If it seems arbitrary, maybe it is. “When you put on your Jesus glasses, you can’t see the truth” does not run afoul of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, but “creationism is superstitious nonsense” does.

In a ruling against James Corbett, a Capistrano Valley, California high school teacher, a U.S. district court has found that the instructor’s statement on creationism constituted a government employee exhibiting hostility towards religion. The statement on Jesus glasses did not.

Apparently, the same wording in the First Amendment that protects us all from the state establishment of a particular brand of religion also forbids anyone working for the state from making disparaging remarks about one of Christianity’s stupid beliefs (I can say that, I don’t get paid by the government)—that humans were directly created by some deity in the sky exactly as we are. Creationism is meant to counter the scientific theory of evolution.

In recent years, there have been many lawsuits against schools and instructors for promoting religion. This one, the first of its kind, was filed by a devout Christian student, a teenager, who went after his history teacher with a vengeance. Not only did he jot down what he considered offensive remarks, but he also recorded some of them in secret.

Judge James Selna, in a 37-page ruling, cleared every one of the 20 statements presented by the student except the one on creationism. Selna felt that one statement stepped outside the bounds of free speech and the “need for expansive discussion” in classrooms into being a violation of the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

The student doesn’t want monetary compensation for the remark Selna agreed was “derogatory, disparaging and belittling regarding religion and Christianity in particular.” Instead, a spokeswoman for Advocates for Faith and Freedom, a Christian law firm that represents the student, said that he is requesting that teachers in the school undergo training and Corbett’s classes be monitored.

Which brings up some interesting questions.

Teacher trainings on what? And who will monitor the history teacher’s classroom? Some Christian right-winger who believes that his or her religion should be shoved down all of our throats?

What stifling effect will this suit have on history teachers throughout the country who have to lecture, as Corbett does, on the terrible things that Christianity wrought in its wake as it spread throughout Europe—the pogroms against Jews, the Inquisition, the witch burnings, the murder of queers.

What is the future of education in America if every history teacher has to think twice about making any comment about Christianity? Will they ultimately have to run every statement by their principal?

Perhaps they could simply pause during a lecture and call the school district’s attorney: “Hey, Joe, what can I say about the popes having kids without getting sued?”

It could happen here.

Read the full article | Print this article