“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.”–The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America
Maybe it’s the Afghan heat getting to me, or it could be a side-effect of my euphoria from being first place in the “Pro Pick ‘Em” league, and second place in the Fantasy Football league–but whenever I find myself adamantly agreeing with Pete Randall and adamantly disagreeing with the sentiment of some of my fellow (L)ibertarians, it causes me to pause.
I am of course, referring to the Catoosa County Cheerleaders and their malcious attempts to indoctrinate our youth, force them to convert to Christianity and establish a Christian-fundamentalist, theocratic madrassa. Oh wait–all they did was paint a banner with a Bible quote? So…what’s all the fuss about?
Believe me when I say that I understand why my fellow libertarian-minded bloggers would raise an alarm. We’ve all seen too often, not only throughout American history, but world history, that politicians have used “religion” has cause for all sorts of blunders, atrocities and injustices. We’ve seen civilizations rise and fall, while acting in accordance what was believed to be “the will of God.” We’ve seen theocracies in the past, the injustices they breed–and we see them now. And none of us ever want that to happen here. Luckily, our forefathers had the foresight to protect us from this fate. And they demonstrated that foresight in the forming of the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Before I go any further, I want to disclose the fact that I consider myself to be a Christian. Some of you, hell most of you, would no doubt question how “devout” I am…and I wouldn’t blame you. But in the end, I am a Christian. I am in no way, shape or form part of an oppressed minority. Christianity is the predominant religion of my state and my country. We are the majority. And I believe that the Bill of Rights was crafted to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
So…where’s the tyranny?
I look at the Catoosa cheerleader incident and see the following:
(1) No government entity ever established a religion of any type. No worship services were held. No religious propaganda was distributed. No “non-believers” were dragged into the streets and shot. In fact, there was no government endorsement of religion in this case–at all.
(2) A group of private citizens decided to publicly profess their faith. They didn’t prevent anyone else from professing a different faith. They didn’t insult the faiths of anyone else. They simply professed their own faith.
(3) Last time I checked, public professions of faith are not illegal. If so, someone needs to tell that blind, gimp preacher on my street corner, holding up a “The End is Near” sign to go away. Actually, the first amendment completely allows for the practice (or freedom) of religion. Not only that, it allows for the practice of free speech. Even unpopular speech.
If a goverment entity, such as the school board, has a problem with the banner…here is the quick, and constitutionally-proper way they could have responded:
“The Catoosa County Board of Education in no way endorses or promotes religious propaganda of any type. The Board does, however, recognize that as citizens of the United States of America, our students are entitled to freely express their own religious beliefs. This applies to students of all religions.”
But Libertarians want to get up in arms about it. They want to raise hell. “This is an outrage,” they say. And you wonder why even political independents won’t take us seriously…much less Republican and Democrats. Get some perspective. Those Cheerleaders didn’t harm a soul. They may have offended your delicate sensibilities…but unfortunately for you, your delicate sensibilities aren’t a Constitutionally-protected entity.
You want to protest Obamacare? Count me in! You want to free Genarlow Wilson? I’m with you. Let’s sell alcohol on Sundays, too. We could legalize weed and prostitution! We’ll cut taxes and spending by 50% or more! OR WHATEVER! It doesn’t matter. But that’s what we need to be focusing on. Not a stupid banner, in a stupid high school. If you want your ideas to be taken seriously as a potential player on the national political scene, then you have to take them seriously yourself. From the comments I saw on Pete Randall’s post, it is clear that Libertarians remain unready to step up.
[On a side note, I hope everyone back home is doing well. It would be an understatement to say that I can't wait to come home on leave. My hands have felt absolutely empty for the last 7 months, without beers in them.]
{ 1 trackback }
{ 46 comments }
The beginnings of my long-winded post on the other thread, apparently we were typing at the same time”
Emphasis added in response to questions 2 and 3 in the main post here.
the logos and stadium, i assume are owned by the PEOPLE of catoosa county. this is not a private citizen shooing the cheerleaders off his lawn…
Jeff, I answered your questions in the other thread.
But for some reason, it’s being held in moderation…just be patient.
I must have missed the part where the private citizens leased the football field for their private football game with its private cheerleaders and private players.
Sorry Jace, I just can’t let this pass…
“No religious propaganda was distributed.”
Other than the 10x 20 sign waved in front of the whole stadium…
Grift,
Whether you like it or not, the school doesn’t own its students. Regardless of whether they attend the school, or just happen to be on school property, students are still private citizens.
And if a private citizen, or a group of private citizens want to wave a sign, I could give a f*ck. It doesn’t hurt me, and it doesn’t hurt you–other than, obviously, your poor feelings. Unfortunately for you, your poor feelings, aren’t protected by the constitution. The right of these students to openly profess their religion is. So is their right to free speech. Regardless of the venue, and regardless of whether or not you agree with it, their speech should be protected.
And no, they didn’t distribute propaganda. They held up a banner. They didn’t force you to do a d*mn thing. Nor did they prevent you from doing a d*mn thing.
Sorry, Grift, I just couldn’t let that pass.
So a large banner on public school property proclaiming “Obamacare is wonderful!” is not propaganda?
If a group of private citizens want to hold up a private sign on private property, I have no problem with that.
But it’s a group of students at a school function on public property holding a sign proclaiming their belief in Christianity… that’s a government activity encouraging religion. And a no-no.
Jace, you lost this battle even before you started whining.
so what the rule when play a private school–or a private school plays on “public property” i’m not trying to be snarky–i’m asking an honest question–for instance, the catholic high school in sav’h plays a bunch of public high schools every year…
I would say the property owner determines what is allowed.
In other words, if the Catoosa cheerleaders were the Sav Catholic HS cheerleaders and wanted to use these same banners at home games, that is perfectly acceptable – ZERO complaint from me, even though they are playing a public school.
If they are playing an away game at the public school though, my contentions here remain and I would say they can display their banner in some location outside the stadium where any other group can also display their own banners.
Are you saying they entered into a lease agreement with the school to rent the property during certain times to hold a private function even if open to the public? If so, no problem! It’s a private function on rented property, and the contract for that engagement is what controls what can be done.
Oh, I see what you’re also asking, Jay. Jeff is correct, above. You play by the home field rules, same as in baseball
drjay
nice gramar.
(grammar)
ByteMe,
I don’t care if it’s “propaganda”. If a group of students want to wave an “Obamacare is Wonderful” flag, I could care less. I doesn’t infringe on my rights whatsoever.
Unlike some, I’m not so thin-skinned and weak minded that I can’t accept the fact that there are differing opinions out there. I encourage the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion at all times. As does our Constitution. You ought to check it out sometime.
Clearly you don’t grasp the difference between yourself and a 10th grader when it comes to peer pressure. Or the difference between established case law and the Constitution. That’s ok. You were still on the losing side of this argument before you ever started whining about it.
I’d be interested in your definition of propaganda if it doesn’t include a 10×20 sign waved in front of a couple of thousand people.
I’d be interested in your definition of “the state establishing an official religion” if it includes a bunch of dumb-*ss cheer leaders painting a paper sign.
As part of a school sponsored team at a school sponsored event. It’s about what has been established as the difference between individual free speech and students acting as agents of the school (and therefore of the state). It’s an issue with much nuance but there’s quite a bit of case law on it.
Gee Grift,
Student’s acting as agents of the school? So…at what point did the principal haul these devious little cheerleaders into his office and give them this secret task to brainwash the mindless drones of Catoosa with horrible grammar and bible verses? Was it before or after Dick Cheney planned 9/11 and rode off in his black helicopter?
Face the facts: These cheer leaders didn’t infringe on your right to do anything. Nor did they infringe on anyone else’s right.
But it’s pretty d*mn clear they hurt yours and Jeff’s feelings.
BOO. HOO.
Ooooowie. Mah feelings are hurt. Stop it Jace!
Or you could look over in the other thread (since you seem intent on cross posting all over the place) where I quoted a lawyer explaining the nuances in the actual law here.
You know, Jace, the law? Something that once upon a time (along with reason), I thought was something highly respected by libertarians.
But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe there’s a libertarian strain that involves defending those intent on shoving their peculiar brand of religion down the throats of every available captive crowd.
Must have missed the meeting on that one.
Actually, Grift, most Libertarians I know respect the constitution…the Constitution, you know Grift, that pesky little document through which the Supreme Court can interpret/reinterpret/and overturn case law?
Just because there is a judicial precedent for something, does not make it right.
But do what you need to do Grift. Stop those malicious cheerleaders from forcing everyone to convert to Christianity.
Or grow up.
I could care less which you choose to do.
Actually, they didn’t hurt my feelings at all. Their actions simply smack of the theocracy and legalism that I long ago swore to myself to fight wherever I encountered it.
You’re right though – they didn’t infringe on my right to do anything. Never said they did.
What I’ve been saying is that they were demanding SPECIAL rights for THEIR religion that are unconstitutional.
MASSIVE difference there.
And when two clauses of the Constitution conflict (which they obviously do here), what do we do Jace? Flip a coin? Wrestle for it in the mud? No, we rely on the legislature to clarify and, yes, the court to interpret?
And as I’ve pointed out multiple times for your ignoring pleasure, religion in school is a nuanced issue but the Supreme Court has provided good interpretation and balance between the two clauses.
But let me go ahead and answer your original question. If it requires for me to side with people who insist on shoving religion down my throat to give the Libertarian Party some sort of legitimacy, then count me out.
Then again, if the true north libertarian argument is nothing better than sputtering about hurt feelings, black helicopters and tin foil hats, then you see pretty quickly why I counted myself out long ago.
But let me go ahead and answer your original question. If it requires for me to side with people who insist on shoving religion down my throat to give the Libertarian Party some sort of legitimacy, then count me out.
And finally, the point I have been trying to make this entire time shines through.
Never in my entire life, did I ever think I would be in danger of being called a theocrat. But the sensitivity of many Libertarians, libertarians, and libertarian-leaning independents toward anything that involves the reconciliation between religion and state, is appalling. Dude, I am about the least devout person you could ever meet. And I have my share of disdain for the so-called “religious right”. But I’m not blinded by my disdain. It’s clear that some of you are. You can’t see beyond your own “hatred (for lack of a better term)” for the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons of the world. You associate anything religious with fools like that, and you end up falling on your sword for what? Because a couple of cheerleaders put a sign up?
I say it again, get some perspective, man. There is evil in religion, because there is evil in people. Religion has an oppressive nature because people have an oppressive nature. But not everything dealing with religion is oppressive or evil.
Some of it truly is a light-hearted way for a bunch of high-school students to profess their faith. There was nothing evil, nothing oppressive about what they did. I know it, and you know it. They didn’t shove anything down anyone’s throat. I know it and you know it.
I fear the “outrage” mentality more than I fear the “entitlement” mentality in the United States. Everyone has to get “outraged” about something. There literally is nothing to see here. Move on.
Sometimes you have to look around and see who your standing with.
Establishment.
Moving on.
Jace:
Clearly, you’ve never gone through the battles I have. You can’t imagine the relief I felt when I FINALLY found a church where the pastor recognized that church was not a fortress – it is a hospital. You don’t go in there perfect and prepared for battle, you go in there with whatever you have on you at the time, battered nearly beyond recognition, and you beg for something to help you.
I came to libertarianism through my battles with legalists and theocrats. They wanted me to act a certain way, to think a certain way – they never wanted me to be free.
The problem is, GOD DOES! Humans are the ONLY beings in ALL of Creation with Free Will! Why would He give us that, knowing that it would cost Him his own Son?
We are the only beings in all of Creation that can willingly choose Him or not, and that is why we are His most prized creation. How DARE legalists and theocrats cheapen that by trying to force people to choose certain things? Do you honestly think that the God who knows our very hearts is pleased when people do things because others told them to? Did Christ not spend the vast majority of his three years of active ministry both reaching out to the outcasts while slamming the very religious establishment that placed them under such oppressive laws?
What about theChange? What about the Difference? People don’t know we are Christian because of 10×20 signs on a football field. They know we are Christian because of how we act AFTER the game. How we act in the hallway, at the party, at the swimming pool over the summer.
THAT is something that most Christians seem to have forgotten, and that is something I’ve been fighting for over a decade already.
Just a quick response to #1. You used a common misinterpretation of the 1st Amendment. It doesn’t say “establish a religion”, it says “respect an establishment of religion”.
Any establishment being anything from the 1st Baptist Church of August to Islam.
Your point still stands, since Congress didn’t do that either.
However, the Supreme Court *has* established that it goes just beyond Congress passing laws. You can agree or disagree with their decision at your leisure.
How many of you would support a sign like that to ALLAH if it was a public school and the team was mostly Muslim? I think pray in school is fine but when it pushes one religion over another it becomes a problem.
I played football on a team with a mix of Catholics, Baptist, Jews, Methodist…..and one of my friends father said a prayer before every game, and he was a local Methodist preacher. And I always remember how respectful he was of all of the different faiths kids had on our team. He never pushed his faith over another faith.
BTW Jace be safe and I hope to buy you a beer soon!
John,
Good to hear from you my friend. I hope you’re doing well, and I look forward to taking you up on that beer offer when I get home for good in March/April.
We had some religious zealots at my High School and frankly it was a real turn-off. The last thing I wanted to do was become like them with what appeared to be a type of “Cult” scenario. As far as these kids go, I doubt they do much to follow the examples in the New Testament which contains lots of “calling BS on crooks and liars/Preachers/Politicians”, hence the lack of credibility with some of these folks. Oh sure it’s real easy to be a “cheerleader for JAYSUS”. But where’s the mojo, eh?
BTW: The Separation of School and State would clear up every single one of these types of issues…
Now that I can agree with.
That is my overall point with this and some other issues. Get government OUT of the question, and people can do as they please.
Government only complicates things and makes allies think they are enemies.
I went back and scrolled through that Pete Randall thread you’re talking about, and pretty much all of “we (Libertarians)” sat it out. No Jason Pye. No Daniel Adams. I popped in for a moment with a joke about Pete being racist, but sat out the actual discussion itself.
It sounds like you’ve got some simmering thoughts about the LP and religion, and I understand (and probably agree). But just for the record, the only Libertarian “we” involved in that debate you’re talking about was you and Jeff. So why don’t you two start an email thread?
Or get a room.
grift was in on it as well. I know he no longer considers himself LP, but more independent-that-leans-libertarian, but still. I’ll defend Jace a bit and say that there were three of us.
Well probably half the people who comment here are more or less “small-L” libertarians if you get right down to it… but Jace was going out of his way to address the actual “big-L” party. That thread simply didn’t fit the gripe.
Steve,
I don’t remember forcing you to read anything, so I could give a sh*t if you don’t care to read it.
See, you don’t get this from any other party in America.
In the two major political parties, there’s an established doctrine that you must subscribe to for the sake of party unity or risk being shunned by fellow members as a flip flopper; and forsaken by everyone you thought were your friends—those whom you thought respected you for your views (which happened to be exactly the same as everyone else’s in the party until you went off course with your sense of individualist opinion-forming nonsense).
GOPGeorgia did post a statement by the superintendent (if I recall correctly) which claimed that the signs were made with taxpayer dollars. But, that’s about the best and only argument there is against this, I’m afraid. It does present a problem, but one that could be easily overcome by private fundraising, and then they’ll be back to beat up football players with paper signs.
Sorry, but those of you expecting the government to have the ability to protect you from religious annoyances—well, I’m afraid you’re going to have to keep hiding behind your couch whenever Jehovah’s Witnesses come knocking at your door, just like the rest of us do.
Way off base. In fact, you have it backwards; it’s not about the government protecting us from religion, it’s about us protecting government from religion – and religion from government.
And we (Libertarians) wonder why no one takes us seriously…
Figured, “we” should make a comment.
As much as I love a good Jace rant, usually complete with a mixture of large and colorful words combined with a touch of red-neckness that only a learned southerner could pull off, I can’t help but find it ironic that he chose this topic to make a mountain out of a mole hill claiming the “we” libertarians need to quit making mountains out of mole hills. I guess “we” can’t help it.
I’m sure I’ll be accused of riding the fence on the issue at hand. My accusers will be correct, for I find myself agreeing with aspects of each side and my intent with this comment is to get the specific incident back to ground rodent mound status.
Jace is correct that WE as a party have bigger fish to fry (in society as a whole and within the LP itself) than to hound the BOE, administration and the cheerleaders of this school. I also, agree with him on the issue of force. There is none in this case, not even with peer pressure to participate. I see football games as an extra curricular activity. No one is forced to participate or even to attend the event. Players aren’t even required to participate in the post game prayer circle (which we see at a lot of state universities, even the li’bral ones). However, If something offends you that much, you can always vote with your feet. That said, as a libertarian, I do believe in separation of church and state. And if I were in attendance of this event, I’m sure my auto reflex action at seeing the banner would have been an exaggerated head shake, complete with eye roll
(thanks, ByteMe), especially due to the current state/achievements of our education system here in Georgia. This is clearly at least a violation of maybe a “right” thing in the wrong place. I would have been more impressed with a quote from a great historical document, other piece of literature or an infamous person. Since football is considered a battle on the grid iron, a good Patton or Churchill quote would have been more apt and EDUCATIONAL. However, for this to get a greater reaction out of me it would have had to take place during normal school hours at a mandatory attendance assembly or similar, but it wasn’t. However, for those that feel much stronger than I, it does bring up the need for more school choices. But that’s for another time.
So Jace, my friend, here’s looking forward to your next rant. Hopefully the guns will be pointed out next time. Stay safe my brother… your future beers are… and are being kept chilled awaiting your return.
Daniel,
Thanks for finally responding. Now that I’ve had a night to sleep on it, I’m not sure why I explicitly called out the party. Even though my sentiments do apply to party members I’ve interacted with before. It was geared more toward all libertarians, really. Small “l”. Big “L”, and just plain ole “L-leaning” independents. It seems like we do like to make mountains out of mole hills, particularly when religion is wrong.
Not that there is anything wrong with erring on the side of liberty, it’s just that sometimes, there really is nothing to worry about.
We do tend to make mountains out of molehills. But obviously my perspective is a little different than yours, Jace. What I see recently is making monumental mountains out of “JESUS GAWD CAN YOU BELIEVE WE SPEND MONEY ON THAT!” molehills and then when it gets to issues of personal liberty (choice, not having our kids beat over the head with religion), we suddenly get squishy.
It’d be nice sometime to see the same furor over some appropriation bill applied to the social issues that libertarians used to care about.
I’m with Danny… completely on the fence here. While I don’t necessarily mind them doing this on their own, I don’t think it should be something a coach should be able to instruct them to do, as I’ve heard rumors of. There’s a lot bigger fish to fry than bible verses at a football game. It’d be one thing if they took time out for a prayer at the beginning of the football game over the loud speaker. But writing a bible verse on something the players are just going to tear up anyways? (Does anyone else see the irony in football players tearing up bible verses? I’m just sayin’….)
I do think that if they’re going to choose religious sayings for their banners, perhaps they should rotate through various religions. Make ‘em do some research on what the other religions believe, since I would imagine a majority of them believe what they’re told to believe by their parents. How many of them do you think have actually taken the time to research alternative religions? How do they know theirs is the only correct religion out there? Because the preacher told them so?
I laugh at these situations more than anything and feel sorry for their blind faith.
David,
I don’t know about the particular kids in question, but I know that when I personally was at that age was when I began to question exactly what I believed and why. EVENTUALLY, that questioning proved to be the tempering fire to the steel of my beliefs – but I was also changed by it in pretty dramatic ways. (For example, back as all this was beginning, honestly I probably would have been on the opposite side of this debate. I was SOLIDLY neo-con legalist theocrat back then. It was only when I began to question things and think for myself that I learned that the basics of all that I believed were spot on, but that the modern Church had so twisted things that it had truly become the very Pharisees that Jesus spent so much time speaking against and trying to show them the error of their ways.)
So who knows what is going on in those girls’ minds? God does, but I aint Him.
As a “Paulista” who doesn’t necessarily agree with everything Dr. Paul believes, with schools I think he’s right on the money. He’s one of the strongest proponents of “separation” in many cases. In the case of schools, he’s got a clearly defined line in the sand with regard to at least protect private schools and home schooling from government interference. And f.y.i. he attended public schools. But some of this controversy may be pre-manufactured sideshow as the government bureaucrats start to get their tentacles into private schools and home schools.
Comments on this entry are closed.