THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Loryn Hendershot, a senior at Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School in Georgia, attends a religious gathering Tuesday. The rally was held in support of the Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe cheerleaders, whose motivational signs using Biblical verses were banned by the school superintendent last week.
From the Associated Press:
ATLANTA (AP) — Cheerleaders at a north Georgia high school are gearing up for another football game, but they won’t be holding up signs bearing Bible verses.
The school district banned the signs over concerns they were unconstitutional and would provoke a lawsuit. The ban has angered many in the deeply religious community near Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School.
Some students say if most of the community doesn’t see a problem with the messages, they should be allowed.
Rallies have been held supporting the signs since the ban was put in place a week ago. School officials have designated an area where they can go on display for Friday night’s game.
One of the signs at a previous game said: “Commit to the Lord, whatever you do, and your plans will succeed.”
The school district banned the signs over concerns they were unconstitutional and would provoke a lawsuit.
Where’s PJ? This is what I’m talking about. I would bet dollars to doughnuts this suit was brought forth by atheists and God-haters. And look, the Constitution is being called into play.
Imagine that.
Donald shoots to PJ; ball is now in PJ’s court.
Don:
Tough call for me personally.
On the one hand – I like freedom of expression, and it is hard for me to turn my back on messages when I personally agree with them.
On the other hand – I don’t like a “Church of the State”. Here I am referring to the way the supreme court has used the 14th amendment to incorporate federal rights to the states. In this case the establishment clause of the first amendment “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion “. In the landmark Everson v Board of Education, Thomas Jefferson’s famous “Wall of separation” between church and state came to be applied at the state level. This has since been expanded in the following decades. Presently the establishment clause is interpreted to prohibit the preference of one religion over another and prohibit the support of a religious idea with no identifiable secular purpose. Here is the test for me on this. How would I feel if my Christian children were attending a public school, and the school principal was allowing the cheerleaders to hold up Satanic Verses, as a way to cheer on the team. I would definitely argue that by allowing that to occur, the principal was lending the credibility of the school to that practice. I would object to my children being exposed to it. And although I recognize that I am by far in the majority in my own community with regard to my religious preference, that is not the point of the establishment clause as it is currently interpreted by the courts.
So I would conclude – yes the superintendent is right. Although I personally like the cheerleaders messages, they are not appropriate in a public school. They definitely favor a particular religious belief system over other religions, and by allowing them, the district is giving its tacit permission and approval to those messages. This marginalizes other religious beliefs, and creates an officially accepted religious belief system, which is unacceptable.
PJ,
I’m sorry, but all I heard you say at the end of your comment was this:
People who have other religious beliefs than Christianity will have their feelings hurt because some cheerleaders are proclaiming the Christian God and not theirs. It seems that even in the case of religion, you are looking to make sure no one gets their feelings hurt or feels slighted. If Muslims wish to, have them hold up signs with verses from the Koran, or let those who follow Judaism hold up signs with verses from the Torah.
The way I see it, Christians cheerleaders have signs that bring attention to their God. If this is offensive, then let other faiths make their own signs and represent their gods as they see fit.
Am I off-base here, or did that make sense? It just seems that you are taking exception to only one religious belief being touted. So, let the others do their part and show up and make their own signs, like these Christian cheerleaders. This way, all faiths are represented and everyone can feel happy. But don’t penalize the Christian girls for having the wherewithal in bringing signs even in the absence of others.
Always a pleasure, PJ! Donald
PJ,
“…favoring a particular religious belief system…”, or “…giving its tacit permission and approval…” is not what the constitution says.
The only ones who can violate the establishment clause is CONGRESS. A cheerleader is by definition incapable of violating this clause. Furthermore, the only way that Congress can violate this clause is if they pass a law. Then, only if that law ESTABLISHES a religion for the US.
Don:
Sure – I like the inclusion of all approach – may leave out athiests?
The question here is not whether or not I like Christian cheerleaders (on my outreach committee, I AM a Christian Cheerleader) – it is whether giving the the schools stamp of approval to a specific religious expression is presently legal. I believe it is NOT presently legal.
David:
I see how you are reading the 1st amendment. That is how I originally read it too. However, that is NOT how the 1st amendment is presently applied legally. The 14th amendment has been used to push the federal issues addressed in the constitution (and specifically here the 1st amendment) down to the state level. This is why your idea that the establishment clause of the first amendment only applies to congress is false as presently interpreted in US law. Certainly the case can be made that the establishment clause SHOULD be read the way you are reading it (basically leaving out the 14th amendment, and Supreme Court rulings) but that is not presently how it is applied.
Don:
Can you think of ANY religious believes, slogans, concepts from a non christian religion that offend you? Would it be ok with you if a public school was using those slogans at a sporting event? What if you found out that this offensive religion were the only type that was represented by the cheerleaders, and it was also true that the cheer coach, school principal, and district superintendent were all followers of that religion, and you couldn’t be a member of the cheer squad, it you were not a believer.
It is not about “hurting feelings”, it is about the power of the state (the government) supporting a particular religion. This is exactly what the framers were attempting to guard against when they debated and finally settled on the wording for the establishment clause.
Here is a concrete example that you will LOVE!
What if a 3rd grade teacher – selected a group of students – and taught them all a song PRAISING President Obama, and actually calling him GOD! Praising him for creating the light and darkness, for creating the stars and the moon, for creating the world ….
That would be ok, as long as they also sang songs about how the “real” God was pretty cool for really being the one who created the world, right? No, I didn’t think so.
When a school is tacitly advocating a religious position, that is inappropriate. Certainly religion and religious values should play a role in all aspects of our society, but when a public school shold not establish an officially “ok” religious position.
PJ,
I hear what you’re saying and again, I appreciate your thoughtfulness in your ideals. Having read your comments I must ask this: Should I be worried about wearing a “Christian” t-shirt to a public school. (Obviously I cannot as I am 41 and way too old for school, but…) Should I be concerned about having a “Christian” bumper sticker if I worked for, say, the State of CT in the Governor’s office?
I guess what I’m asking or observing is that religion, specifically Judeo-Christianity, cannot be displayed, spoken about, argued, or even mentioned anywhere near or around any Federal, State, or otherwise government-run/sponsored/subsidized building or property. If this is the case, then I understand much better what you are saying.
Yet, funny enough, did not our President swear on The Bible during his inauguration? The Bible. Where were the atheists then? Where was the ACLU decrying “Separate, separate!! You cannot do this!”
Until that day comes, until the day comes when our politicians and elected officials do not acknowledge the Lord in their swearing-in processes, be they President or Senators or Governors, then I will continue to represent to the fullest of my ability my Jesus, regardless of who is paying the lease on whatever building or property I am in or on.
I am writing an article, even now, on this “separation of Church and State” nonsense. If it is posted here, I look forward to your input.
Don:
I don’t know, that is a tough call. I think these issues really only arise when a line is clearly crossed.
I am a pack leader for a local cub scout troop. The troop sponsor is a local public school. Most of our meetings take place in the school. There is a religious aspect to scouting, and we openly acknowledge the existence of God. Participation in our organization is voluntary, but technically the school is tacitly supporting a position that there is a God. I think the line is crossed when a climate is created that marginalizes a specific religion or religious viewpoint. With scouting in my community, this has not presented an issue, but I think it would become an issue, if I made the meetings more about evangelism and less about parents and children having fun together while the children grow into responsible adults. Just staring with a respect for others (I think) eliminates most of these problems. In the football game example, we are talking about a football game, not a bible reading, or a tent revival, or even a Christmas concert. Is there something about a football game that requires the use of bible verses? As Christians, certainly our love for one another would lead us to extend a welcome to all. No one is asking Christians not to participate in football cheerleading, just not to take over the football game and make it into a religious event.