# Kay v. David Douglas School District No. 40

> Court of Appeals of Oregon · May 21, 1986 · 79 Or. App. 384

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9552625

## Case

- **Full name:** KAY Et Al, Respondents, TAKASHIMA, Plaintiff, v. DAVID DOUGLAS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 40 Et Al, Appellants
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Oregon
- **Decided:** May 21, 1986
- **Citations:** 79 Or. App. 384; 719 P.2d 875
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Warren
- **Judges:** Buttler, Warren, Rossman, Respectfully
- **Cited by:** 12 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Reversed on other grounds by Kay v. David Douglas School District No. 40, 303 Or. 574 (1987).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9552625

## Opinion text

WARREN, J.,
concurring.
Although the dissent makes the point that other examples of governmental nonneutrality toward religion are common, those examples prove nothing relevant to the constitutional challenge made here. It is no answer in this case that attendance at the commencement is voluntary, and it is no answer that there may be other inconsistencies between what government does and what it should do. As the lead opinion points out, certain originally religious references have acquired, over time, nonreligious significance. The prayer proposed to be offered at the commencement in this case does not fall within that category.
The greatness of this democracy is due in no small measure to the fact that we adhere to the principle that, although the majority rules, the rights of minorities are fiercely respected. No student or parent entitled to attend a commencement ceremony or any other governmentally sponsored event should feel a need to remain away or compromise principles because he or she holds beliefs at variance with those of the majority of American citizens.
I join in Judge Buttler’s opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9552625. Public record. Not legal advice.