210 likes | 457 Views
CHAPTER 19. 1 ST AMENDMENT Read the following notes and answer the questions on a separate sheet. You need to discuss each question with your group. Answers need to be in full sentences. You can use your books if you need to. FIRST AMENDMENT. The First Amendment includes:
E N D
CHAPTER 19 1ST AMENDMENT Read the following notes and answer the questions on a separate sheet. You need to discuss each question with your group. Answers need to be in full sentences. You can use your books if you need to.
FIRST AMENDMENT • The First Amendment includes: • Freedom of Religion • Freedom of Speech • Freedom of Press • Freedom of Assembly • Freedom of Petition
Question #1 • Put these five parts of the First Amendment in order of importance. • Explain your reasoning for your #1 answer.
Limits on your rights: • You are allowed to practice your religion in any manner that you choose: • However, this is not a 100% guarantee. You can practice; • as long as you don’t commit a crime. • Example – you can not commit murder in the name of religious sacrifice. • Example – you can not commit poligamy in the name of religion. • If you do these things, you will not be protected by your First Amendment rights.
Question #2 • Can you think of another limit on your rights?
First Amendment – Freedom of Religion Statement – has 2 parts • Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof… • The Establishment Clause (in red) – stops the government from supporting any particular religion, by creating a religion of the country, or by giving money to particular churches. • The Free Exercise Clause (in purple) – allows us as individuals to exercise any religion we want, or to not exercise religion at all.
Question #3 • What phrase is the Establishment Clause also known as? • Give an example of what the Establishment Clause is referring to?
Establishment Clause & Public Schools • Many Supreme Court Cases deal with either; • Prayer in public schools • The government can’t force you to say prayers in public schools, but can’t stop you as an individual from saying your own prayer. • Engel v. Vitale • Government involvement (tax $ support) in parochial schools. • Can (government) tax payer dollars be used to aid parochial schools? • Lemon v. Kurtzman
Question #4 • What is a parochial school? • What does secular mean?
Engel v. Vitale, 1962 • Outlawed school sponsored prayer in public schools. • That means a public school can not require a prayer be said in school.
Question #5 • Do you think that some public schools still have prayers in school? • If not, do you think this is fair? • If so, when do you think they have prayers?
Lemon v. Kurtzman, 1971 • The Supreme Court Justices used this case to create a test to determine whether the government can give tax ($) aid to a parochial school. It is a 3 part test. • 1. Does it have a secular purpose? • 2. Does it neither inhibit (prevent) religion or enhance (support) religion? • 3. Does it avoid excessive government entanglement?
Question #6 • Using the Lemon case (“test”) to help decide other future “aid to parochial school” cases is an example of what (term)?
Two examples of the Lemon Test • Example #1 • Everson v. Board of Education – The Supreme Court ruled that a New Jersey state law that allowed tax dollars to be used to pay for school buses for parochial schools constitutional. Because it is for a secular purpose (part #1) – to take kids to school to get an education.
Two examples of the Lemon Test • Example #2 • Wolman v. Walter – The Supreme Court ruled that an Ohio law that used tax dollars for school buses for field trips was unconstitutional. It was excessive entanglement with government (part #3) because the schools would have to contact the government every time they went on a field trip so they could decide if it was for a secular purpose (field trip to zoo / secular, field trip to see the Pope / religious).
Question #7 • Can you think of another example of when it would be ok to use tax $ in a parochial school? • Can you think of another example of when it is not ok?
YOUR FREEDOM OF RELIGION ASSIGNMENT: • In a group of 3 you will be reviewing court cases about freedom of religion. • You will need to read the case (it is a class copy – please do not write on it) and have a group piece of paper (put all of your names). • You can use the Constitution p C2, CH 19, or this PP • You will need to answer as a Supreme Court Justice – in how you interpret the Constitution. Not as a civilian with your own personal opinion. (You can decide that a law violates someone’s rights & is unconstitutional or that a law does not violate, or it does but for an acceptable reason.)
ESTABLISHMENT & FREE EXERCISE CASES • Answer the questions at the end of the whole sheet. • Answer the ultimate question -does it violate the Establishment Clause (if the government is involved) or does it violate the Free Exercise Clause (if an individuals right to religion is involved) in a conference discussion. • Write your majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions. Remember, you need to explain your decision as well as your reasoning.
COURT CASES THAT MIGHT HELP YOU • Abington School District v Schempp • Murray v. Curlett • Westside Community Schools v. Mergens • Lee v. Weisman • Wallace v. Jaffree • Lemon v. Kurtzman
First Amendment – Freedom of Speech Notes • Protects – • Pure Speech – spoken word • Symbolic Speech – actions that express yourself (ex. Burning the flag) • Example: Tinker v. Des Moines – US Supreme Court ruled that students were allowed to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam War.
Freedom of Speech • Does not protect • Slander – spoken words that are untrue and can hurt a person or their reputation. • Libel – written words that are untrue and can hurt a person or their reputation. • Seditious Speech – advocates for the overthrow of the government • Clear & present danger speech – If your words lead to danger or illegal action. • Example – yelling fire in a movie theatre – if you were joking and people rushed out and somebody got trampled to death, you could be held responsible for their death. And you can’t say, “but I have the right to freedom of speech.”