In article <4a846afb$1@news.povray.org>,
Jim Henderson wrote:

> If the adult has the right to be in the school and is not a school 
> official (which is important in public schools - if a teacher were 
> promoting a religion in a public school, I would have a problem with 
> that, regardless of the religion, because public schools are part of "the 
> state" and the first amendment prohibits the state sponsoring a 
> religion), then there should be no problem with this, again, as long as 
> they're not disruptive or inciting people to act against "those who are 
> different".

Okay. 

I myself wouldn't really, in this context, distinguish private from
public, though. It's about education. Let me argue from an even
tougher perspect: family. If your parents are oppressing you, I think
it kinda is my business too. It's true that there may be virtually
nothing I can do about it, because I will not intervene in your family
life in order to do what I think is best.

And if I ever do intervene, then it is my responsibility to show
beforehand that an intervention is indeed required, and I should get
approval from others. There is, in fact, a formal way of doing that:
calling the police, for example. That is, we hand to the state the
task of intervening.

Sometimes this can be justified. For example, if your parents beat you
up violently, regularly, I think that most people will agree that an
intervention is justifiable. So, if a private school is oppressing
people, I think it is people's business too. But there are Good and
Bad ways of doing something about that.

I'm not saying you are against any of this. It just came to mind as
you begin to distinguish between public and private schools on free
speech.

>> Now I want to question the framework of the discussion. Why is a (six
>> year old?) kid interested in Jesus? Suppose you find an answer here by
>> talking to his family. Then you go ``aha.'' And that is why I don't
>> allow adults doing propaganda in my school. Home is just another school;
>> only more important.
>
> Where he got his interest is irrelevant.  We all learn from our families 
> and our friends.  So what?  The reason the kid is exercising his free 
> speech is not important.  He should be allowed to do so, as long as he's 
> not disruptive or inciting people to harm others.

The paragraph I wrote has nothing to do with free speech, actually. I
changed the subject. ``Now I want to question the framework...'' This
sometimes falls outside the scope.

[...]

Post a reply to this message