code that is designed to prevent displays of gang symbols.

This isn't exactly new.

We can't ban any color or object a gang might choose to adopt; that's nuts.

his neck does not make it jewelry; it makes it a visible expression of his beliefs which, though not conventionally Catholic, are his Constitutionally protected beliefs.

absolutely 100% allowed to wear his rosary. You're confusing wearing it, and showing it off. Since when is insisting that a religious symbol being worn over a shirt and not under part of the Catholic religion? Since when is a Catholic entitled to something no other religion does? Sorry, schools are not designed to promote religion and insisting you wear a religious symbol if only everyone can see it is exactly that. Don't confuse the argument. He CAN wear his rosary. Yes, he had to take it off after he refused to abide by the rules, but he wasn't forced to take it off because he was Catholic, he was forced to take if off because he refused to follow the rules. Absolutely no sympathy for this kid.

And is in direct conflict with the school district's policy.

I'm not saying that conventional Catholic religion approves of him wearing the rosary around his neck. I'm saying that it's his personal choice to express his religion that way.

Are you also opposed to Sikh youth wearing a turban in school? Or a Muslim girl wearing a veil?


Here is the school's dress code:

http://monroees-susd-ca.schoolloop.com/students

MONROE DRESS CODE

Monroe Dress Code:

No red or blue clothing, shoes, belts, accessories No hats, beanies or hair dye are allowed No athletic team apparel will be allowed.
No sagging
No clothing, including backpacks, that promotes graffiti.
No rosaries are allowed.
No tank tops or any clothing that exposes the midriff No flip flops, slip on shoes, slippers or pajamas allowed “Our goal is to promote Safety for students.”
Education Code Section 35294.1

Here is district policy:

http://www.stockton.k12.ca.us/pdf/studentcode.pdf

Other Forms of Expression: Students are entitled to express themselves by displaying or wearing symbols of ethnic, cultural, political, or other values, except for gang-related items.

Students shall dress appropriately for daily attendance at school. In sites where a school uniform policy is in effect, clothes should adhere to the published district uniform guidelines (available at school sites). In all other instances, the school shall be concerned only when the type of clothing, hairstyle, or cosmetics are extreme and could cause school distraction or disruption, or could be unsafe.

Examples of inappropriate clothing may include (but are not limited to):
- Garments where the torso is exposed, i.e., tube tops, half shirts, halters.
- Clothing or buttons which show obscene or alcohol or drug-related slogans, words or pictures, or sexually suggestive statements.
- Clothing related to gangs or gang activities.
- Garments where the entire thigh is exposed, such as micro 
minis, short shorts, or bathing suits.
- Bare feet.

since the district forbids rosaries, it's likely because it's not a religious symbol if the Catholic church claims it shouldn't be worn that way. In that case, it's a personal religious belief and where do we draw the line. He can't claim he's wearing it to support his Catholic faith, what faith is he then? His own personal religion? What else are the rules governing that? Sorry, it's a move by a punk kid to put his beliefs above others and the rules. If he had a problem with the rule he could have filed a complaint with the school board. Schools have been ruled in this country by scotus as not having to comply with certain free speech things if the greater good would be harmed.

The district explicitly allows students to express their values in what they wear. He is expressing his values in wearing the rosary. The particular school is going against school policy.



Here is district policy, which contains not a word about rosaries.

http://www.stockton.k12.ca.us/pdf/studentcode.pdf

Other Forms of Expression: Students are entitled to express themselves by displaying or wearing symbols of ethnic, cultural, political, or other values, except for gang-related items.

Students shall dress appropriately for daily attendance at school. In sites where a school uniform policy is in effect, clothes should adhere to the published district uniform guidelines (available at school sites). In all other instances, the school shall be concerned only when the type of clothing, hairstyle, or cosmetics are extreme and could cause school distraction or disruption, or could be unsafe.

Examples of inappropriate clothing may include (but are not limited to):
- Garments where the torso is exposed, i.e., tube tops, half shirts, halters.
- Clothing or buttons which show obscene or alcohol or drug-related slogans, words or pictures, or sexually suggestive statements.
- Clothing related to gangs or gang activities.
- Garments where the entire thigh is exposed, such as micro 
minis, short shorts, or bathing suits.
- Bare feet.

policy is not to allow individual schools to add their own rules then the school is violating policy. You are assuming individual schools don't have the authority to add to the District policy. That would be unwise in that some schools are completely different is size/makeup/need than others in the same district. It would seem that this school has had a problem with rosaries being used by gang members, perhaps the other schools don't. I don't feel for this kid for one second. Even assuming his intentions are pure (though since his choice isn't recognized by his own church I doubt it) at the very least he's a student who hasn't complained about the policy to the local board or his priest, he chooses to willfully ignore the rules as written and the school leadership.

not in addition to it. The school district is very clear about the right's the students are "entitled to" and the limits on the school's ability to require dress codes.

The key words are "entitled to" and "only."

http://www.stockton.k12.ca.us/pdf/studentcode.pdf

Other Forms of Expression: Students are entitled to express themselves by displaying or wearing symbols of ethnic, cultural, political, or other values, except for gang-related items.

Students shall dress appropriately for daily attendance at school. In sites where a school uniform policy is in effect, clothes should adhere to the published district uniform guidelines (available at school sites). In all other instances, the school shall be concerned only when the type of clothing, hairstyle, or cosmetics are extreme and could cause school distraction or disruption, or could be unsafe.

banned them on the grounds of their being a gang symbol. I liked the poster who is more familiar with the situation explain the rosary and how the gang adopted 13 beads. I would be curious to know if that was what the kid as wearing. I'm wondering why the kid or his parents didn't bring it to the attention of their priest.

is or isn't trying to promote a gang. Schools are for the common best interest. Not for the principal to spend his time deciding whether individuals are or aren't in a gang. It's ludicrous to even ask for it. Sorry, you and I will continue to disagree on the matter. I have no problem tucking my cross into my shirt in a public school setting. It doesn't make me less of a Christian. I would like to see more outrage directed at the individuals who are turning it into a gang symbol. Also, I didn't think the Catholic Schools allowed it, so I did a quick google search. The first thing that came up:

To: Biggirl
I feel for the young man and his loss, yet even if for the wrong reason, the school is correct in asking the young man to remove the Rosary Beads. I teach in a CATHOLIC SCHOOL, and we do NOT allow the wearing of Rosary Beads. They are NOT an adornment. They are to be used for prayer and prayer alone and it is against the teachings of the Catholic Church to wear them. That said, unfortunately, they have become a gang symbol for many local hoods

It's against the teachings to wear them as a fashion item, without reverence.


http://ctscatholiccompass.org/features/youth/wearing-rosaries-should-it-be-done/

http://www.catholic-convert.com/blog/2011/07/16/wearing-the-rosary-as-a-necklace/

http://www.ketv.com/Fremont-Girl-Banned-From-Wearing-Rosary-At-School/-/9675214/10134418/-/rxirgc/-/index.html#ixzz2iUSnoMsu

Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor Rev. Joseph Taphorn said it's disheartening.

"I don't think Christians should have to forfeit what is the symbol for the love of Christ because a few people want to misuse that symbol," he said.

He said the corruption of something as beloved as the rosary disgusts the church.


"One ought to be able to figure out whether she's trying to promote a gang," Taphorn said. "If she's not, why would she be punished for her right of religious freedom and religious expression?"

Code of Canon Law says, “Sacred objects, which are designated for divine worship by dedication or blessing, are to be treated reverently and are not to be employed for profane or inappropriate use even if they are owned by private persons.”

Gang signs would fall under this rule, wouldn't they? Of course, so would Madonna who sort of inspired this "fashion." Indigenous culture has infused church dogma with their own colorful ethnic flavor in the West. A gaudy manifestation of religious faith characterizes the shrines, retablos, milagros which also reveal an equally strong belief in magic. Perhaps the gangs ascribe some protective power to the rosary itself. I notice some wear multiple crucifixes. Like charms. Hopefully not just fashion accessories.

What I will be curious to see is whether the fad spreads to Protestants because then it would clearly be for the wrong reasons as Protestants do not pray for intercession to Mary nor do they depict images of Christ on a crucifix. But I can see some ignorant of their own traditions wearing them as fashion statements.

I think we can all safely assume the nuns would not approve.

He says he's wearing it as an expression of his religious beliefs.

Of course the Catholic Church does not support the use of rosaries as gang signs. The Archbishop doesn't either. But he doesn't think ordinary Catholics should have their religious rights limited because some gangs might be misappropriating their symbols.

But that doesn't make it Constitutional.

The ACLU strongly supports students' right to wear rosaries. And students who fight the prohibition are winning.

http://global.christianpost.com/news/neb-schools-ban-on-rosary-style-necklace-touches-on-free-speech-issues-57228/

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, standing behind Carey, said in a statement it “strongly opposed policy on the grounds it violated the First Amendment’s guarantee to practice religion freely.”

“Students have the right to express their faith in public schools,” ACLU Nebraska Legal Director Amy Miller argued. “Whether a student wants to wear a crucifix, a rosary or another symbol, it is wrong for school officials to interfere.”

“We understand the serious concerns about gangs in schools, but Fremont Public Schools should demonstrate there is a concrete gang connection before shutting down a student’s free speech and religious rights. ACLU Nebraska has and will continue to support the constitutional rights of religious people.”

Agreeing with the ACLU, Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor the Rev. Joseph Taphorn also said there needed to be concrete evidence of gang affiliation before punishing students for religious expression, in an appearance on KETV.


The district explicitly protects the right of the students to express their values in what they wear, and explicitly limits the schools in what they can prohibit.

And the district is right -- otherwise they could get sued.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/n-y-teen-suspended-for-wearing-rosary-sues-school

Editor’s note: On Oct. 30, 2010, a U.S. district judge approved a settlement agreement between the Schenectady City School District and Raymond Hosier, who was suspended for wearing a rosary to school. The school district agreed to pay nearly $25,000 in damages, legal fees and costs, and to expunge any disciplinary notes stemming from the incident from Hosier’s permanent record. The school district also recently changed its policy banning the rosary from being worn in school.

http://www.yumasun.com/articles/school-79814-rosary-religious.html


Much to the dismay of school administrators, religious students are pushing back. Last year, 14-year-old Jonae Devlin sought legal help after she was suspended by her Houston school district for wearing a rosary in memory of her grandmother. Two years ago in Schenectady, N.Y., 13-year-old Raymond Hosier's family filed suit after being told Raymond couldn't wear rosary beads to honor his older brother, who had died in an accident.

The Catholic rosary isn't the only religious symbol caught in the wide safety net cast by public school anti-gang efforts. In 1999, for example, a Mississippi school district barred Ryan Green, a Jewish 11th-grader, from wearing the Star of David. In 2003, an Oklahoma school district suspended sixth-grader Nashala Hern for wearing her hijab, a head scarf she wore to observe her faith.

After calling in lawyers, all of these students eventually won the right to wear symbols of their religion to school. It's likely that Jake also will prevail should his family challenge the rosary ban in Coon Rapids.

Students win these cases because the U.S. Supreme Court famously recognized in 1969 that students “do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District).

I am not surprised that courts side with the kids.

That said, good lord I hate how broadly schools define "distraction or disruption" these days.

like our Constitutional rights?

way back in the day we were not allowed to wear rosaries this was for exactly that reason. It is not jewelry. It is a holy tool to guide prayer. I think gang members have used it symbolically to mean something else.

Even if the kid means it in a prayerful way - prayer is personal not to be flaunted. AND something dangling from ones neck is = in fact - a safety hazard. As a teacher we are discouraged, no forbidden to wear dangling things, hoop ear rings, and while you see many teachers with their keys on a lanyard around their neck it is not recommended, it can be dangerous accidentally or --- on purpose -- from the wrong kind of person/

like necklaces. Only rosaries.

Different Catholic ethnic groups followed different practices about the rosary. Yours didn't believe it should ever be worn, but some ethnic groups that it was fine to wear it -- and it wasn't against Catholic doctrine.

I still remember it--very blingy, with white pearl-like beads surrounded by silver-tone filigree bead caps and an ornate cross. I thought it was sparkly-beautiful, and wore it as a necklace one day. (Although I did use it at home for its intended purpose also.) Sister Edna rightly suspected that I was wearing it for the bling factor, and chewed me out royally for disrespecting its sacred purpose. I got a day of detention (utterly humiliating for an A student), was ordered to never bring it to school again, and was permanently sentenced to using the other one I had with cheap pink plastic beads when we did a decade before recess.

That Sr. Maria de Jesus in Mexico might have thought it was fine for you to wear a rosary, as long as you had done it faithfully.

And this boy is Hispanic.


http://jrgray.hubpages.com/hub/Can-Catholics-Wear-a-Rosary-as-a-Necklace

"Catholics in certain cultures have worn rosaries as necklaces to obtain indulgences, show their faith and to remind themselves to pray. There is historical evidence for this being an acceptable practice. Saint de Montfort's writings encourage 'wearing' the rosary. Many portraits of saints, popes and priests show the rosary worn around the neck. There is no specific canon law against wearing the rosary visibly."

And here's an Archbishop who supported another student who got in trouble for wearing a rosary in school:

http://www.ketv.com/Fremont-Girl-Banned-From-Wearing-Rosary-At-School/-/9675214/10134418/-/rxirgc/-/index.html#ixzz2iUSnoMsu

Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor Rev. Joseph Taphorn said it's disheartening.

"I don't think Christians should have to forfeit what is the symbol for the love of Christ because a few people want to misuse that symbol," he said.

He said the corruption of something as beloved as the rosary disgusts the church.


"One ought to be able to figure out whether she's trying to promote a gang," Taphorn said. "If she's not, why would she be punished for her right of religious freedom and religious expression?"

--that they are not being anti-religion. That would make their gang affiliation argument much more compelling. If they are banning crosses also, that would justify a lawsuit.

It's not up to the school to decide which displays of religion are acceptable, unless a specific connection to gang activity can be shown -- and it couldn't in the case of the boy or this girl.


http://global.christianpost.com/news/neb-schools-ban-on-rosary-style-necklace-touches-on-free-speech-issues-57228/

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, standing behind Carey, said in a statement it “strongly opposed policy on the grounds it violated the First Amendment’s guarantee to practice religion freely.”

“Students have the right to express their faith in public schools,” ACLU Nebraska Legal Director Amy Miller argued. “Whether a student wants to wear a crucifix, a rosary or another symbol, it is wrong for school officials to interfere.”

“We understand the serious concerns about gangs in schools, but Fremont Public Schools should demonstrate there is a concrete gang connection before shutting down a student’s free speech and religious rights. ACLU Nebraska has and will continue to support the constitutional rights of religious people.”

Agreeing with the ACLU, Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor the Rev. Joseph Taphorn also said there needed to be concrete evidence of gang affiliation before punishing students for religious expression, in an appearance on KETV.

Our symbol is pants. Check, school board.

Chew on that, authoritahs!

Dangerous lot, that.

Thanks to you two for giving me a laugh out of this.

or shut the fuck up Holier Than Thou Christians.

"Adrian has been asked a handful of times to tuck the religious necklace inside his shirt "

He was given a choice, put it inside his shirt or take it off. He chose to repeatedly not put it inside his shirt.

Its realllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllly morbid.

Or it's an attractive yet mischievous woman holding a golden apple.

Pasta is the devil.

Do you really consider that to be an expression of your faith, or simply an ideal representation of your philosophical outlook, or concerning the spaghetti monster, an outward rejection of faith?

I think some would say yes, others no, and others still wouldn't care.

I would say it's completely up to you. Whatever makes you happy, stays within your mind and isn't intended to be divisive is most likely beneficial. Even if it changes from day to day, and it is normal to change from time to time, that's your prerogative.

Your expression makes me contradict myself. While I don't believe in anything outside of "humanity", the thought of Gaia feels like a drug that I wish I could believe in.

Is that Eris to you? Is she something that taunts you? Or do you refer to her because you appreciate the artistic representation of the human facet she represents? I think you might have already answered me. I'll respond with this, make some tea and see if I can't find the answer in what you wrote lol.

Eris is the Goddess of chaos. Discord. The legend of the Golden apple; it has something to do with the trojan war, or something- The Gods held a party on Mount Olympus and Eris wasn't invited, so she tossed the golden apple inscribed "For the prettiest one" into the party, and so of course ALL the gods and goddesses fought over it.

Eris also has the distinction of being the name (Mike Brown clearly being a fan of certain authors) of the largest- larger than pluto- to date discovered Kuiper belt object. Too big to fit into any previous categories, forcing a re-evaluation of the categories entirely, in fact (no one had, to that point, bothered to define what, exactly, constitutes a "planet&quot ... so true to form Eris forces a reevaluation of the semantic maps and categories through which we view realty- the "real" reality, of course, not fitting so neatly into that nice diorama we all remember from grade school, of the sun and the nine round planets all in round orbits.

In terms of "what I believe"- I'm a stone cold skeptic, a firm believer in the scientific method- for purposes of the political debate in this country I categorize myself as an Atheist (although I do find it helpful to define exactly what it is I'm supposed to not be believing in before I give an answer whether I 'do' or not ... a key fact I find glaringly missing from most "debates" on Theism) ... do I "believe" in Eris? Or the Flying Spaghetti Monster? They're useful metaphors or teaching tools or maps or maybe thought experiments or, like I said, jokes.

Yet still pretty tame stuff compared to western contemporary fashion standards...

Last edited Fri Oct 25, 2013, 04:38 AM - Edit history (1)

He is half naked(not always bad) dying, bleeding, evidently tortured.

Individually one of those things can be great! IN THE PRIVACY OF OUR OWN HOMES. The combination, displayed in public, makes my skin crawl.

It's morbid, it's not even jewelry.

I don't want my kids exposed to that garbage, and I shouldn't have to worry about them distracted by a stubborn superstitious student when they SHOULD, and he should be, focused on doing as best as he possibly can in school.

displaying a rosary is too much for you, you should home-school your child, just like the parents of the fundies who can't cope with their children being exposed to ideas and cultures different than their own.

But since It's school, and not church, I don't want my children wearing Zoroastrian symbols or berating the Christian, Jewish or Muslim children for adhering to a religion that is largely ripped off from a mythical system my ancestors believed in, unless they are all taking a Sociology or comparative religion class, then I'd expect them to contribute to the discourse in a polite, factual and OBJECTIVE manner.

The issue is students choosing to express their religion in a public setting, which is protected by the Constitution.

Again, I'd be curious to see ANY court case in which judges allowed schools to determine which religious symbols a student could openly wear.

I didn't read anywhere in the article that the school was banning the rosary because it is a religious symbol they disagree with, but rather because it is a symbol associated with regional violent gangs.

I guess my next question, since the article is obviously biased towards assuming the school is banning a religious symbol as opposed to a gang symbol, does the school have some reason to believe this child might be associated with said gangs?

I'd be interested to read an objective piece about this and find out.

between a student's display and gang membership -- which isn't true in any of these cases. Neither this 13 year old nor any of the other kids who have won these cases have been accused of gang involvement. For example, a girl wanted to wear her rosary in honor of her dead grandmother, and a boy wanted to wear his to honor a brother who died in the service.

According to these judges, a school can't ban the rosary out of fear that some gang members might want to display them.

Is there some reason you don't think the ACLU is an objective source?

I agree that this kid should have worn the thing under his shirt. Stuff dangling around your neck can also pose a safety issue. He's not being penalized for being Catholic. He's being penalized for being finger in the eye Catholic and violating a school dress code.

I'll refer the inevitable howlers to Matthew 6:5-6.

Is a girl who wears a veil a "finger in the eye Muslim"?

Is a young man in a turban a "finger in the eye Sikh"?

I'm with the kid. He's not hurting anyone else by wearing the rosary.

and yes, he's a finger in the eye Catholic.

If he were concerned about keeping that religious symbol next to his heart, he'd wear it inside his shirt.

And I'll bet you didn't look up that bible quote, did you?

not to other people.

And school policy shouldn't be able to ban his expression of his religious belief, anymore than it could ban the wearing of a turban by a Sikh.

Does that school ban turbans and veils, too?

France got it right. There is now less violence and divisiveness there related this.

We should follow suit.

The Constitution here isn't the same as the one in France. Our Constitution entitles people to express their religion in public.

As far as I can tell it just establishes the right of people to believe as they wish, go to religious institutions they wish, and prohibits the government from establishing a state religion.

Precedent shows that Safety, which seems to be at the heart of this specific debate, can trump the right to wear certain things. Dress codes have been upheld various times in court. I really see nothing different about this case.

For instance you have no right to walk into a public museum dressed as the supposed Christ when he died on the cross. If you tried to walk into a government building half naked, dragging a cross, wearing a crown of thorns, you would be cast out or removed by police.

The ACLU strongly supports students' right to wear rosaries, which is in keeping with the clear meaning of the 1st Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

http://global.christianpost.com/news/neb-schools-ban-on-rosary-style-necklace-touches-on-free-speech-issues-57228/

The American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, standing behind Carey, said in a statement it “strongly opposed policy on the grounds it violated the First Amendment’s guarantee to practice religion freely.”

“Students have the right to express their faith in public schools,” ACLU Nebraska Legal Director Amy Miller argued. “Whether a student wants to wear a crucifix, a rosary or another symbol, it is wrong for school officials to interfere.”

“We understand the serious concerns about gangs in schools, but Fremont Public Schools should demonstrate there is a concrete gang connection before shutting down a student’s free speech and religious rights. ACLU Nebraska has and will continue to support the constitutional rights of religious people.”

Agreeing with the ACLU, Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor the Rev. Joseph Taphorn also said there needed to be concrete evidence of gang affiliation before punishing students for religious expression, in an appearance on KETV.

They aren't limiting his ability to exercise his religion. He can believe whatever he wishes, he just can't wear whatever he wishes. Countless times uniforms have been upheld, with no exceptions made for jewelry or accessories.

Besides there was no ban. He was told numerous time to place the rosary in his shirt.
Why couldn't he do that? It would have been closer to his heart, I would think that would have pleased him......unless of course the purpose of wearing it is to proselytize and be divisive, which is definitely not allowed in an educational setting, nor should it be allowed.

This school doesn't require uniforms and rosaries are the only religious item they don't allow students to wear. "No rosaries are allowed" is clearly a discriminatory policy.

The school would lose if this case went to court, just like other schools have lost. I'd be interested if you could show me any case where a judge ruled against a student wearing a rosary.



http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/n-y-teen-suspended-for-wearing-rosary-sues-school

Editor’s note: On Oct. 30, 2010, a U.S. district judge approved a settlement agreement between the Schenectady City School District and Raymond Hosier, who was suspended for wearing a rosary to school. The school district agreed to pay nearly $25,000 in damages, legal fees and costs, and to expunge any disciplinary notes stemming from the incident from Hosier’s permanent record. The school district also recently changed its policy banning the rosary from being worn in school.

http://www.yumasun.com/articles/school-79814-rosary-religious.html


Much to the dismay of school administrators, religious students are pushing back. Last year, 14-year-old Jonae Devlin sought legal help after she was suspended by her Houston school district for wearing a rosary in memory of her grandmother. Two years ago in Schenectady, N.Y., 13-year-old Raymond Hosier's family filed suit after being told Raymond couldn't wear rosary beads to honor his older brother, who had died in an accident.

The Catholic rosary isn't the only religious symbol caught in the wide safety net cast by public school anti-gang efforts. In 1999, for example, a Mississippi school district barred Ryan Green, a Jewish 11th-grader, from wearing the Star of David. In 2003, an Oklahoma school district suspended sixth-grader Nashala Hern for wearing her hijab, a head scarf she wore to observe her faith.

After calling in lawyers, all of these students eventually won the right to wear symbols of their religion to school. It's likely that Jake also will prevail should his family challenge the rosary ban in Coon Rapids.

Students win these cases because the U.S. Supreme Court famously recognized in 1969 that students “do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District).

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/k-12-public-school-student-expression-overview

But some cases have shown that school officials do not have carte blanche to regulate all student dress. For example, a federal court in Texas ruled in favor of two high school students punished for wearing rosary beads to school.

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/rosary-ban-in-colorado-school-sparks-controversy/

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. — Wear a Buddha. Wear the Star of David. Wear an atheist evolve fish, even if religious students take offense. Just don’t wear a rosary while attending Mann Middle School.

Administrators of the school, in a city of 410,000 that’s often referred to as the “Evangelical Vatican,” have banned wearing the rosary unless it’s tucked under a shirt. While imposing the policy, administrators have clarified that students may wear any other religious items in a visible manner. They have created confusion about their rationale, telling the media it relates to gang activity and telling parents that it has to do with sensitivity to Catholics who may find wearing of rosary beads offensive. First Amendment lawyers say the case is bizarre, placing the school in danger of losing a potential lawsuit.

The school in Colorado Springs is the second in two months to find itself embroiled in a rosary conflict, as federal judges ruled in September against a rosary ban in upstate New York.

So I see the rulings contradictory at best. I think we can both agree that these courts haven't always abided by the constitution. The citizens United decision is an example of money influencing our constitutional courts, as are some of the anti-reproductive rights laws that have been upheld.

Like I said the constitution gives people the right to believe what they want, attend institutions they wish, it doesn't enumerate any right to outwardly proselytize their faith in an educational setting funded by our tax dollars.

only one particular religious display, the rosary, which is clearly discriminatory -- as a uniform requirement is not.

I have a hard time believing it is the only gang related symbol they ban.

And again it isn't a ban, he was allowed to wear the rosary close to his heart under his shirt.

school in the OP, as well as the dress policy of the school district -- which is in direct conflict with the elementary dress code because it specifically entitled students to express their values in what they wear, and limited schools as to the items they could ban.

Yes, I know, you think the Constitution only protects religious beliefs, not the expression of those beliefs -- and you're wrong.

Here is the school's dress code:

http://monroees-susd-ca.schoolloop.com/students

MONROE DRESS CODE

Monroe Dress Code:

No red or blue clothing, shoes, belts, accessories No hats, beanies or hair dye are allowed No athletic team apparel will be allowed.
No sagging
No clothing, including backpacks, that promotes graffiti.
No rosaries are allowed.
No tank tops or any clothing that exposes the midriff No flip flops, slip on shoes, slippers or pajamas allowed “Our goal is to promote Safety for students.”
Education Code Section 35294.1

Here is district policy:

http://www.stockton.k12.ca.us/pdf/studentcode.pdf

Other Forms of Expression: Students are entitled to express themselves by displaying or wearing symbols of ethnic, cultural, political, or other values, except for gang-related items.

Students shall dress appropriately for daily attendance at school. In sites where a school uniform policy is in effect, clothes should adhere to the published district uniform guidelines (available at school sites). In all other instances, the school shall be concerned only when the type of clothing, hairstyle, or cosmetics are extreme and could cause school distraction or disruption, or could be unsafe.

Examples of inappropriate clothing may include (but are not limited to):
- Garments where the torso is exposed, i.e., tube tops, half shirts, halters.
- Clothing or buttons which show obscene or alcohol or drug-related slogans, words or pictures, or sexually suggestive statements.
- Clothing related to gangs or gang activities.
- Garments where the entire thigh is exposed, such as micro 
minis, short shorts, or bathing suits.
- Bare feet.

The two codes are not in violation of each other. Both ban gang related symbols, apparently THIS SPECIFIC TYPE OF rosary is used by local gangs.

Instead of fighting against the schools policy which is obviously designed to prevent violence in school, wouldn't it be more productive to fight against the gangs and their adoption THIS SPECIFIC TYPE OF ROSARY as their emblem.

I'm still wondering whether the school believeS this child is associated with one of these gangs?

in California, a school that banned all rosaries, not just ones with 13 beads.

The Loveland case you cited, involving a rosary with 13 beads (which some Catholics do use, by the way -- it was one variation of a Catholic rosary long before it was ever used by a gang) has not yet been adjudicated, unlike the case in CA. And this Denver newspaper's opinion is that the school's action is unlikely to be upheld.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_21546292/editorial-school-rosary-ban-may-go-too-far

The key federal court case on the issue is one from 1997 out of Texas, Chalifoux vs. New Caney Independent School District. The court decided the school in question had violated the students' First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.

The court noted school dress codes can be used to restrict gang activity on campuses but concluded the rosary ban unduly burdened the students who brought the legal action because they were not affiliated with a gang.

That case turned on whether the students were engaging in a "sincere expression of their religious beliefs." The court found they were.

And that may very well be the legal linchpin in the situation in Loveland.

Was Vigil affiliated with a gang, or was he wearing the rosary to help him deal with the recent murder of his uncle, as his mother said?


SNIP

I admit I posted to quickly, nonetheless I stand behind the schools right to ban whatever they wish in order to prevent gang violence, and hope they institute a uniform only dress code there and nationwide.

I also hope the the kid doesn't end up shot or stabbed by a rival gang because of what he chooses to wear.

it's the only thing anti-religion people know about the Bible. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean "sit there and take it while I trash your belief system and/or ban your religious expressions" like a lot of you wish to think.

since he'd be allowed to wear it in secret, next to his heart. No one would ever have asked him to take it off in that case.

I think a lot of belief systems are utterly silly but I will defend your right to have whichever gets you through the night.

it was a no-no to wear the rosary this way. A rosary is to be held in your hands as you use the beads to count of and keep track of the prayers. Gang kids do wear it and it means something else to them. It is ok (as we were told) to wear a cross on a chain. There are scriptures Matthew I think saying ostentatious prayer is not appropriate.
There are safety issues as well, regarding gangling things and choking hazard.

In Mexico it's not uncommon, and this boy is Hispanic.

And then there's this:

http://www.ketv.com/Fremont-Girl-Banned-From-Wearing-Rosary-At-School/-/9675214/10134418/-/rxirgc/-/index.html#ixzz2iUSnoMsu

Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor Rev. Joseph Taphorn said it's disheartening.

"I don't think Christians should have to forfeit what is the symbol for the love of Christ because a few people want to misuse that symbol," he said.

He said the corruption of something as beloved as the rosary disgusts the church.

"One ought to be able to figure out whether she's trying to promote a gang," Taphorn said. "If she's not, why would she be punished for her right of religious freedom and religious expression?"

If they are, then the ban is appropriate. If the ban is directed at content of speech (religious symbols, in general, or specific religious symbols), it is not appropriate.

all necklaces were to be inside the shirt or blouse -

to the extent that dress codes are constitutionally permitted, that rule was viewpoint neutral - unlike one which permits neckwear other than religious neckwear to be visible when worn.

the neck is fine.

And it does this even though the school district's policy explicitly entitles students to express their values in what they wear.

Now, I left the Church many decades ago, but I was taught they are not meant to be worn: they are an aid to prayer and devotion. If a Catholic wishes to wear a religioius symbol, there are scapulars, which are typically worn under the clothing next to the skin, IIRC.

conventional Catholic beliefs, they are his beliefs.

Extremely insulting to the members of either religion. It just isn't done.

It's this boy's expression of his beliefs, even if it isn't following official Catholic doctrine.

You can't do something that's not part of a religion and then claim you're doing it because it's your religion and expect that to fly.

to wear rosaries than others, but it is "done."

Despite what some would have you believe, Catholics don't uniformly hold all the same beliefs or follow all the same religious practices. We're as diverse as any other large group.

http://jrgray.hubpages.com/hub/Can-Catholics-Wear-a-Rosary-as-a-Necklace

"Catholics in certain cultures have worn rosaries as necklaces to obtain indulgences, show their faith and to remind themselves to pray. There is historical evidence for this being an acceptable practice. Saint de Montfort's writings encourage 'wearing' the rosary. Many portraits of saints, popes and priests show the rosary worn around the neck. There is no specific canon law against wearing the rosary visibly."

And here's an Archbishop who supported another student who got in trouble for wearing a rosary in school:

http://www.ketv.com/Fremont-Girl-Banned-From-Wearing-Rosary-At-School/-/9675214/10134418/-/rxirgc/-/index.html#ixzz2iUSnoMsu

Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor Rev. Joseph Taphorn said it's disheartening.

"I don't think Christians should have to forfeit what is the symbol for the love of Christ because a few people want to misuse that symbol," he said.

He said the corruption of something as beloved as the rosary disgusts the church.


"One ought to be able to figure out whether she's trying to promote a gang," Taphorn said. "If she's not, why would she be punished for her right of religious freedom and religious expression?"

so that I no longer have to see teenagers' boxers?

lol hahahahaha

during the civil war Irish soldiers would put their rosarys around their necks so that if they were killed or mortally wounded the appropriate religious observations would be made. Only time rosary was worn around neck was if you were likely to die in battle.

when possible, Catholic Chaplains still give last rights to soldiers en masse before major engagements.

for multiple denominations. The necessities of war I guess.

Wearing a rosary as a necklace is in extremely poor taste and an insult to actual Catholics. While good taste and decency was not the school's aim, they did the right thing.

If the kid wants to wear something as an article of faith, he can wear a saint's metal or a cilice. Either can be concealed discreetly under clothing.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]n/t

Catholic kids often wear colored plastic rosaries, which is why they've become "gang related", because of the colors. Gangs also modify them to include 13 beads instead of 10 to represent Mexican gangs.

Gang kiddies may be Santa Muerte, which uses a lot of Catholic "smells and bells," but isn't Catholicism. Wearing a rosary as a necklace isn't done by practicing Catholics.

this boy is saying he's doing.

is Hispanic? And the Church doesn't oppose it, despite what some people here think. It is allowed as long as it is done as an expression of faith.

A Catholic Archbishop spoke up in another case of a child being banned from wearing a rosary at school.

http://www.ketv.com/Fremont-Girl-Banned-From-Wearing-Rosary-At-School/-/9675214/10134418/-/rxirgc/-/index.html
Omaha Catholic Archdiocese Chancellor Rev. Joseph Taphorn said it's disheartening.

"I don't think Christians should have to forfeit what is the symbol for the love of Christ because a few people want to misuse that symbol," he said.

He said the corruption of something as beloved as the rosary disgusts the church.


"One ought to be able to figure out whether she's trying to promote a gang," Taphorn said. "If she's not, why would she be punished for her right of religious freedom and religious expression?"