Sorry, I found the name of the court case amusing and I imagine it was intentional. :)

<link>

In one of those apparently rare cases where the Supreme Court doesn't overrule the 9th Circuit...

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Monday declined to stop a school district from blocking a group of Christian students from forming a Bible club on campus.

The court refused to hear an appeal from the high school students who wanted to form the Truth Bible Club at Kentridge High School in Washington state in 2001.

The school refused to let the group be chartered as a school club. They cited the group's name, the fact that students would have to pledge to Jesus Christ to vote in the club and that allowing the club in would bring religion into the school. The club's would-be founders then sued the Kent School District, claiming discrimination.

Fortunately, the kids have other options. I hear they're called churches...

<link>

Thanks for reminding me of this song.

Sometimes the truth just doesn't deserve to win out.

I really don't have a problem with the club forming so long as

a) They are meeting either after or before school or during designated break or non-assigned periods (E.G. Lunch or recess)

b) They are not using tax payer dollars to support them.

c) They are not, in some other way, interrupting the learing process. (E.G. Disturbing other students, creating a hostile environment, distracting people that are trying to study etc)

Other than that, I am not sure why this is a problem. I really don't think it is right to completely banish religion from the school house. I do feel that it should be banished from classrooms where it is not the subject of study. But that is just because I don't believe anything should distract from class time and the subjects that it is committed to.

Apparently the school didn't like the xian-only membership clause...so I would guess on the other counts, the club was okay. Maybe the next generation of kids will go ahead and allow all students to join. Since the case dates back to 2001, I imagine the crop that started the court case has since gone on to do well at Liberty University, or perhaps to a successful career at the Creation Museum.

Sounds like the pledge is the problem. The brief article notes:

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the district did not violate the students' First Amendment rights by requiring them to allow all students full membership in their club.

Since the issue was this group's right to be chartered as an official school club (and I'm not sure what that means), an insistence by the school that "official" clubs be open to all students does not strike me as unreasonable. Obviously, The Supremes felt similarly.

Here's more detail from the Seattle Times which is a bit clearer on the details:

The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear the case between Kentridge High School and two former students who fought to form a Bible study group that excluded non-Christians from becoming voting members.

...The school in 2003 denied a charter for the group, called Truth, saying its membership requirements discriminated against students who refused to sign a statement accepting Jesus as their personal savior. Truth founders argued that the school denied their First Amendment rights and violated the Equal Access Act by preventing them from forming a group according to their religious beliefs.

Truth's founders filed their case with one major question in mind: Can a school district refuse to charter student organizations that restrict membership based on religion?

Yep. I'd certainly say so. Add this into the mix, from local station KPLU:

But an attorney for the Kent School District says other clubs at the school, including religious ones, don't make members sign an oath. "This group wanted to receive public funds, wanted to be an ASB club. To be an ASB club, your membership must be open to all students," says Kent Schools general counsel Chuck Lind.

Ah. There's your taxpayer dollar support...thanks for digging that up, Primate.

silent.observer:

Apparently the school didn't like the xian-only membership clause...so I would guess on the other counts, the club was okay. Maybe the next generation of kids will go ahead and allow all students to join. Since the case dates back to 2001, I imagine the crop that started the court case has since gone on to do well at Liberty University, or perhaps to a successful career at the Creation Museum.

Funny.recently a group of students were either expelled from "liberty u" or stopped from forming a young democrates club because as the school said "you can't be a christian and be a democrate" i know it's a private school but the attitude is the point .

J.MADISON:

Funny.recently a group of students were either expelled from "liberty u" or stopped from forming a young democrates club because as the school said "you can't be a christian and be a democrate" i know it's a private school but the attitude is the point .

So what does that make Carter?

Interesting perception of xtians and thier infighting on who is and isn't among their ranks. I was priviy to a month long flame war by a fanatical zealot accusing a friend of mine, who I have no question as to her devotion to her perception of faith as a xtain, of not being one.

I missed that bit. But, it is certainly a bit of a hitch in their argument.

I find such an oath funny for a supposedly Christian students' club. I can't think of a single Christian church that requires such an oath to attend services. Heck, they're begging for doubters and soul seekers to come in and drink the Kool-Aid.

James 5:12

But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.

Matthew 5:34 - 37

But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: [35] Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. [36] Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. [37] But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

NightSwimmer:

James 5:12

But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.

Matthew 5:34 - 37

But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: [35] Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. [36] Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. [37] But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Were these get-out-of-jail clauses because Bamidbar 30:3-17 too confusing to follow?

it makes any oath said on a xtian text, for office, marriage, or in testomony hollow, empty and invalid of any meaning then doesn't it?

Even as a young child, I always found it incredible that adults could take that nonsense seriously.

Well I triple dog dare you to believe in the same non-sense as adults do. LOL!