education

There are times in life when it’s good to be considered the “worst” on a list – especially when that list is the “Top Party Schools in America.”

According to “Niche,” a website that provides college, K-12, and even neighborhood rankings, that designation for 2027 belongs to Patrick Henry College, the private Christian college in Purcellville, Virginia.

Founded in 2000 by Michael Farris, a social conservative stalwart who also started the Home School Legal Defense Association, the school’s mission stands in stark contrast to the goals of Florida State University, which tops the list of party schools.

While Florida State claims to “preserve, expand, and disseminate knowledge in the sciences, technology, art, humanities, and professions,” Patrick Henry aims metaphorically higher.

Our friends in Virginia state their goal is to “Prepare Christian men and women who will lead our nation and shape our culture with timeless biblical values and fidelity to the spirit of the American founding.”

While the rankings are admittedly subjective, being listed 1,587 out of 1,587 says something – and the institution’s founder has some thoughts about it.

Writing Thursday on Facebook, Farris noted:

“Not that PHC isn’t fun. There are all kinds of genuinely fun and exciting things to do.”

He then gave an example.

“The student body erupted when the Chancellor joined the student rock band named CS Lewis & the News to play rhythm guitar for a ‘60s rock and roll segment at an annual music and comedy event.”

For those too young or otherwise disinterested in the genre, the band name is a spoof on the quintessential ‘80s band, “Huey Lewis & the News.”

Farris stresses, “If you are looking for drunken frat parties, look elsewhere. If you’re looking for the number one school in the nation in legal debate (moot court), then PHC. If you are looking for wholesome fun without a legalistic overlay, then PHC. If you are looking for a commitment to the Word of God and academic rigor, then PHC.”

It’s unfortunate that a “partying” reputation on college campuses has for so long been associated with the abuse of alcohol and the presence of sinful vices. Committed Christians have long known that intoxicating beverages aren’t necessary for gatherings to be enjoyable.

The abuse of alcohol isn’t a new development, of course. Warned King Solomon, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise” (Proverbs 20:1). The apostle Paul also provided counsel and perspective to the partying culture of Corinth when he advised, “All things are lawful, but not all things are helpful” (1 Cor. 10:23).

Patrick Henry College isn’t the only school known for its wholesome environment, of course. Other Christian schools on the Niche list include Appalachian Bible College (1,582), Baptist Health Sciences University (1,581), Wesleyan College (1,579), and Maranatha Baptist University (1,577).

For years, The Princeton Review ran its annual “Stone-Cold Sober” school list, and regularly included such beloved Christian institutions as Wheaton College, Grove City College, Thomas Aquinas College, College of the Ozarks and Calvin University. They stopped publishing it in 2022.

Farris concluded his reflections on Patrick Henry College’s “Dead Last” ranking with this hale and hearty endorsement of the school he helped start.

“If your priorities match ours, PHC is truly in a class by itself.”

Can the government require a public school teacher to say something she believes is false — or keep information from parents she believes they have a right to know?

Those are the questions at stake in a new case a Maryland substitute teacher is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear. 

Kimberly Polk says Montgomery County Public Schools forced her to choose between her Christian beliefs and her job. 

Now she is asking the Court to decide whether the First Amendment protects teachers from being compelled to speak — or remain silent — in ways that violate their religious convictions.

How the Case Began

Polk began working as a school district substitute teacher in 2021 and received positive evaluations. The following year, the district required employees to certify that they would follow its “gender identity” policy. The policy required teachers to address students by their preferred name and pronouns and, in many circumstances, prohibited staff from disclosing a student’s preferred “gender identity” to parents without their consent.

According to court filings, Polk believes that using pronouns inconsistent with a student’s biological sex would require her to say something she believes is untrue. She also believes parents have the primary responsibility for raising their children and that she could not ethically withhold information from them about their child’s sexual identity confusion at school.

Polk requested a religious accommodation that would have allowed her to continue teaching without violating her deeply held beliefs. The school district denied her request.

As a result, Polk did not continue working as a substitute teacher. Instead, she filed a lawsuit in federal court, arguing the district violated her constitutional rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion, as well as a federal employment law protecting religious accommodation. 

Her case was dismissed by a federal district court. Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld the lower court’s decision, concluding that the district could require teachers to follow the policy because it is part of their official job duties.

What is Polk Asking the Supreme Court to Decide?

Polk is now asking the Supreme Court to review the case and answer two questions:

First, can a public school require teachers to use words that conflict with their sincerely held religious beliefs as a condition of employment?

Second, can public schools require teachers to withhold certain information from parents if doing so conflicts with the teacher’s religious convictions?

Polk is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which argued that the First Amendment protects not only the freedom to speak but also the freedom not to be compelled by the government to speak messages a person does not believe. 

ADF also contends that government employers, including public schools, must respect an employee’s sincere religious beliefs unless there is a compelling reason not to do so. 

What Happens Next?

If at least four justices vote to hear the appeal, the case will be considered by the U.S. Supreme Court. If they decline to hear the case, the Fourth Circuit’s ruling will remain in effect.

This case is ripe for consideration, as Polk’s petition raises a broader question that extends to many school districts across the United States: Where does the Constitution draw the line between government authority and individual freedom of speech and religion?

If the school district name sounds familiar, it’s because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the same school district in a case they considered last year  — Mahmoud v. Taylor.

As reported by the Daily Citizen, in that case, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of parental rights and religious freedom over mandated “LGBT” curriculum in public school classrooms, affirming the rights of parents to opt their students out of LGBT material based on sincerely held religious beliefs. 

The case is Polk v. Montgomery County Public Schools.

The Daily Citizen will continue to follow this developing story.