As a concerned citizen of Milford, NY, the proposition of allowing our local religious group, the Good News Club, to host their meetings at our public elementary school has been the talk of the town recently, and has drawn many opinions from both sides of the argument. However, it is of my opinion that the Supreme Court is wrong in their decision to allow the Good News Club to meet in its local elementary school. Rather than basing their final jurisdiction on the Establishment Clause, they opted to argue for the Free Speech Clause, less relevant to this particular issue. The evidence that the Good News Club is unlawfully promoting and advancing religion on public school property, combined with the fact that the time the club meets at
…show more content…
Milford Central School based on the Establishment Clause, allowing for unlawful activity to be permitted on Milford Central School …show more content…
Milford Central School. They opted to ignore the remarkably relevant Establishment Clause, as well as the convenient Three Part Test. In this case, the Supreme Court based their arguments and ultimately their decision on the Free Speech Clause and on previous cases such as Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District in 1993, when the court ruled that school property must be open to religious groups if all other groups are also permitted. In failing to recognize and acknowledge the evidence that the Good News Club is inhibiting religion on school property and excessively entangling religion with academics, the Supreme Court is allowing for unlawful activity to occur on school grounds. In today’s modern day world, people are continuously becoming more sensitive and politically correct to subjective controversies, with an example being the recent emerging argument over the “racist” Washington Redskins team name. To remain consistent with this theme, the Supreme Court must require the disallowance of the Good News Club to hold its weekly meetings on Milford Central School property in our hometown of Milford,
Milford Central School based on the Establishment Clause, allowing for unlawful activity to be permitted on Milford Central School …show more content…
Milford Central School. They opted to ignore the remarkably relevant Establishment Clause, as well as the convenient Three Part Test. In this case, the Supreme Court based their arguments and ultimately their decision on the Free Speech Clause and on previous cases such as Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free School District in 1993, when the court ruled that school property must be open to religious groups if all other groups are also permitted. In failing to recognize and acknowledge the evidence that the Good News Club is inhibiting religion on school property and excessively entangling religion with academics, the Supreme Court is allowing for unlawful activity to occur on school grounds. In today’s modern day world, people are continuously becoming more sensitive and politically correct to subjective controversies, with an example being the recent emerging argument over the “racist” Washington Redskins team name. To remain consistent with this theme, the Supreme Court must require the disallowance of the Good News Club to hold its weekly meetings on Milford Central School property in our hometown of Milford,