COURT RULINGS ON EDUCATION AFFECT SCHOOLS ACROSS THE NATION

In recent weeks it seems education issues have been all over the national
news. Supreme Court rulings about drug testing and vouchers and a ruling by
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that declared the Pledge of Allegiance
unconstitutional dominated headlines two weeks ago.

The first ruling relates to testing for drug use among high school students
who participate in extracurricular activities. While not required to test
those students, schools which do so have had that right confirmed by the
Supreme Court.

Many districts in our area do not test high school students who participate
in athletics or other after-school activities, but some do. Perhaps testing
all students would be more fair because studies have shown those who are
not involved in such activities are more likely to use drugs.

We need to do all that is possible to keep people of all ages from using
illegal drugs, but if testing occurs without education about the dangers of
drug use and rehabilitation for those who are found to be addicts, then we
are simply invading the privacy of our students.

Another recent Supreme Court ruling upholds the use of vouchers in
locations such as Cleveland, Ohio, and portions of Florida.

While it is important to offer choices to parents, we must hold all schools
which receive government money, directly or indirectly (i.e., through
vouchers provided to parents), to a high standard.

Currently, private schools are not required to meet testing and
accountability standards set for public schools and do not even have to
have certified teachers leading classes.

We do our children no service by sending them to supposedly safer and
better schools if they will receive an education at a facility that is not
held accountable for its performance.

In a third court ruling, and perhaps the most controversial of the three,
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California stated that the Pledge of
Allegiance is unconstitutional due to the words "under God," which were
added in 1954.

I am very disturbed by this. While I do agree that no one should be forced
to participate in religious activities that go against his or her personal
beliefs, I feel this ruling carried the idea a bit far.

The pledge is to our nation, and affirming our allegiance to the country in
a unified manner is needed at this time.

Also, as I understand the current laws regarding the pledge, no child is
forced to say it, but can choose to refrain from doing so in any classroom.
This ruling, however, takes away the rights of all the children who do want
to say the pledge.

If removing the words "under God" will help alleviate the controversy,
perhaps we should go back to the version that was in place before 1954.

But I do not think in these times of terrorist attacks and other dangers to
our country we should rid our classrooms of any patriotic themes which
teach children to take pride in their nation.

The ramifications of all these rulings are yet to be seen and will take
time to affect our students personally in Northeast Mississippi, but all of
us have the potential to be touched by the things our federal government
does, therefore, we should pay close attention to the decisions they make.