My opinion and then I will be quiet again.
The case being brought by Sikhs is going to be a landmark case because it will test two contradictory aspects of the 1rst Amendment of the US Constitution. Freedom of students to be protected from the establishment of religion in the form of religious "messages" by a state employee who is wearing religious garb (1) versus the employees freedom to express his/her religious faith by wearing religious garb (2).
Now when you think about it...the School Code prohibition against the wearing of religious garb by teachers is ridiculous. The rational for this measure is that teachers wield immense psychological power over students by virtue of their professional role. The 1st Amendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion. Teachers as state employees therefore would, by wearing religious garb, impose their religious beliefs on their students -- who are theoretically helpless to resist the influence of garb and other indications of religion. What makes this nonsense IMHO is that there are many other influences on children that are more powerful than teachers in the US today.
Are there any recorded cases of school students changing their religious adherence because of the garb worn in real-time by influential people in their lives? Peers, television, particularly cable television, as well as motion pictures compete with church and family for this kind of influence. In fact celebrity culture competes with teachers, family and church. Many argue that media is form of mind control that instigates all kinds of social ills. I won't enumerate. Media, the Internet and celebrity culture are today probably more likely to influence children than schools -- sorry to say.
The case being brought by Sikhs is going to be a landmark case because it will test two contradictory aspects of the 1rst Amendment of the US Constitution. Freedom of students to be protected from the establishment of religion in the form of religious "messages" by a state employee who is wearing religious garb (1) versus the employees freedom to express his/her religious faith by wearing religious garb (2).
Now when you think about it...the School Code prohibition against the wearing of religious garb by teachers is ridiculous. The rational for this measure is that teachers wield immense psychological power over students by virtue of their professional role. The 1st Amendment prohibits the establishment of a state religion. Teachers as state employees therefore would, by wearing religious garb, impose their religious beliefs on their students -- who are theoretically helpless to resist the influence of garb and other indications of religion. What makes this nonsense IMHO is that there are many other influences on children that are more powerful than teachers in the US today.
Are there any recorded cases of school students changing their religious adherence because of the garb worn in real-time by influential people in their lives? Peers, television, particularly cable television, as well as motion pictures compete with church and family for this kind of influence. In fact celebrity culture competes with teachers, family and church. Many argue that media is form of mind control that instigates all kinds of social ills. I won't enumerate. Media, the Internet and celebrity culture are today probably more likely to influence children than schools -- sorry to say.
