Culture Wars
The Candy Cane Case and "offensive" christian messages
August 2008 
A fifth-grader's religious-themed Christmas candy gets censored by a school district – and triggers a first-amendment challenge.
By Andrew Peterson
For CoverUps.com
School officials in Saginaw, MI, probably never guessed their suppression of a Christian message would ever get this close to a Supreme Court review, but as the old saying goes, “In a world where carpenters are resurrected, anything is possible.”
According to Worldnet Daily, it all started in 2003 when a 5th-grade student, Joel Curry, participated in a classroom project for which students were given guidelines to develop and sell a project for a Christmas-time event called “Classroom City”.
Curry’s product was a candy cane made from pipe cleaners, accompanied by product literature with this message:
The Meaning of the Candy Cane
Hard candy: Reminds us that Jesus is like a "rock," strong and dependable.
The color Red: Is for God's love that sent Jesus to give his life for us on the cross.
The Stripes: Remind us of Jesus' suffering-his crown of thorns, the wounds in his hands and feet; and the cross on which he died.
Peppermint Flavor: Is like the gift of spices from the wise men. White Candy: Stands for Jesus as the holy, sinless Son of God.
Cane: Is like a staff used by shepherds in caring for sheep. Jesus leads us and watches over us when we Trust him.
The message was deemed “offensive” by school officials. A lawsuit against the school district was filed. The Department of Justice even filed a brief on behalf of the boy:
The school has defended its actions on the ground that it sought to avoid disruption and to avoid a violation of the Establishment Clause of the Constitution ... The Civil Rights Division brief argues that the school's actions discriminated against the boy's speech in violation of the free speech clause, and that the school's Establishment Clause defense was meritless.
Despite this, a three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Curry, in favor of the school district. This draw a sharp response from Jeff Shafer, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, an advocacy group that specializes in first-amendment cases involving religious speech. The ADF is attempting to take the case to The Supreme Court.
Automatically classifying religious speech as offensive runs counter to settled constitutional precedent ... We hope the Supreme Court will agree to review Joel's case and resolve this important question, which could potentially affect thousands of public school students.
The Supremes haven’t agreed yet to hear the case. If they do, their ruling, one way or the other, will have a sizable effect on free speech in the United States. According to Shafer:
The First Amendment exists to protect private speakers, not to enable religious discrimination by government officials ... The court of appeals' unprecedented classification of student religious speech as an 'offense' worthy of censorship should be reversed.
Our Take
Reading young Joel Curry’s words, it beggars the imagination to see why school officials would take offense – unless it is Christianity itself to which they object. If this is so, perhaps they could use some reminding about the virtues of tolerance, about which they are so quick to lecture others.
Link to article. 
