Saluting it is not therefore a religious ceremony Thedetermination whether a

Saluting it is not therefore a religious ceremony

This preview shows page 7 - 8 out of 10 pages.

symbol.Saluting it is not therefore a religious ceremony. Thedetermination whether a ceremony is religious or not is left to the courts not to any religious group. Petitioners are willing to remain silent and stand during flag ceremony. Petitioners salute the flag during boy scout activities. Their objection then rests on the singing of anthem and recitation of pledge. The pledge is judged to be completely secular. It does not even pledge allegiance to the flag or to the Republic. The anthem is also secular. It talks about patriotism. It does not speak of resorting to force, military service, or duty to defend the country. There was no compulsion involved in the enforcement of the flag salute. They were not criminally prosecuted under a penal sanction. If they chose not to obey the salute regulation they merely lost the benefits of public education. Take it or leave it. Hamilton vs Univ of California: Appellants were members of Methodist Episcopal Church who believed that war and preparations for war are against God's wishes. They did not take required military service training which was requirement to graduate. Court said that they were not being drafted to attend university. University did not violate due process when it required the mil service. Minersville School District vs Gobitis: two Jehovahs Witness children were expelled from school for refusing to salute flag. Requirement of participation of all pupils in flag ceremony did not infringe due process. West Virginia State Board of Education. vs. Barnette: reversed the former decision at a divided court. This court leans towards Gobitis decision. Specialcircumstance of Barnette case was that it expelled the students although attendance in schools is mandatory turning them all into truants headed for reformatories. Fortunately, the law requiring compulsory enrollment there in the Philippines is so riddled with exceptions and exemptions that there is no crisis if the children didn't attend school. There is no penal sanction for failing to attend school. Whenever a man enjoys the benefits of society and community life he becomes a member and must give upsome of his rights for the general welfare just likeeverybody else. The practice of religion is subject toreasonable and nondiscrimantory regu lation by thestate.Prince vs. Commonwealth of Massachusets: SarahPrince (Jehovahs Witness again)was convicted under the Child Labor law because her hiece distributed religious pamphlets. Court said that state can limit control of parent/guardian. The right of practice religion freely does not include liberty to expose child to ill health. This case was decided after Barnette, supra. SecEd was not imposing a religious belief with the flagsalute. It was merely enforcing a non- discriminatoryregulation applicable to members of all religions. State carried out duty to supervise educational institutions and teach civic duty. Petitioners do not question the right of the school toconduct the flag Salute ceremony but question theattempt to compel them. The trouble
Image of page 7
Image of page 8

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 10 pages?

  • Fall '15
  • The Bible, Freedom of religion, COMELEC, Ang Ladlad, Flag Ceremony

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture