Running Head: Religion and Public Schools 1

Artifact 5: Religion and Public Schools

Cody Wilson

Edu 210-1003

Dr. Dale Warby

2/28/2019
Religion and Public Schools 2

A kindergarten teacher named Karen White recently became a part of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

As such, according to her new beliefs she is no longer able to decorate her class for and celebrate the

holidays. In addition, this means no more singing “Happy Birthday” to her students or being able to

recite the Pledge of Allegiance. When she sent out a letter informing her students and their parents of

this, it was met with outrage. The school principal, Bill Ward, felt that she was no longer able to meet

the needs of her students and should be let go. Given this hypothetical situation, I would like to present

both sides of the argument as well as how I feel the courts would handle this case.

First, I would like to argue for the teacher’s case, against her dismissal. In the case of Adler v.

Duval (2001), it was ruled that if a student’s expression of prayer is not be school sponsored, it is still

considered to be constitutional. If the school has no policy requiring all teachers and students sing

“Happy Birthday” and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, then I see no reason why her abstaining is

infringing upon the other students or violating any school rules.

Next, I would like to invoke Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972). In Wisconsin v. Yoder, it was ruled by the

Supreme Court that the states could not interfere with the free exercise of religion unless they were

capable of showing a compelling state interest in doing so. Her willful exclusion from singing “Happy

Birthday” or reciting the Pledge of Allegiance as stated in Ms. White’s new classroom rules and

guidelines do not infringe upon her students’ rights, as they are still able to do so on their own.

Now I would like to take some time to argue for her dismissal as well. According to Peloza v.

Capistrano Unified School District (1991). In Peloza v. Capistrano Unified School District (1991), it was

ruled that the removal of religious imagery and Peloza’s own personal Bible from the classroom was not

violating the teacher’s rights. As the teacher does not wish to perform these harmless acts of singing

“Happy Birthday” and the Pledge of Allegiance, I see no difference between removing a tangible item
Religion and Public Schools 3

like a Bible and removing her religious beliefs from the classroom. Therefore, I believe it is perfectly

within Principal Ward’s power to suggest her removal from the classroom.

To further argue for Ms. White’s dismissal, I would like to invoke Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971). To

ensure that laws do not violate the establishment clause, the case of Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) inspired

the United States Supreme Court to create the “three-prong test”. The three-prong test requires that an

action or policy be secular, neither advance nor inhibit religion, and cannot foster an excessive

government entanglement with religion. Since her unwillingness to sing “Happy Birthday” and recite the

Pledge of Allegiance are secular in nature due to her religious beliefs, I believe that Ms. White has

infringed upon her student’s rights.

Based upon these rulings, I believe that despite Ms. White’s policies failing the three-prong test,

her students are still more than capable of singing “Happy Birthday” or reciting the Pledge of Allegiance

on their own, Ms. White should not be removed from her position. I feel that the existence of a

volunteer or additional school staff could easily help to handle these obligations if necessary for these

students.
Religion and Public Schools 4

References

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971).

Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).

Adler v. Duval, 250 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 1991).

Peloza v. Capistrano Unified School District, 37 F.3d 517 (9th Cir. 1994).