The ACLU is suing congress for passing a bill that establishes a national religion. Wait, that’s not right. Let me try again. The ACLU is suing Harrison County education officials for passing a bill that establishes a national religion. Silly me, that isn’t right either. Let me try one more time. The ACLU is suing Harrison County education officials for hanging a picture of a man’s interpretation of what Jesus looks like in Bridgeport High School.
“I frankly cannot understand why this school insists that it is doing nothing wrong,” said Barry Lynn, executive director of American United. “This is pretty clear constitutional law. Public schools cannot promote specific religious ideas.”
It is? I never knew. Let’s trot over to the first amendment of the U.S. constitution and see what it says about high schools and pictures:
“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.”
Liberals cannot be dumb enough to mistake a high school for Congress or a picture for a law, so maybe Lynn was referring to the West Virginia constitution:
“3-15. Religious freedom guaranteed.
“No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever; nor shall any man be enforced, restrained, molested or burdened, in his body or goods, or otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument, to maintain their opinions in matters of religion; and the same shall, in nowise, affect, diminish or enlarge their civil capacities; and the Legislature shall not prescribe any religious test whatever, or confer any peculiar privileges or advantages on any sect or denomination, or pass any law requiring or authorizing any religious society, or the people of any district within this state, to levy on themselves, or others, any tax for the erection or repair of any house for public worship, or for the support of any church or ministry, but it shall be left free for every person to select his religious instructor, and to make for his support, such private contracts as he shall please.
“3-15a. Voluntary contemplation, meditation or prayer in schools.
“Public schools shall provide a designated brief time at the beginning of each school day for any student desiring to exercise their right to personal and private contemplation, meditation or prayer. No student of a public school may be denied the right to personal and private contemplation, meditation or prayer nor shall any student be required or encouraged to engage in any given contemplation, meditation or prayer as a part of the school curriculum.”
Neither the U.S. constitution nor the West Virginia constitution say a high school cannot hang a picture of Jesus on the walls, but that’s the ACLU’s story and they are sticking to it.
“School officials are flouting the First Amendment principle of church-state separation and in the process providing students a shoddy civics lesson,” said Richard Katsee, assistant legal director of the Americans United group.
Wow. I’m learning new things everyday. According to the liberals, our country is not governed by laws but by principles. The truth is the ACLU and Americans United cannot make a case in the black-and-white text of our constitutions, so they must rely on vague penumbra. Making the assertion that principles govern over words allows anyone to do anything. No change of law is required; all you must do is change the definition.
I refuse to concur with one person’s erroneous interpretation. If society would rather have no references to God in any schools, then let us write legislation to that effect. Until then, leave the picture alone.
But I know exactly what will happen. The ACLU and friends will find a judge who does not understand the idea that if it is not in the law books it is not law and he will order the school board to remove the picture. They will do so and that will be that.
I worry less about the picture and more about the rule of law. When liberals insist we follow their version of the rules and liberal judges agree, another crack is put into our foundation. The majority takes a backseat as a vocal, activist minority circumvents the legislative process and assumes the role of everything-police.
If we allow the minority to wage their crusade in the name of protecting our “civil liberties,” we will soon find out that no liberties remain.
- Add your comments (14 so far)
© Copyright 1999-2007 William Stewart. All rights reserved.
Comments
You’re all wet on this one Will. And you are in the dark about the background. Please don’t ally your desire to support Christianity with the arrogance of a government manager who insists he has the right to choose a religious object for veneration in a public school because he is the principal and ‘there is nothing anyone is going to do about it’. Exact same details as precedent in Washegesic v. Bloomingdale Public Schools (1994). Every local lawyer I discussed this with, conservative and liberal, say this is illegal. The legal counsel for the Harrison County Board of Education told the board that they had no leg to stand on. It is a lack of local leadership and political courage to teach people what the First Amendment means. When a school girl who is Jewish is being mocked because her father points out to the Board the legal precedents that make it illegal then it is time for all conservatives and Christians to jump off the fence and defend the minority. Much more in my archives, as well. regards, Gundo.
You evidentally have never read John Stuart Mill’s ESSAY ON LIBERTY. You should, and you then might have a less narrow view of freedom as did our Founding Fathers.
Then you ought to read the Federalist Papers.
Then read Goldwater’s “Conscience of a Conservative.” I was priviledged to have met Senator Goldwater, spent five wonderful hours in private conversation with him, and while I did not agree with a few of his positions, he was many many cuts above the current leaders of the GOP.
The Republican Party in Texas, where GW Bush, Karl Rove and the other Christian Right fanatics are from, has announced that in their platform they intend to establish a “Declaration that this Country is Christian Country”
How do you spell Christallnacht in Texan…or your version of Werst Virginian.
Take me off your e-mail list. Your extremism, and that of the Bush/Armey/Cheney/Rove and their pals is why I, and many others, are so fed up with the theft of the original GOP that was made so great by Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower and Goldwater…even Nixon.
I changed my lifelong registration to Independent. I am fussy about who I associate with.
The ACLU has gone to bat and protected even right wing American NAZI’s rights…because they do understand* how incrementally these private rights, that are so carefully defined in principle in the Constitution, knowing also that they can and are being eroded by the current GOP leaders.
The Supreme Court today admonished the BUSH administration for it’s abandonment of basic protections and rights under our laws as it pertains to the so called “Combatants” in that we are holding in Cuba without due process or basic right to counsel, charges, evidenciary findings and simple justice.
You are so out of touch with reality, an dit shows. Look at the polls Mr. Stewart…
*(Unlike the specifics your shallow approach is seeking)
Allan: I appreciate your comment, but you did not answer the question posed in the article. Where in the constitution does it say a high school cannot hang a picture of a religious figure?
I’m not governed by a dead utilitarian’s book or the federalist papers or Goldwater’s writings. I am governed by the constitution of the country and our state.
I want facts without ad hominem attacks. Can you liberals ever debate without comparing your opponents to Nazis?
Actually they usually compare their opponents to “jackbooted Nazis”.
William, that’s not how our Constitution is written, so your question is completely ridiculous. You need to understand the very simple distinction between laws and facts. Constitutional amendments lay out general rules that courts then have to apply to a particular set of facts.
The Constitution doesn’t say anything about whether the police can search through your garbage or use a dog to sniff your car for drugs or whether a school can prohibit students from wearing offensive t-shirts or start a bible reading club on school grounds or et cetera, et cetera. Those are particular sets of facts to which the court has to apply the law.
The Constitution doesn’t say that the police can’t use thermal imaging devices to determine whether people are growing marijuana in their attics, but when the court applied the law (the 4th amendment) to that particular set of facts, they held that that is unconstitutional. (And if you think that was some extreme liberal act of judicial activism, let me point out that the opinion was written by that darling of the right, Scalia.)
The law says the government “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” and the court has to determine how that applies to a public school hanging a painting of a religious figure. Now, you may not think that the 1st amendment prohibits a public school from hanging up a picture of Jesus, but at least use arguments that make sense. Arguing that because the Constitution doesn’t explicitly prohibit that exact set of facts then it must not be unconstitutional just reveals your ignorance. (By the way, yes, the 1st amendment says that “Congress shall make no law…” but the 1st amendment applies to the states too, not just the federal government, through the 14th amendment.)
Gundovald: While I am a Christian, I did not write the article to “support Christianity.” Having a picture of what someone thinks Jesus looks like does not help me as a Christian. My point is the 1st amendment says “Congress shall make no law…”
My point was legal precedence from judges gone wild has completely subverted the true meaning of the 1st amendment which is, “Congress shall make no law…”
Raging Red: My point was not that the constitution must explicitly list every single scenario in order to be applicable; that’s impossible. As I said, judges have taken two unmistakable words, “Congress” and “law”, and twisted it to apply to a myriad things.
Yes, the constitution applies to everyone, but there is only one Congress and the Bridgeport High School ain’t it.
Notice I never said whether I thought it was right or wrong. If you believe it is wrong, petition your legislator to write a bill.
William, it’s firmly established by various cases that I’m not going to take the time to find links for that the 1st amendment applies to public schools, which are government entities. Once again, saying “Bridgeport High School isn’t Congress” is off the mark, to say the least. Similarly, “make a law” is interpreted to apply to a wide array of government actions, not just a legislature actually passing a statute.
Will,
I respect your opinion and appreciate your stirring dialogue, but have to disagree with Harrison County Schools’ decision to uphold the display of Jesus’ likeness at Bridgeport High School. Although I am a Christian myself, I still recognize the significant importance of separating church and state.
Even the Charleston Daily Mail, a traditionally conservative newspaper, acknowledged today that the school system’s judgment on this matter was not prudent.
Too many Christians are compelled to force their beliefs on others. Perhaps they feel like less of a disciple if they fail to do so. This is religious arrogance and civil narrow-mindedness. The United States has been defined by its tolerance of differing religious viewpoints.
The interpretation of constitutional language is more important than observing the words alone. A most recent example of such is U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson’s decision ordering Alabama’s Supreme Court to remove the Ten Commandments from its rotunda. I don’t consider that a liberal decision, I consider it an American decision, upholding freedom, and recognizing diversity.
Unfortunately, a majority of the Harrison County school board feel they must subtly proselytize through the image of their savior, and they don’t understand why people would question such. This situation reinforces an image of West Virginia as an intolerant state. You’re correct Will, a judge will probably strike down the school system’s decision. It should never have come to that point.
JBK
I live in Bridgeport and graduated from BHS(the picture was there when I was in school).I am a Conservative Christian and disagree with the ACLU 99.9% of the time. However this time they are right. What angers me is that Harrison Co Board has been told by their attorneys they should remove it. So what is going to happen is they will take this case to court & lose, then the HC Board will have to pay the legal fees of the ACLU, which means the taxpayers of HC will be helping the ACLU & taking money away from important things in HC.
Another thing that really angers me is the kids of the parents that are filing the suit are being made fun of and booed at athletic events. This is from probably Conservative Christian and that makes us all look bad.
Plus the more battles the ACLU wins the stronger they get.
GOD BLESS
Will, the other point that rubs my conservative bones the wrong way is that I view the Board of Education and the public school system as part of the government. Somehow, we don’t traditionally think of it in that fashion. We almost think it is extra-government or meta-government because it is in our neighborhoods and it employs our neighbors, friends, spouses etc. We just think of it as part of the community. The problem here, to my mind, is it really is a government entity. And I don’t want that entity shoving a religious object of veneration down my throat because they think it will be good for me. Interestingly, the board of Ed in Harrison County admits that they do not own the portrait; the principal says he doesn’t own it; so, Who’s in charge and why will we have to reimburse the lawyer fees to the ACLU to have this removed? The fact that the portrait is still displayed in a public school is NOT a miracle. It is there because of inept and cowardly management within the central office and among the members of the Board. Granted, some of them are just ignorant of the Constitution. Pity, they intend to stay that way. Even to the extent that they will not learn enough to understand the opposing argument. They chose not to understand what that with which they disagree. I know people who disagree with me on this, but they know the argument which they disagree with. And once they do, and I understand their argument the steam is released and we can have a civil discussion.
Also, I don’t need to to ask my legislator to write a bill. The founding fathers already took care of this one for me.
I know you don’t want to accept this, but judicial precedent is law.
We need to ask ourselves: “What is the purpose of this picture?”
If it is a matter of Principal Bennett’s right to display a personal picture of his chosing, should the picture hang IN his office and not in the hallway?
If we fight to keep faith in the school system, will the school board find themselves in a situation where they MUST accept pictures of OTHER religious figures?
Does the first amendment mean freedom FROM religion?
Is a democracry a tyranny of ONE? (or two)
Does absence of religion in the public school system really translate as neutrality toward religion? (or hostility toward religion?)
Does a popular vote of BHS families figure into this issue at all?
Again, back to the begining: what is the purpose behind keeping the picture at BHS?
Is all this debate helping or hurting the Christian community? faith communities in general?
THE FIRST IMMIGRANTS TO THIS GREAT COUNTRY CAME HERE TO HAVE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND NOT HAVE TO WORSHIP AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGLISH GOV. IE.,CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
ALL BELIEVED IN THE SAME GOD BUT CHOSE TO WORSHIP HIM IN DIFFERENT WAYS, METHODIST,BAPTIST,PRESBYTERIAN,ETC. IN ENGLAND THEY COULD NOT DO THIS. IT WAS THE CHURCH OF ENGLANDS WAY OR NOT AT ALL.
THE FIRST AMEND. CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF;
SOMEBODY PLEASE SHOW ME WHERE IT SAY THERE WILL BE A SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
THIS IS THE LAW OF THIS COUNTRY NOT THAT OF LAWYERS, JUDGES OR ACLU.
THIS IS OUR GOD GIVEN RIGHT AND NO MAN CAN CHANGE IT
IF THEY WANT THIS PICTURE DOWN LET THE LAWYERS, JUDGES AND ACLU COME IN PERSON.
If I could. I would like to interject one comment to the person(s) who claimed that public schools are government schools. This point is true. They are government sponsored schools and the constitutional statements do apply.
However, the fact that someone placed a picture of what Jesus looked like to them does not violate the Ammendment. NOW.. if Congress passes a law that says every public school in every state (or any public school in any state) must place a picture of Jesus Christ in a prominent (or any) place in the school under penalty of fine - THAT! would be a violation.
The 1st Am. does not prohibit individual government agencies from doing something voluntarily. IT DOES prohibit the United States or State governments from explicitly defining law that compells government agencies to adopt something supporting a particular religion.