Charles Haynes Quotations

There really is confusion out there. Finding common ground sounds good. But the reality is, a lot of people on all sides have a stake in the fight.

The power of these recommendations is that they come from leaders representing a broad spectrum of religious conviction. At the table were people with Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Native American and humanist perspectives, as well as individuals from advocacy groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Center for Law and Justice.

The concept of religious freedom is largely ignored in the curriculum of our nation's public schools.

If the aim is to keep "Christ" in the shopping-mall Christmas or to ensure that pagan trees and mistletoe don't lose their Christian labels, then it might make sense to attack presidents and business owners who commit the "happy holiday" sin. But if the goal is to restore the religious meaning of the Christian holy day, then they are aiming at the wrong Target.

Today it's something about hallucinogenic tea, but tomorrow it could be something that Roman Catholics or Southern Baptists or a number of groups need some accommodation in relation to a federal law.

O'Connor could be the key vote here. She would support keeping RFRA applicable to the federal government, which is one of the issues in that case.

I believe this really upholds the First Amendment and is sound educationally.

There is a difference between what is required and what is the right thing to do.

I think the school is very smart to put this in the handbook,

Some of the courses I've encountered around the country over 20 years would not pass muster in a court of law. They're closer to Sunday School than legitimate academic courses.

I think change in this area could be quite dramatic. All the 5-4 decisions could go the other way.

That was when the court decided to weaken the Tinker standard. The school really does have to show it would be a serious disruption.

We think it reflects the standards we agreed to.

The broader issue is there are many U.S. conservative Christians who feel that public schools have become hostile to their faith.

This is not a Sunday school course. I think the legislature didn't do its homework, didn't think about the ramifications of this.

Americans are deeply divided over homosexuality in our society. But if school officials and community members use the ground rules of the First Amendment, they can reach agreement on how public schools can guard the rights of all students in a safe learning environment.

This is very unusual. In fact, it is unprecedented to have these kinds of courses offered with this kind of support from the state.

A textbook is essential to uphold the First Amendment, ... There's been nothing cast in this direction until now.

In my view, schools ought to allow students to express various points of view as long as it's not hostile. I don't think, in my view, the T-shirts don't rise to the level of creating a hostile environment. I do think that some things go overboard.

Behind this is the tension around the country about how to go about doing a Bible elective, and a lot is at stake.

Generally speaking, private and religious schools are not subject to the First Amendment.

These are cases courts like the least; they stir raw emotions. Whatever they decide will be misunderstood; I don't think any side will be happy with the result. Even the winning side loses because of the deep divisions that will result.

This is not about compromising convictions. This is about finding ways to work and live together as American citizens.