Running head: ARTIFACT # 6 RELIGION IN THE SCHOOLS 1

Religion in the Schools: Case Review

Yesenia Lara
ARTIFACT # 6 RELIGION IN THE SCHOOLS 2

Religion in the Schools: Case Review

Karen White is a Kindergarten teacher who recently joined a religious group

known as Jehovah’s Witnesses. Karen consented her students and their parents that she would no

longer be participating or direct activities that went against her beliefs. For example, her

classroom would not be decorated for holidays, she would not do gifts exchanges during

Christmas seasons, and she would not sing happy birthday. In addition to that there would also be

things like reciting the Pledge of Allegiance where she would not be a participant in. Her

student’s parents were not happy with her recent affiliation, they protested and the principle Bill

Ward recommended her for dismissal.

Karen White new choice of religion is by all means allowed, but within her classroom she

should not be allowed to demonstrate nor inflict her personal conviction on her students. In the

case of Stone v. Graham, the display of the ten commandments was considered unconstitutional

and religious promotion was not permissible. Karen White’s refusal to decorate and not to Pledge

Allegiance is simply that, and her recommendation for dismissal should be understood.

Unfortunately, there are established laws that separate church and state and Karen White

is a teacher at a state funded school. That being said, she must abide by the rules and her

religious beliefs cannot reflect unconstitutional against the school. The same concepts apply to

students, for example in the case of Hazelwood School District v Kuhlmeier, the student was

required to remove religious statements from a mural because it was sponsored by the school.

Holiday activities, and Allegiance to the Flag are considered state and school sponsored,

therefore Bill Ward has the right to refer her for dismissal.

Karen White’s convictions could be seen as unconstitutional; however, she is not required

nor is it allowed for a school to sponsor a religious holiday. It is up to the teacher whether or not
ARTIFACT # 6 RELIGION IN THE SCHOOLS 3

she would like to teach upon the holiday, but they are without a religious purpose. In reference to

Doe v. Harlan School District, the court prohibited a play that included the ten commandments,

how different is that from the celebration of the birth of a Christian God. Karen White was really

letting her students and their parents know that she would not participate in activities that are

already prohibited by law. Bill Ward should have taken her side and advised the parents of the

obvious and established regulations.

Karen White has every right to practice any religion that she chooses. As far as what she

stated in her student and parent consent is simply an answer if they needed a reason for which

she chooses not to direct a gift exchange during the Christmas holidays. In the case of Wigg v.

Sioux Falls School District, the teacher wished to join an after school religious club, her

principle advised her not to do so based on his perception of religious endorsement. However,

the teacher in fact was allowed to attend because it was an after school activity and she attended

as a private individual. The same concept applies to Karen White; after school her religious

practices do not affect her as an educator.

I think in this particular case, Karen White should not refuse school sponsored activities,

yet the school has no right to fire her based on her religion. If this in fact went to court the school

would lose. There are other ways that this could have been resolved, a simple overview of the

regulations would have been suffice. I also think that the principle should have come in defense

of Karen and advising the parents of the current rules of religion in the school.
ARTIFACT # 6 RELIGION IN THE SCHOOLS 4

Reference:

(Webb, 2006)

(Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 1987)

(Stone v. Graham , 1980)

(Doe v. Harlan County School District , 2000)

(Wigg v. Sioux Falls School District , 2003)