Atheist student allegedly gets death threats, harassed, and disowned for asking school to follow law

After May 21st it won't matter anyway.

Assholes.

What gets me is that they're doing evil, not fighting it - while congratulating themselves on being such good people.

I am a religious person now, I was a religious Christian in high school, and *I* found prayer in public school offensive. It's a government institution, and there's also no single formula for any single religion so trying to use public schools for a soap box is just individuals confusing their ego for their principles.

The thing is, if the blog is accurate, the kid threatened to call the ACLU, he automatically has raised the bar to inflame and instigate a battle. And apparently with intent on doing so.

So here's the problem, somebody is going to win, and somebody is going to lose.

Nobodies going to be happy.

The threats to this kid are ridiculous, and bullshit..

But,,, I have to ask thus question which usual starts the mechanism for getting a thread like this closed.

Wait a second....

I got an idea, let me phrase it differently than I originally had in mind.

Me, I,, Number one, oh me oh my, (to borrow from Toby Keith)

I really am agnostic, TRUTHFULLY!!!

I don't like religion, don't believe in it, would be really happy if it didn't exist.

However, I understand that there are those who desire the concept and content with the organizations that promote and sponsor different beliefs..

So, I attend some religious sponsored events because my friends and family have ceremonies planned there.

I understand this young man's angst, and I understand if he doesn't participate in the program part of the prayer, but I don't get why he wants everyone to follow his path.

I've never understood why an atheist cares whether someone else prays around them or not.

To me, if I don't believe in a God, then so what. Fuck it,,, waste your time any way you like.

Now, I do understand that some of these prayers may be against the law in some way or another. Would not the better approach if this is a serious issue for you to address in a different time frame other than right before graduation.


Because now, you're picking a fight with every other kid who does believe in God or religion or whatever. So, now you've started a fight that my guess is you had planned all along.


Had you addressed your concerns months prior to this and your concerns ignored, I would have been more sympathetic to your cause..


but again it seems like you're picking a fight because you can....

Just my opinion peops.....

Here's how the first article ends:

Mitzi Quinn has been on the staff at BHS for almost 25 years, much of that time as a senior advisor. In the past, Quinn said there have been students who were atheist, agnostic and other non-Christian religions who “had no problems” with the prayer....

“And what’s even more sad is this is a student who really hasn’t contributed anything to graduation or to their classmates,” Quinn said.

Click to expand...

As if that makes it "even worse" that the objector is "spoiling all the fun for the rest of us."

The second article is much worse. Forwarding to the local freethought mailing list...

Don Allen said:

...
I understand this young man's angst, and I understand if he doesn't participate in the program part of the prayer, but I don't get why he wants everyone to follow his path.

Click to expand...

NO he is NOT wanting everyone to follow his path.

Specifically, he pointed out that it was illegal for the school admin to lead prayer and other religious activities at the graduation ceremony, and threatened to call the ACLU if they proceeded to do so.

what am i missing Ben.?

mmallico said:

There are many religious traditions in school. It's over in a few minutes, you can't sit through them? You talk about your rights, but what about the rights of the others, the majority who seem to have no problem with it. You don't have to be religious to share in an intimate ceremony.

A few years ago in my old town, there used to be this really dangerous highway. And along this highway, hundreds of crosses were erected. For years, no one complained but then one asshole started riling up and the crosses were removed. Grow up! You will go through many things you will not like in your lifetime, but someone else may. Is it really hurting you that much? What happened to accepting diversity in America? No one is being harmed in all of this.

Click to expand...

Wow. Things is, the Supreme Court of the US disagrees with you, and has for a number of years now.

The point, which you are missing entirely, is that no individual should be coerced into praying to a god he doesn't believe in. People can pray all they like but they can do it on their own time, in their own (i.e. not public) places. You know, like a church or something.

Tell me this, is anyone being harmed by there NOT being prayer at graduation? Is God gonna get mad and make all the diplomas disappear or something?

The thing about us atheists is, we're happy for you to pray to your heart's content but we sure as heck don't like you shoving your religion down our throats.

And the US Supreme Court happens to agree with us.

And if that makes us "assholes," then I be one.

Monkey said:

It is against the law for the school to sponsor prayers and other religious services at its graduation. And for damn good reason, which I will pedantically spell out for you if need be.

Do you really suppose there was ANY way Damon could have brought this up to the school board that they would have been okay with?

And do you really think the onus was on him to either keep silent or to make damn sure not to offend anyone with his phrasing of the problem?

Click to expand...

You seem angry, exactly what the other people are feeling who want the religion involved. So, it's exactly what I said, picking a fight because you can, i'm cool with it, but the kid has to understand people will be pissed at him... I don't think you can avoid that, law or not...

If "the other people" want religion involved they can pony up cash and send their little wartlings to a private religious school. If they don't have the cash, then their wonderful, generous churches should provide the education for them for free and they can all sing kumbaya and pray aloud all day long if they please. As long as it's not in a public school, led by the public school's administration or teachers.

mmallico said:

There are many religious traditions in school. It's over in a few minutes, you can't sit through them?

Click to expand...

No. A public school should not be pushing religiousity. Those who "want" it can pray privately, silently, go to church every day of the week before and after school, or attend a religious school.

mmallico said:

You talk about your rights, but what about the rights of the others, the majority who seem to have no problem with it.

Click to expand...

Whether or not they represent a majority is entirely beside the point. They have every "right" to pray privately. They have no right to shove a religion down people's throats at a public school function.

They need to follow the law, not bash the kid who points out that they are breaking it.

Monkey said:

I am angry.

Angry that standing up for his legal rights means that this kid is scared to go to his own graduation. Angry that people say, "Well, he should have just ignored the violation of his rights, because doing anything else is picking a fight." Angry that he is receiving threats, and that his mother is disowning him. That he's having to move out of state.

Are you really suggesting that my anger that this child is getting death threats and disowned for standing up for his legal rights is the same as people getting angry that they aren't allowed to have the school itself officially sponsor Christian prayer at the graduation?

Click to expand...

I support monkey right here in the thread.

This story is offensive to the max. People who would harass and, worse, threaten, a kid because they don't like the law of the land are thugs.

All I can say to them is, it's the law. Suck it up, stop in at the church for your graduation prayer moment, and obey the law. Is that too much of an imposition? Are you feeling oppressed by being reminded that other people aren't interested in being forced to sit through your rituals? Tough. Welcome to America.

Have people seriously forgotten that prayer in the schools is no more? Seriously? There are no wishy-washy nebulous guidelines in the SCOTUS decision about prayer in the schools. Lee vs. Weisman, in the SCOTUS 5-4 decision of 1992, deals with prayer at graduation ceremonies. The question before the Court was: Does the inclusion of clergy who offer prayers at official public school ceremonies violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?

In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that government involvement in this case creates "a state-sponsored and state-directed religious exercise in a public school." Such conduct conflicts with settled rules proscribing prayer for students. The school's rule creates subtle and indirect coercion (students must stand respectfully and silently), forcing students to act in ways which establish a state religion. The cornerstone principle of the Establishment Clause is that government may not compose official prayers to recite as part of a religious program carried on by government.
Decisions

Click to expand...

http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1991/1991_90_1014

And before that, there was:

Engel v. Vitale, 82 S. Ct. 1261 (1962)
Any kind of prayer, composed by public school districts, even nondenominational prayer, is unconstitutional government sponsorship of religion.

and

Wallace v. Jaffree, 105 S. Ct. 2479 (1985)
State's moment of silence at public school statute is unconstitutional where legislative record reveals that motivation for statute was the encouragement of prayer. Court majority silent on whether "pure" moment of silence scheme, with no bias in favor of prayer or any other mental process, would be constitutional.

This is a no-brainer. An absolute no-brainer. The student is wholly in the right as per his constitutional rights and the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States.

I can't believe how many people are telling this particular Rosa Parks to go to the back of the bus and shut up.

But then again, I guess atheists deserve to be treated like second-class citizens when they expect their government's agencies to stick to the rules.

Kind of an interesting history behind prayer in Louisiana public schools. It wouldn't have been the first court case about this statute in La.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&case=/data2/circs/5th/0030874cv0.html

As originally enacted in 1976, La. R. S. � 17:2115 required local school boards and parishes to permit school authorities to allow students and teachers to observe a "brief time in silent meditation" at the beginning of each school day. La. Rev. Stat. � 17:2115 (West 1976). In 1992 the provision, which had been renumbered as La. R. S. � 17:2115(A), was amended to allow observance of a "brief time in silent prayer or meditation". La. Rev. Stat. � 17:2115(A) (West 1992) (emphasis added). In 1999 the Louisiana legislature passed, and Foster signed into law, an amendment deleting the word "silent" from the statute, so that it now reads:
Each parish and city school board in the state shall permit the proper school authorities of each school within its jurisdiction to allow an opportunity, at the start of each school day, for those students and teachers desiring to do so to observe a brief time in prayer or meditation.


--cut--

The plain language and nature of the 1999 amendment as well as the legislators' contemporaneous statements demonstrate that the sole purpose of the amendment was to return verbal prayer to the public schools. This purpose runs afoul of the Establishment Clause, see Wallace, 472 U.S. at 40, 105 S. Ct. at 2481 and the Louisiana statute at issue here is therefore unconstitutional.
CONCLUSION Because La. R. S. � 17:2115(A) was not adopted with a secular purpose, it violates the Establishment Clause and is unconstitutional. We therefore AFFIRM.

Click to expand...

If it's against the law, it's against the law. This kid has guts. That the superintendent immediately dropped the public prayer from this ceremony tells me he knew they were violating the law and wouldn't last in court. Probably his head should roll for allowing this to happen in previous years.

Btw this is a compelling story, with the family drama and the angry community and the brother coming in to help... could make for a good book.

Monkey said:

Do you really suppose there was ANY way Damon could have brought this up to the school board that they would have been okay with?

Click to expand...

Actually, yes. From the article you linked to, it would seem the school has been having a prayer at graduation for quite a a while.

Damon--or his brother--could have contacted the ACLU or some other org long ago and started the ball rolling, so to speak. No need to even let anyone else know. I'm sure the ACLU would have acted on an anonymous tip that had been confirmed.

Doesn't mean threats, harassment, and the like are fair. They're not. But I can't see how anyone would be surprised by the reaction. E-mailing a threat to the Superintendent days before the ceremony is hardly diplomatic.

That is true. I don't deny that the kid is lacking a few gold stars in the 'how to approach the powers that be' department, but the fact remains--if the school has been praying in an ongoing fashion, especially since the '92 Lee v. Weisman decision, then they've been in serious violation of the law and the kid has a case. A legitimate, realistic case.

I don't see much reason to be diplomatic. Obviously, I'm a shitstirrer at heart, but I'd have done the same thing. The more media coverage you can get, the more likely the right thing will happen.

mscelina said:

That is true. I don't deny that the kid is lacking a few gold stars in the 'how to approach the powers that be' department, but the fact remains--if the school has been praying in an ongoing fashion, especially since the '92 Lee v. Weisman decision, then they've been in serious violation of the law and the kid has a case. A legitimate, realistic case.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. Which is why it would have taken very little to force a change, as the story confirms. But that very little could have come from any lawyer with ACLU on his/her stationary or business card.