If the school administration organizes the prayer as a part of the curriculum, then it’s unconstitutional. It’s perfectly within a citizen’s rights, however, to have unofficial organized prayer meetings at a school. Students may gather to pray if that is what they wish to do during their breaks or before school.
Many people feel that it is important to pray at various times of the day, whenever they feel the need to do so. They sometimes like to have prayer groups that meet outside church. There is nothing wrong with that (though it isn’t my personal preference). It does not violate the separation of church and state, as long as goverment officials aren’t requiring it. Which, evidently, they are not doing in this case.
If you saw the video, you saw that he compared our faith to belief in Santa Claus, and then ridiculed building a society on it. He also called the school students “a gang, a religious gang”. If it isn’t mistrust, it is at the very least a profound disrespect. And his blog is full of statements like “Though I worried about being sent away for five years on bogus charges, my dread was the Christian mob.” I’d call that mistrust.
Regarding his blog, he also wrote this:
What type of place is this? Well this is not the place for a
little debate in a coffee shop with the sweet salt air rolling
up from San Francisco bay. This is a place where the children
write on their schoolbooks the south will rise again. This is
a place where they say that black people caused slavery! Where
they burn rock CD’s. Mormons are the tools of Satan. That my
daughter is gay cause only homosexuals vote for Kerry and
Christians vote for Bush. Atheists worship Satan!
Where religious fanaticism is fused with political rhetoric
and political leaders pander to this madness.
This place has a sickness, a malignant disease and it is
spreading.Would you take your daughter there? I wouldn’t.
Regarding his business, he should have cared more for his family than he did for his business. He could have centralized his business some other way.
It seems to me that allowing “prayer circles” at school sporting events is pretty much the same thing as school officials requiring prayer. Peer pressure and fear of being ostracized are incredibly powerful forces in children.
Perhaps his impressions of the Christians of that town came after he bought his 80 acres in the country. Maybe it was the one place he could afford. I wouldn’t have moved there, but I wouldn’t move anywhere in the U.S. unless it was for gobs of money.
Calling people “a gang, a religious gang” after their alleged behavior is not mistrust or disrespect. In fact, my version would have been much more vehement, and it still would not have been disrespectful of the majority of Christianity.
Since you watched the video, I would suggest watching it again. As I just did. His “Santa Claus is coming to town” seemed like nothing more than an IPU or FSM throw-away line in response to the interviewer’s insistence that he couldn’t prove there isn’t a god.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Free Exercise. Guess what that means when it comes to the government employees of a school telling a student he’s not allowed to pray. If those kids, during a non-disruptive time, wish to pray, you MUST let them pray. You can’t tell people that they’re only allowed to exercise their religion in church or at home. The constitution doesn’t allow for “free exercise thereof, as long as you’re in church”.
But children are left out of school events all the time. Not everyone makes the football team, not everyone gets to be in the play. Why would it matter that not everyone “gets” to pray? Does peer pressure of not making the team ostracize kids?
If some kids wanna pray and others dont I, like some others here, feel that is their business as long as the school administration is not involved.
What form of English is this that you speak, where “allowing” equals “requiring”?
There is no logical connection whatsoever.
And as for peer pressure/fear of ostracism (of which I suffered), and as much as I wish it weren’t so, one does not have the right to be popular or liked.
Was this written after he was harassed? It’s sounds like he just dislikes people who make his life hell and he is just venting his frustration.
I think it’s reasonable to expect that you can move to a region in which your ethnicity/race/religion or lack there of is in the minority and still be safe and able take advantage of the local public services. Why shouldn’t we have this expectation?
I agree that they are not equivelant, however I don’t think this is a black and white sort of issue. Between ‘allowed’ and ‘required’ there are all sorts of shades of grey, including, but not limited to ‘encouraged,’ ‘rewarded,’ ‘punished,’ ‘frowned-upon,’ etc etc etc.
When dealing with children, much more attention needs to be paid to these shades of grey than when dealing with adults in the ‘real world’.
Let us review what you’re saying here. If you have competitive tryouts for the football team, the best players get chosen for the team. (In a small town, you might have “everyone who goes out for a sport is on the team, but the best players start” instead.) The most skilled actors and actresses among the kids are the ones who get roles in the play.
And yes, the kids who are not skilled at sports or drama do feel ostracized, unless the school also has an activity at which they can excel, or in which they are interested and can participate without competition.
And if the students wants to start up a Christian prayer club, that would be their prerogative under the free exercise clause.
The one thing they are forbidden in any of the above is to harass or ridicule another student for being unable or unwilling to participate.
Now, having gotten that far, it is possible to do things to build team spirit. There are a wide number of secular activities that are specifically designed to do just that. (Remembering the young lady who married my “son” learning to overcome distrust by an exercise in a retreat where she was required to fall backwards without attempting to catch herself, her partner in the exercise being required to catch her and keep her from falling to the ground – following which they traded places. This is an extremely effective team-building exercise.)
Now, the question is, what about a sports team requires that the students pray together? If they are all devout Christians, it can be a team-building exercise, if they choose unanimously to do it together voluntarily. But if even one of them is not, it then becomes divisive, and a violation of free exercise rights. (Free exercise includes the right to refrain from entering into a devotion that violates one’s own belief system, including the “zero option” of atheism. I am certain people can easily come up with examples of prayers that would offend the Christian members participating in this thread, me included, to be expected to join in them.)
I’d thought of making a bad joke about football teams and prayers = the Hail Mary pass. But take that as a real example: suppose a team in a heavily Catholic city environment this year includes twelve Catholics, a Methodist, and two Baptists. And it has been the (previously solidly Catholic) team’s custom to join in the Hail Mary aloud while a Hail Mary pass is headed downfield to the receiver. Would it be appropriate to expect the Methodist and Baptists to join in that prayer?
The way to think about this is substitute some other religion’s prayer into the scenario.
Suppose Scientologists were in charge. Or Hindu or Hopi or Wiccan. A heavt dose of any of those gets old fast, I can tell you.
I am hard pressed to think of many times at school when vocalized prayer would be non-disruptive. We always kept a tight schedule. We did, by law, allow for one moment of silence every day. That usually consisted of my shushing students.
Someone suggested that a teacher look in on prayer groups to be certain that no one is being harrassed. If a teacher has to be present, then the group becomes school-sponsored even though the teacher is not making the choices about the prayers.
No it isn’t, obviously. Students need to be supervised at lunch - do you suppose it should be illegal for them to say grace before the meal?
In the same sense, children are being compelled to play football because there is a football team. Or forcing children to turn gay by having a GLBT group.
You are suffering from the liberal syndrome of believing that “whatever is not forbidden is mandatory”.
Fortunately, there’s no constitutional requirement for the kind of respect you’re demanding, nor does the family give up any actual constitutional protections by choosing to live in a particular part of the United States.
Kindly un-nail yourself from the cross. You can borrow my claw hammer if needed.
If there is a basketball team, requiring the members to play basketball is not unreasonable. And no one is forced to joint the basketball team if they don’t want to.
If there was a prayer group, requiring the members to pray is not unreasonable. And no one is forced to join a prayer group if they don’t want to.
If there is a basketball team, requiring the members to pray is unreasonable. You shouldn’t force someone to pray in order to be on the team - the point of the team is to play the sport, not pray. Kicking them off the team for refusing to pray is wrong. In this case, the school officials decided to make prayer mandatory.
You were doing fine until you misstated the facts. No one was kicked off the basketball team for refusing to pray, no one is forced to pray to be on the team, and no school officials made prayer mandatory. Apart from that - well, if things had been different, then they wouldn’t be the same.
I’m curious: do we have any recorded views from the father from the period prior to the second incident with his daughter being ejected from the team? Do we have any evidence that he explicitly mistrusted his neighbors or found them threatening prior to his being falsely charged with a crime while defending himself?
Clearly he now has an extremely negative view of the town, its officials, and police. I would suspect that prior to these incidents, he probably held Christianity in less than admiration. However, looking at statements that he has made following months of deliberate harrassment by the police force and any number of actions from individuals within the town of Hardesty that were performed “in the name of” being Christian, does not actually demonstrate that he came into town with a chip on his shoulder looking for a fight. He lived there for three years with no incidents of hostility that I have seen reported. Retroactively using comments made after he has been attacked is hardly the appropriate criteria to judge his mindset from before the attacks.
