I hate commencement speeches. Hate them. Commencement speeches are like fruitcakes -- there's really only one and it just gets passed from person to person. It seems like every one of them is full of the same stupid cliches and platitudes. I hate them. But remember the valedictorian who filed the suit a couple months ago against government-sponsored prayer at his own graduation ceremony in Indiana? He delivered a commencement speech I could cheer for.
This is the same school that decided not to pre-approve any of the commencement speeches anymore so that any student speech could not be considered government-approved. Their goal was to allow students to talk about religion without government imprimatur and therefore avoid legal trouble. And it worked. The student body president stood up and thanked God, as she has every right to do.
But then it was Eric Workman's turn, the kid who filed the suit. And while what he said did contain a few of those tired metaphors (doors closing, doors opening, the best is yet to come, yada yada yada), he also delivered a powerful defense of the separation of church and state and of science as a method of understanding the world -- and a rather blistering rebuke to the school administration that was sitting right behind him. Here's the full text of his speech:
Hello, everyone. Tonight is a rather auspicious occasion, marking the closing of one door and the opening of several others. The Greenwood Community High School Class of 2010 has experienced much together--our journey has encompassed seven years, four of which have established a foundation for the rest of our lives. During these four years, some of us have found our niche in English, Foreign Language, Social Studies, Business, Physical Education, The Fine Arts, Mathematics, and/or The Sciences. For me, I found my place in the latter. Science never stops asking "why" until it has uncovered "how" and never stops asking "how" until it has determined "why." Science uses both logic and reason to assess the world around us--to explain and improve our relative universe. Science is a product manifested from secular humanism; it is devoid of delusion, ideological zealotry, and blind ignorance. Science is, in essence, the purest form of intellect. In addition to finding a passion for science, though, I also learned that taking a stand for principles far surpasses the respect, the acceptance, or the repudiation of anyone.Thomas Jefferson once said, "In matters of principle, stand like a rock." I have never fallen short of President Jefferson's credo in this respect, as I am sure you are aware. You may not agree with my decision to fight for civil liberties, but I expect you to respectfully listen while I elucidate. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states, in part, that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." This implies that no entity, agent, or facet (however subsidiary) of the government is to ever endorse, promote, or encourage any form of religion or religious doctrine. This, as you may or may not know, includes school-sponsored prayer.
In September of last year, our remarkably doltish administration called upon us all to vote in deciding whether or not we wanted the Constitution of the United States to be flagrantly violated. Understanding the law and knowing right from wrong, I vehemently opposed such an atrocious act from ever taking place. However, my one voice and the voices of others were shouted-down by most of you. Our rights and the law were disregarded. You see, subjecting government-endorsed prayer to a majority rule is, in and of itself, unconstitutional, let alone the government approbation of said prayer. Founding Father Thomas Jefferson is quoted as having said, "All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in [most] cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate [them] would be oppression."
Individual freedoms were subjugated, the United States Constitution was omitted, and most of you were unfazed. I, however, was fazed--I, however, took action to redress this grievance. On March 11th, the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed a lawsuit on my behalf to legally halt any and all school-sanctioned prayer at tonight's commencement ceremony. On April 30th, Federal District Judge Sarah Evans Barker issued an injunction to do just that. In her ruling, Judge Barker stated that "the degree of school involvement ma[de] it clear that [any graduation] prayer [would] 'bear the mark of the state,' and accordingly [transgress] the Constitution." I solemnly hope that you all do understand that the Greenwood Community School Corporation had its hand in this from the beginning, that the Greenwood Community School Corporation thought (and still likely thinks) it was and is above the law, and that neither the Greenwood Community School Corporation nor any other government entity is above the law. In challenging my lawsuit, the Greenwood Community School Corporation accrued a debt of legal fees and court costs to the ACLU, totaling approximately $18,000. For the School Corporation's legal representation, you can expect the debt to be exorbitantly greater.
It is rather unfortunate that Joe Farley and his Milquetoast myrmidons chose to allocate funds to battle, in futility, a precedent that has held firmly in law since its issuance from the United States Supreme Court. These tens of thousands of dollars could have been better used to maintain the teaching positions being cut in the coming academic year due to a lack and administrative mismanagement of funds. Nonetheless, $18,000 will be spent appropriately, helping the ACLU to further its mission to protect and defend freedom.
Now, before I leave you with your thoughts, I would like to thank and acknowledge those who have, above all, influenced and inspired me for the better. Firstly and foremost, I thank my mother, Kathy, for believing in me and my abilities. Her love, care, and guidance have been immeasurable assets in my journey through life thus far. Secondly, I thank my sister, Tiffany, for being my rock in times of hardship. She will never know how grateful I am to have her in my life. Thirdly, I thank my grandparents, Richard and Betty, for providing me with the love and encouragement that enriches me, my life, and my future. Their hearts have touched mine more than they know. Fourthly, I thank Becky Kehler for shaping me into the scientist I am today--an individual who does not stop asking "why" until he has uncovered "how" and who does not stop asking "how" until he has determined "why." It was she who gave me both the unparalleled opportunity and vast resources necessary to thrive and prosper as a research scientist in High School. Fifthly and finally, I thank Suzanne Schulz for teaching me to never compromise myself or my principles for anyone or anything. Her candor and unyielding disposition have been hallmarks in shaping me and my outlook on the world.
Thank you for permitting me the chance to speak with you tonight. It has been a pleasure for me and, hopefully, a teaching moment for you. Before we part, though, I leave you with these words:
"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double your danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!" - Sir Winston Churchill
Congratulations, Class of 2010; the best is about to begin!
Yeah, I know. It's a little self-congratulatory and there's a hint of pollyanna in it. But I give this kid huge credit for standing up in front of a largely hostile audience, standing his ground and eloquently defending his position. I give him credit for saying something that actually matters in a commencement speech. Wish more kids would do that.

Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 

Comments
Young Eric Workman understands the Constitution on this matter better than any conservative or Republican national leader I've encountered in many years. He expresses his point more clearly than any Democratic leader I've encountered with the exception of Barack Obama.
We should ask ourselves why a high school student can easily understand and clearly articulate why we need both religion clauses in the Bill of Rights and yet the politicians we elect appear perfectly ignorant of this principle.
I'm cognizant of the argument it's not politically popular and therefore it's not ignorance but mere avoidance as a result of a political calculation. But when it comes to protecting the individual or a minority from the majority on uncontroversial related matters, I don't see a light bulb go on with those matters either.
Posted by: Michael Heath | June 2, 2010 12:28 PM
I give him extra credit for "myrmidons."
Posted by: how | June 2, 2010 12:31 PM
"Milquetoast myrmidons," huh? At least they weren't "nattering nabobs of negativity."
Also, a LITTLE self-congratulatory? I agree with what the kid did 100% and I still want to give him a swirlee after reading that.
Posted by: Rorschach | June 2, 2010 12:56 PM
I'm glad he didn't get pelted with anything or booed. Good for him for calling the school administration out.
Posted by: Leni | June 2, 2010 12:57 PM
O Providence! That Jefferson's words would have a better representative that this smug little twirp. Make your point without sounding like such a jackass, jackass.
Posted by: Joe V. | June 2, 2010 1:10 PM
The best high school graduation speech I ever heard was a salutorian's speech which was woven entirely out of cliches, made into flowing paragraphs.
I wish I had the text of it around to quote, because it was brilliant.
Posted by: Snarkyxanf | June 2, 2010 1:21 PM
So what if Eric wanted to do the free-speech equivalent of a victory dance in the end zone? I think that he had more than earned the right to do so, especially on a point of such importance. More importantly, I'm delighted that he used that speech for one more attempt to inform and educate the audience on this issue; I hope that some people there actually listened and learned something.
My only criticism is that Eric took the low road in using certain insulting terms: "doltish," "Milquetoast," etc.; one can easily make one's point without slinging insults. On the other hand, he's still young, so it's no surprise that a bit of juvenility is still noticeable in him (valedictorian or not), and the temptation to express himself so freely must have been overwhelming. And I can't say that the administration didn't deserve every bit of it.
~David D.G.
Posted by: David D.G. | June 2, 2010 1:40 PM
I think that Eric's insults were if anything too mild.The
school adminstration wasted valuable money on B.S. while laying off teachers.
Posted by: Paen | June 2, 2010 2:06 PM
I liked the insults. They were almost Shakespearean. I loves me some snark!
Posted by: NietzscheanMat | June 2, 2010 2:19 PM
*Applause*
No doubt Billo and Glenn Beck are going to try to turn him into a marxist/fascist/terrorist-loving monster.
Posted by: Scott M | June 2, 2010 2:40 PM
@ 10,
That kid sounds more intelligent than Dildo O'Reilly and the Beckerhead combined.
Posted by: Fifth Dentist | June 2, 2010 2:57 PM
What David D.G. said.
To hear this kid's speech was an unexpected treat. I grinned through the whole thing, most broadly when he stuck in a few barbs and when he mentioned that he was able to "thrive and prosper as a research scientist in High School."
I'm sure that by now he's gotten a larger sized hat.
Good on you, Eric Workman. You are likely well named.
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | June 2, 2010 3:00 PM
OK, he's VERY full of himself, but after all, he's the valedictorian, and he initiated and won a lawsuit against his school. How many of us can say either of those things? I hope he gets over it, though, or he's gonna be a real pain as an adult.
Still, he makes some great points, and it's a far more useful commencement address, with far more actual content, than the vast majority of them.
Posted by: MS | June 2, 2010 3:38 PM
I wonder what kind of scientist? Be awfully funny if he went into physics at New Mexico Tech -- the physics department is in the Workman Center (named for E. J. Workman, an impressive atmospheric physicist.)
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | June 2, 2010 3:51 PM
Bravo. Whatever insults that a teenager who stood for his Constitutional rights flung at the scores of alleged "adults" in his audience who would have gladly trampled upon them were more than justified. However smug he might have come across, think of the smugness of those who self-righteously sought to force him to pray to their god, against the law.
Posted by: Chuck | June 2, 2010 4:11 PM
"In September of last year, our remarkably doltish administration called upon us all to vote in deciding whether or not we wanted the Constitution of the United States to be flagrantly violated." This is just wonderful.
I don't really see much "defense" of science, though, other than repetitions of the how/why platitude that doesn't seem to make very much sense.
Posted by: Alex | June 2, 2010 4:28 PM
For all his pontificating, the boy remains remarkably ignorant of what that first amendment really means. Of course between his upbringing and the federal indoctrination system this would be an easily predictable outcome.
Posted by: emdfl | June 2, 2010 4:56 PM
Three thoughts:
1. He was of course right about the law, and congratulations to him for carrying through on the lawsuit.
2. It seems to me there are signs in his choice of certain words and phrases that personal problems may be coming, unless those words are out of character and reflect just the moment and all the attention he was getting. He goes from a moment's acknowledgment that he is not absolutely the only one who disliked the school policy - "most of you were unfazed" - to "I, however, was fazed--I, however, took action. . . ." Then he calls his own speech "a pleasure for me and, hopefully, a teaching moment for you," where the "you" appears inclusive. These comments, combined with "I solemnly hope that you all do understand," suggest that he was irrationally seeing himself as a completely isolated figure, despite the fact that he had prepared a list of people to thank for helping him. And identifying himself grandiosely as "a research scientist in High School" with "vast resources"?
3. This school may have some dreary graduations ahead if future speakers follow this model in insults. Next year, I suppose, it'll be "the doltish atheists who . . . ."
Posted by: JuliaL | June 2, 2010 5:14 PM
Need I point out to the detractor's we're talking about a High School student. He isn't some smug congress critter, he's a kid, who has much to learn, and has the chance to learn, and appears to want to learn. Crikey, I'm sure the lot of you were modest, proper, and respectful at age 17, and never ever would consider showing up a few pompous asses that deserve the ass whopping he handed them.
Oh, and emdfl, Foxtrot Oscar Alpha Delta.
Posted by: Onkel Bob | June 2, 2010 5:23 PM
Bravo Eric Workman.
From comment #1:
We should ask ourselves why a high school student can easily understand and clearly articulate why we need both religion clauses in the Bill of Rights and yet the politicians we elect appear perfectly ignorant of this principle.
Ask why? It’s simple. Eric Workman is not running for reelection.
Politicians must pander to their voters. Bible thumping voters will vote their faith. “I am a Senior Deacon in First Baptist Church. That is why you should vote for me. I intend to challenge any law that prevents Good God Fearing Folks from proclaiming the Lord God at any or in any place.”
At least that pesky first amendment prevents our Senior Deacon from tax payer supported proclamations of the Baptist (and presumably Christian) Lord God.
Posted by: Peter B | June 2, 2010 9:00 PM
Wow. Wish I had a few students like that. If he insulted me, I'd have to think I earned it, unlike the silly insults my current students throw my way.
I agree with Onkel Bob, the kid's a high school student. Give him a break.
And for the record, I happen to like fruitcake. ;-)
Posted by: BaldApe | June 2, 2010 9:05 PM
Damn it! The kid's alright. I just wish that he had let me or Duwayne write his speech--or, maybe, Bill Hicks.
Posted by: demodommie | June 2, 2010 11:54 PM
"...Eric Workman's turn, the kid who..."
"Young Eric Workman..."
"That kid sounds ..."
"...he's a kid..."
"Damn it! The kid's alright...."
Can we be any more insulting and patronizing?
Posted by: IanW | June 3, 2010 7:23 AM
Peter B - I'd appreciate your responding to portion of my comment @ 1 within the context which it's framed. From that perspective it's my perception that your point doesn't exhaust all possibilities given there are times where constitutional literacy would work in these politicians favor and yet the light-bulb still doesn't power-on as I noted @ 1.
Posted by: Michael Heath | June 3, 2010 8:10 AM
Ian:
"Can we be any more insulting and patronizing?"
You're fucking kidding, right? The answer is, btw, "fuck yeah"
Posted by: democommie | June 3, 2010 9:44 AM
I've heard (and given) worse speeches. But why does nobody mention that the Mayor turned into a gigantic demon and bit the Principal's head off, and then the school librarian blew up the school with dynamite?
Posted by: Tony Sidaway | June 4, 2010 5:32 AM
To 23
I 100% agree with almost everything he said. But too bad to all the other kids who did not hope that the commencement they shared equally would turn into a pulpit from which there would be a slightly incomprehensible lecture that basically flips the audience off and congratulates the speaker.
A for content. B- for probably sounding like gobbeldygook. D- for grace and tact.
Posted by: Buffoon | June 7, 2010 2:58 PM