in their own picture -- where their T-shirts would be fine (I was a yearbook photographer in high school -- the same school in the story!). They should already have a much more appropriate medium in which to present their message in the yearbook. I saw a second picture on my local TV version of the story (shown at right), with just the students with letters spelling J E S U S (HEART) U and two wearing T-shirts with crosses, plus 1 or 2 big wooden crosses. That's fine for the picture of a Christian school group. But putting their LOUD message on a big full-senior-class picture just seems damned rude and inappropriate to me. It does make it look like the whole senior class endorses the message. As mentioned, if it was individual students, it wouldn't be so bad (while still irritating), but the big group thing is just way too much.

Do they really want next year's picture (or the retake this year) to have the pro-Jesus crowd offset by dissenters spelling "JESUS SUX"? Or worse? Who gets to stand in front? And why?

I see a different dilemma, I think.

[spoothbrush.livejournal.com]

The point as I see it has little to do with the students being rude and inappropriate - it has to do with whether they were violating the standards that the school had given the class.

If the school didn't say "group statements may not be made in the class picture" or "clothing that makes a religious statement is not appropriate" (and what a mess that would be! Imagine telling someone that they have to remove hijab or take off a yarmaluke for a school picture: those could also be construed as making a religious statement, if in a different way) or anything along those lines, then the students have a point: they weren't breaking any existing rules or guidelines to the best of their knowledge. They weren't promoting hate, violence, or illegal substances with their clothing, thus as far as they were concerned this was perfectly legitimate and the school authorities were wrong for telling them to stop.

High school students aren't known for good taste, or for having a well-developed ability to tell when actions are and are not appropriate. From what I can tell from the article, the school didn't have any sort of backup blanket "or any other article of clothing deemed inappropriate by school authorities" clause, or any specific policy in place for the picture. And if there wasn't any sort of a rule already in place that could be enforced in this situation, well, then it looks to me like the school district put itself in a potential "damned if you do, damned if you don't" position and that group of students made it a reality.

If they'd let the students co-opt their class picture with this message, they'd get nailed by non-Christians, and some Christians, saying that this is absolutely inappropriate and should not have been allowed to happen. But with nothing saying beforehand that this was inappropriate and would not be allowed, the students who were blocked from making this statement have a legitimate complaint.

Re: I see a different dilemma, I think.

[queerbychoice.livejournal.com]

I disagree, for reasons explained here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/rampling/107350.html?replyto=410710).

Re: I see a different dilemma, I think.

[spoothbrush.livejournal.com]

Can you summarize or restate it? It's a protected entry.

Re: I see a different dilemma, I think.

[queerbychoice.livejournal.com]

Agh, sorry.

The article says:

"Not allowing students to wear what they please and arrange themselves as they like amounts to anti-religious censorship, said attorney Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute."

Not allowing WHICH students to arrange themselves as they please? What about the non-Christian students in the school (surely there are some!) who would prefer to stand in between the Jesus people and mess up their lettering?

I think they're all perfectly free to wear anything they like, but expecting the school to let them decide where to stand and not let others decide to stand in front of them is just asking for them to be privileged over other students.

And you said:
"The point as I see it has little to do with the students being rude and inappropriate - it has to do with whether they were violating the standards that the school had given the class."

Even putting aside the fact that I think it *highly* unlikely that there would not be a single non-Christian student who would (unless they fear being attacked for saying such a thing!) voice a preference to stand in between the letters of these people's shirts, and presuming for the sake of argument that all students agreed on their place to stand - I find it *extremely* unlikely that the school ever gave the students some sort of written contractual promise that they *would* be allowed to arrange themselves in any position they see fit. The right to not be told to stand in alphabetical order by last name in your class picture in not a right that I've ever heard of schools promising to students in writing ahead of time.

Re: I see a different dilemma, I think.

[spoothbrush.livejournal.com]

I hadn't really thought about ordering all the students, I admit -- I wonder whether the Persons In Authority had such a solution occur to them.

I agree with you that placing the class in alphabetical order, or ordered by height, or some other arbitrary arrangement, would have been a solution that would have defused the problem without being unfair to the t-shirt group, either in a negatively unfair or a positively unfair way. It sounds like the assistant principal (?) who was supervising the picture-taking was trying to re-arrange or move the t-shirt group, but without any significant alteration of the rest of the class. That's the expedient solution that gets everyone back into the classroom as quickly as possible, but it singles out the t-shirt clique by *denying* them a privilege that the other students still have. Being ordered into alphabetical order would have been a pain in the ass, but one that would have been just as unpleasant to everybody.

[eleanor.livejournal.com]

I'm with the attorney for the school. If the students had worn indiviudla shirts with their message, that would have been one thing. The group effort not only involved the school, with an implied endoresement, but involved the other students; at the least, the position and relative weight of the other students was diminished, attention taken away from them, and worst, other students were made to feel uncomfortable by being party (by virtue of positon) to a message they did not endorse.