But, wait, Judge Biery's ruling gets even more offensive towards the intent and meaning of the principles enshrined in the First Amendment.

"Judge Biery’s ruling banned students and other speakers from using religious language in their speeches. Among the banned words or phrases are: “join in prayer,” “bow their heads,” “amen,” and “prayer.”

He also ordered the school district to remove the terms “invocation” and “benediction” from the graduation program.  “These terms shall be replaced with ‘opening remarks’ and ‘closing remarks,'” the judge’s order stated. His ruling also prohibits anyone from saying, “in [a deity’s name] we pray.”

Should a student violate the order, school district officials could find themselves in legal trouble. Judge Biery ordered that his ruling be “enforced by incarceration or other sanctions for contempt of Court if not obeyed by District official (sic) and their agents.”

We now have a judge banning the use of certain words in public, altering the text of a program in a politically correct manner, a prohibition against the act of prayer or asking others to join one in prayer, and the penalty of jail for anyone who happens to exercise their first amendment rights and protections.

Given this ruling it is apparent that Judge Biery is unfamiliar with what the 1st amendment says or means so here is a free education for you Judge.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

First off we have the establishment clause which states rather plainly that CONGRESS shall not make a law establishing a religion.  This came about due to the experience our Founding Fathers had with the whole Church of England and the religious persecution they faced.  A Texas high school graduation ceremony where people may or may not pray does not constitute an establishment of a religion.

Second we have the free exercise clause which allows people to practice their faith as they want.  Want to pray in public go right ahead, don't want to belong to a religious institution fine, don't want to believe in any faith tradition what so ever that is ok, what to pray five times a day facing Mecca, alright(although shouting Allahu Akbar in a public place like inside an air plane may get you tackled and taken to Club Gitmo).

Third and self explanatory is freedom of speech.  

The free exercise clause is the one that has the most importance in our examination of this wrongheaded ruling.  If the family at the center of all of this don't like religion or prayer, let alone in public, though, the rest of us also have rights to practice our faith as best we see fit.  In that spirit, I ask anyone who may happen to be attending this graduation ceremony(and reading this blog) to politely and kindly search out the parents here in question, and say a brief quite(but loud enough for them to hear) prayer like God bless you, or something similar.  No need to be confrontational, rude or insulting towards these religious-phobes, just simply exercise your 1st amendment rights, why it would be great if some student who was speaking at this graduation read out loud the 1st amendment while looking this family in the eye(s).

To conclude I say this to the Schultz's, have a nice day, and may God Bless you and I pray for you.  If you and your son found that message or this blog post to be offensive or to have irreparably harmed you, to bad, the 1st amendment is clearly not only on my side but on the side of everyone who you have a problem with.