My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available! Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680 Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680 Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023 Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495 Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
Not being an American, I can't completely talk about whether it violated the constitution or not. But I think it was the right decision. I mean, the school is not taking "a side", so to speak, in religious matters. They are simply allowing students to meet and talk about common interests/opinions. I really don't think it is different, than having a democrat or republican after school club, discussing politics.
Excellent point. It's always good to get an "outside perspective" from those who are not American citizens. I really appreciate you sharing your opinion.
I'am not a Christian but I agree with the court because children should be allowed to set up a club even if it is a religious purpose but the sponsor should not get paid.
After school clubs are not mandatory for students or teachers so why should teachers get paid for them especially when it is something that the school should not take sides in or endors?
I think that the ruling is totally justified, and even though I'm a firm believer in the separation of church and state the fact this ruling does mean that student clubs of any religion or belief system (including atheism) can form extracurricular clubs makes it a good one ^^
Yeah, I think a key part of this decision was the distinction that it would not be ok if the teacher who sponsored the bible club was paid. Because they are not paid, that wall between church and state goes up
@@night6724 I'd argue public school is more agnostic than atheist, but I digress. How would you have them propagate exclusively theism but not prioritize one faith over the others? What would that look like?
This decision seems funky to me. They had to allow it (I get this part) but the faculty sponsor couldn't be paid. It's the second part that gets me. I'm guessing the court can't force the school to force a teacher to sponsor the club... so... if there were no volunteers, how would that work?
Also, I would argue that prohibiting the students to form an after school bible study group would be against the free exercise clause of the first amendment.
Mr. Beat yes I do. The 1st amendment is very specific with the establishment and free exercise clause. Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of region, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The only thing that can’t happen is congress state or federal to pass a law saying everyone has to be, for example: Anglian Protestant,. (going all Henry the 8th). I participate in bible clubs today because of this case, and I’m very happy I can.
Mr. Beat sort of.I think the students should be allowed to do that,but allowing an employee to sponsor it could be seen as state sponsorship of a religion,so I agree with the court rocking the district to allow it and not paying a sponsor,I don't think they should've allowed a sponsor.
I do not, cause it opens the door to ANY kind of group (religious, non religious, politic, economic, etc) to lobby using public buildings via the students, if any group wants to target teens they should do it in their own buildings.
This court case and the equal access act also mean that schools have to allow students to start a GSA club. I think a lot of LGBT students don't know this unfortunately and just back down when a principal tells them the club is not allowed.
I am NOT endorsing anything here but I am curious if this would hypothetically mean that schools would have to allow a Nazi/ISIS/whatever club as well? If a hardcore conservative school can't block a GSA club then can a liberal school not block a white power club?
Forgetful if im not wrong, free speech doesnt apply to everything, especially if it promotes violence. You cant threaten ppl and say its free speech. With that being said, clubs that promote violence or discrimination (like Nazi and Isis club) will more likely be blocked from schools.
Mr. Beat you’re great. Last American history class was my junior, and took gov senior year (college freshman now). You remind me a lot about my history teacher Mr. Mullins who works at Palmetto high in Fl.
I agree with the decision because the school is not taking a side by allowing a religious group to meet during appropriate non-instructional hours.Plus,it gives students the opportunity to express their beliefs and gain interests outside of academics and/or sports.This would be a relevant case to talk about if a public school wouldn’t allow an Atheist/Humanist club or Gay-Straight Alliance.I think it gives relevance to students having constitutional rights in school as well.Btw it would be nice if you did Briswold v. Connecticut sometime in the future as well.
There's an old English tradition that because there are so many kinds of underwear and justices are supposed to be fair, they must not wear any underwear to court. In 1889, they unanimously decided that boxers are shorts, not underwear, hence not prohibited in court. That's why today all supreme court justices wear boxers.
I definitely agree I think if different kinds of religion people want to gather after school and talk or debate things like that I think it’s a good thing. Not forcing or threatening but just allowing students to study or talk about their own religion beliefs.
Your videos are very good, even if you can’t help to avoid introducing your politics. The good part is that normally it does not detract from the factual part.
As an atheist, I actually agree with this decision. I think any religious (or atheist) student groups should be allowed. As long as one religion isn’t being given special treatment over others
I’m an Agnostic Atheist and if my fellow Atheist students can do it than I guess I’m okay with religious students doing it as well as long as the school district gives them no money lol
For my government class i had to vote on a (not real) supreme court whether this was constitutional or not, and i was seriously divided because I had to ask whether this was something that should even be brought to the Supreme court, though I eventually voted in support of mergens. One day, you should do a Supreme Court Briefs on Wallace V Jaffree
About a month ago when we were up there. I should have let you know, but I guess it was a little hectic anyway with the kids. Are you still out in Lincoln?
Its been a few years since I looked at this kinda stuff but I believe you are allowed to teach both Creationism and Evolution in schools as long as you do NOT declare either as being absolute fact. How did I do?
Depends on how far you wanna go with it. If you’re going full on revolution against the bourgeoisie, probably not. If it’s like every other university communist club of all talk, no action you’re probably fine.
I agree with the other guy. If you're revolting against the government and going full Lenin then no. If you're discussing the logical point of view about communism and want to learn more, then yes. Also, I know this is a meme comment btw.
As an atheist, I totally agree with this decision. The state isn’t promoting or forcing any one religion upon anyone by allowing these clubs. It also means atheists, Muslims, Hindus, Jews etc. can have clubs too which is great
How would you answer someone who says this? "If the school allows the Bible Study club on its property, then it is implicitly endorsing Christianity. If a Christian school allowed a Buddhist club on it property, then it is implicitly endorsing Buddhism." I don't agree with it, but I would like to know how you would respond to it.
It's not implicitly endorsing Christianity, as any other religious clubs are equally allowed. It's just that nobody had asked to create any others at that point. As for Christian schools, they are by necessity private schools, so the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment doesn't apply there in the first place. A private religious school is perfectly free to exclude all other religions just as long as they aren't being hateful about it.
I'd consider myself a strong atheist, and I'm certain I wouldn't like any of the people in that club, but the final result here is pretty reasonable. Also, I am mature enough to realize I am often wrong, so all in all, whatever.
I don't think atheist clubs apply to the courts rulling. Since atheism is not a religion, school can simply prohibit such groups from organising on grounds of promoting obscenity.
President During this time: George H. W. Bush Chief Justice: William Rehnquist Argued January 9, 1990 Decided June 4, 1990 Case Duration: 146 Days Decision: 8-1 in favor of Mergens (Rehnquist, Marshall, Brennan Jr., Kennedy, O’Connor, Blackmun, Scalia, White. Stevens for WC.)
I honestly feel that this whole Supreme Court case and suing the school was unnecessary as the students could’ve just convened somewhere else like at their parents/friends/or other relatives’ houses or even better yet, AT A CHURCH.
I personally think it’s a stupid thing, but it’s a fair thing. Which is why we also have a Secular club starting at our school, with many around the country.
I disagree with this, I think hosting a bible study club on school grounds does endorse a religion, it could offend some kids at school or something, I just don’t think a religion should be endorsed by a school.
I believe that it is fine for a school to do this unless they show special treatment towards some religions and against others. Like it would be alright if a school sponsored a Christian club, as long as they allow a Muslim, Hindu, or Jewish kid to do the same thing
I think schools should be completely free from religious doctrine of *ANY* type. I was completely unaware of this even being a thing until the last couple of days. I mean, growing up in the 90's I was always led to believe that schools were supposed to be 100% neutral on religious anything...as in, no religious groups or events - nothing of the sort! This is all news to me to say the least.
![[4K] Watch SpaceX Catch A Starship Rocket From Space!!! #IFT5](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pIKI7y3DTXk/mqdefault.jpg)
My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available!
Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS
Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680
Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680
Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss
Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b
Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023
Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495
Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e
Not being an American, I can't completely talk about whether it violated the constitution or not. But I think it was the right decision. I mean, the school is not taking "a side", so to speak, in religious matters. They are simply allowing students to meet and talk about common interests/opinions. I really don't think it is different, than having a democrat or republican after school club, discussing politics.
Excellent point. It's always good to get an "outside perspective" from those who are not American citizens. I really appreciate you sharing your opinion.
Also not an American. Also agree 👌
I'am not a Christian but I agree with the court because children should be allowed to set up a club even if it is a religious purpose but the sponsor should not get paid.
+Mummy Neo Good to hear your perspective
What if the teacher isn't directly paid by the school for doing it?
After school clubs are not mandatory for students or teachers so why should teachers get paid for them especially when it is something that the school should not take sides in or endors?
I think that the ruling is totally justified, and even though I'm a firm believer in the separation of church and state the fact this ruling does mean that student clubs of any religion or belief system (including atheism) can form extracurricular clubs makes it a good one ^^
Yeah, I think a key part of this decision was the distinction that it would not be ok if the teacher who sponsored the bible club was paid. Because they are not paid, that wall between church and state goes up
@@night6724 I'd argue public school is more agnostic than atheist, but I digress. How would you have them propagate exclusively theism but not prioritize one faith over the others? What would that look like?
This decision seems funky to me. They had to allow it (I get this part) but the faculty sponsor couldn't be paid. It's the second part that gets me. I'm guessing the court can't force the school to force a teacher to sponsor the club... so... if there were no volunteers, how would that work?
If there are no volunteers, no club
Student led
Teachers really only have to be there for custodial purposes
@@iammrbeat the fact two of my favorite RUclipsrs are talking is so cool love both of you guys
love these vids. dont comment on every one but I watch and enjoy every one. keep em coming!
Well I appreciate the comments. Thanks for watching and will do! 🙂
Also, I would argue that prohibiting the students to form an after school bible study group would be against the free exercise clause of the first amendment.
+Jett For President Jett for Supreme Court Justice :D
Do you agree with the Court in this case? Why or why not?
Mr. Beat yes I do. The 1st amendment is very specific with the establishment and free exercise clause. Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of region, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The only thing that can’t happen is congress state or federal to pass a law saying everyone has to be, for example: Anglian Protestant,. (going all Henry the 8th). I participate in bible clubs today because of this case, and I’m very happy I can.
It weird that as long as the teacher isn’t paid, then it isn’t seen as state sponsored.
Mr. Beat sort of.I think the students should be allowed to do that,but allowing an employee to sponsor it could be seen as state sponsorship of a religion,so I agree with the court rocking the district to allow it and not paying a sponsor,I don't think they should've allowed a sponsor.
I absolutely agree! Seems pretty obvious to me.
I do not, cause it opens the door to ANY kind of group (religious, non religious, politic, economic, etc) to lobby using public buildings via the students, if any group wants to target teens they should do it in their own buildings.
This court case and the equal access act also mean that schools have to allow students to start a GSA club. I think a lot of LGBT students don't know this unfortunately and just back down when a principal tells them the club is not allowed.
So true
There’s one at my school
I am NOT endorsing anything here but I am curious if this would hypothetically mean that schools would have to allow a Nazi/ISIS/whatever club as well? If a hardcore conservative school can't block a GSA club then can a liberal school not block a white power club?
@@nullnull7089 Yes they cant. The same logic to free speech applies to everything.
Forgetful if im not wrong, free speech doesnt apply to everything, especially if it promotes violence. You cant threaten ppl and say its free speech. With that being said, clubs that promote violence or discrimination (like Nazi and Isis club) will more likely be blocked from schools.
Awesome, I remember asking about this case, and you told me you had it on the to do list. Thanks!!
It came a little bit quicker than I expected, too, as at that time I didn't know I'd be going up to Omaha! :D
Mr. Beat you’re great. Last American history class was my junior, and took gov senior year (college freshman now). You remind me a lot about my history teacher Mr. Mullins who works at Palmetto high in Fl.
I agree with the decision because the school is not taking a side by allowing a religious group to meet during appropriate non-instructional hours.Plus,it gives students the opportunity to express their beliefs and gain interests outside of academics and/or sports.This would be a relevant case to talk about if a public school wouldn’t allow an Atheist/Humanist club or Gay-Straight Alliance.I think it gives relevance to students having constitutional rights in school as well.Btw it would be nice if you did Briswold v. Connecticut sometime in the future as well.
+Delightfully Dakota Griswold v. Connecticut is coming some time in 2018 for sure
Funny (in a way) that by the time the case was decided, those "high schoolers" would have likely been already done with college.
Plot Twist: Supreme Court Justices actually wear boxers
There's an old English tradition that because there are so many kinds of underwear and justices are supposed to be fair, they must not wear any underwear to court.
In 1889, they unanimously decided that boxers are shorts, not underwear, hence not prohibited in court. That's why today all supreme court justices wear boxers.
@@felixfourcolor Fr?
Great video Mr. Beat. I know you were born on November 6 but happy early birthday 🎂🎈🎁
Thanks Lindsay! :D Hope you are doing well
What was Stevens’ reasoning for dissenting?
2:18 why does thurgood marshall look like he's destroying the equal access act with laser eyes XD
I definitely agree I think if different kinds of religion people want to gather after school and talk or debate things like that I think it’s a good thing. Not forcing or threatening but just allowing students to study or talk about their own religion beliefs.
Please do a video on all the Clauses of the Constitution, and another on the Doctrines of the Courts.
What is with that occasional megaphone effect?
I am weird.
Your videos are very good, even if you can’t help to avoid introducing your politics. The good part is that normally it does not detract from the factual part.
Thanks Jaime! I try really hard to be as objective as possible. Obviously, we all are biased to some degree.
As an atheist, I actually agree with this decision. I think any religious (or atheist) student groups should be allowed. As long as one religion isn’t being given special treatment over others
Where is the notification squad
Do Virginia vs Black from 2003?
Mr. Beat: do you know JP Stevens' rationale for his dissent?
I gotta wonder what justice Stevens had to say in his dissent.
I'm sure you can find it online
I’m an Agnostic Atheist and if my fellow Atheist students can do it than I guess I’m okay with religious students doing it as well as long as the school district gives them no money lol
I personally agree with the court them saying kids can have the club however the staff member would have to not be paid
I agree with the court here, I think students should be allowed to host whatever clubs they want so long as it’s not a violent club at the school
For my government class i had to vote on a (not real) supreme court whether this was constitutional or not, and i was seriously divided because I had to ask whether this was something that should even be brought to the Supreme court, though I eventually voted in support of mergens. One day, you should do a Supreme Court Briefs on Wallace V Jaffree
Shoutout to Westside! When did you film the outro?!
About a month ago when we were up there. I should have let you know, but I guess it was a little hectic anyway with the kids. Are you still out in Lincoln?
REPRESENT! WESTSIDE MIDDLE SCHOOL! WOOOOOOOOOT!😄
Oh I can totally understand the hectic-ness. And yes! I graduate in May! :)
Its been a few years since I looked at this kinda stuff but I believe you are allowed to teach both Creationism and Evolution in schools as long as you do NOT declare either as being absolute fact.
How did I do?
MR.BEAT ONLY HAS 758K SUBS?!
By the time the decision was made all the students graduated
Lmao I like how the title of this video was changed
Could one theoretically start a Communist club, just asking for a friend
Depends on how far you wanna go with it. If you’re going full on revolution against the bourgeoisie, probably not. If it’s like every other university communist club of all talk, no action you’re probably fine.
I agree with the other guy. If you're revolting against the government and going full Lenin then no. If you're discussing the logical point of view about communism and want to learn more, then yes. Also, I know this is a meme comment btw.
If it's a revolutionary one just keep it hush
@@jordigutierrez4161 use a capitalist club that wants to overthrow South American elected officials as cover
I think that would be a little more controversial.
As an atheist, I totally agree with this decision. The state isn’t promoting or forcing any one religion upon anyone by allowing these clubs. It also means atheists, Muslims, Hindus, Jews etc. can have clubs too which is great
Hey Mr. Beats, why did you change the title of this video?
I'm trying to be consistent for this series.
Mr. Beat, what I noticed was that you didn't put the name of the case as the video title, which you usually do.
+Jett For President Yeah, I'm just trying to get more people interested in the video
How would you answer someone who says this? "If the school allows the Bible Study club on its property, then it is implicitly endorsing Christianity. If a Christian school allowed a Buddhist club on it property, then it is implicitly endorsing Buddhism." I don't agree with it, but I would like to know how you would respond to it.
It's not implicitly endorsing Christianity, as any other religious clubs are equally allowed. It's just that nobody had asked to create any others at that point.
As for Christian schools, they are by necessity private schools, so the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment doesn't apply there in the first place. A private religious school is perfectly free to exclude all other religions just as long as they aren't being hateful about it.
the problem with allowing these things is that somebody's group will be excluded.
l feel very bad about a religious study group in a public school; but maybe, as a compromise, with no payment given to the teacher, it is acceptable.
2:59 “Talk about their religions” as they watch Black Butler
I'm more interested in what Stevens had to say..
I'd consider myself a strong atheist, and I'm certain I wouldn't like any of the people in that club, but the final result here is pretty reasonable. Also, I am mature enough to realize I am often wrong, so all in all, whatever.
Were you the sponsor Mr beat
I don't think atheist clubs apply to the courts rulling. Since atheism is not a religion, school can simply prohibit such groups from organising on grounds of promoting obscenity.
President During this time: George H. W. Bush
Chief Justice: William Rehnquist
Argued January 9, 1990
Decided June 4, 1990
Case Duration: 146 Days
Decision: 8-1 in favor of Mergens (Rehnquist, Marshall, Brennan Jr., Kennedy, O’Connor, Blackmun, Scalia, White. Stevens for WC.)
I don’t understand why the school would care after the state court said it was ok 😂
It be like that sometimes.
Good case decided correct.
Shalom
Where did you go to college
I honestly feel that this whole Supreme Court case and suing the school was unnecessary as the students could’ve just convened somewhere else like at their parents/friends/or other relatives’ houses or even better yet, AT A CHURCH.
So, did anyone ever sponsor the club? That feels like an easy way to have it shut: Make sure no teacher sponsors the bible study club.
Then the school would wind up in court, where they would presumably lose on similar grounds.
I personally think it’s a stupid thing, but it’s a fair thing. Which is why we also have a Secular club starting at our school, with many around the country.
I'm a bit surprised that atheist clubs would offend people.
hey i went to that school
That hair is so 80s.
i used to live in omaha
Me too :)
Freedom of speech and religion!
For some reason, I can't read the comments
Edgy athist clubs *dabs*
Hello
What's up. How has your week been?
I AGREE with the court's decision. We NEED more JESUS in EVERYTHING
My high school had religions clubs and this was around 2000.
I disagree with this, I think hosting a bible study club on school grounds does endorse a religion, it could offend some kids at school or something, I just don’t think a religion should be endorsed by a school.
I believe that it is fine for a school to do this unless they show special treatment towards some religions and against others. Like it would be alright if a school sponsored a Christian club, as long as they allow a Muslim, Hindu, or Jewish kid to do the same thing
No particular religion would get special treatment; you're free to start a club of your own religion (or of none at all)
I think schools should be completely free from religious doctrine of *ANY* type. I was completely unaware of this even being a thing until the last couple of days. I mean, growing up in the 90's I was always led to believe that schools were supposed to be 100% neutral on religious anything...as in, no religious groups or events - nothing of the sort! This is all news to me to say the least.