Flying Oskar: Standing Up For Religious Tolerance At Dorman High School
loading...
Imagine for a moment that you’re 18-years-old again. You’ve reached that much ballyhooed milestone in life, the moment that American society uses as its substitute for the Quinceanera, the Bar and Bat Mitzvah, and the Seijin-Shiki to mark the transition from the trivialities of childhood to the responsibilities of adulthood. It’s high school graduation.
You’ve donned your cap and gown, and marched your way into the already-filled auditorium. Once you find your chair and sit down for the last time as a high-school student, you spot your parents sitting up in the stands enthusiastically snapping pictures, grins on their faces so large you imagine you could count their teeth. As the ceremony begins, a student steps up to the podium. He’s the student-body chaplain, and he’s there to give an invocation.
He begins to speak, calling to God as his beliefs say that he should. “Allaahu Akbar†he repeats four times. “Ashhadu Allah ilaaha illa-Lah†he repeats twice. “Ash Hadu anna Muhamadar rasuulullahâ€, again repeated twice. What you’re hearing is the Muslim call to prayer. Looking around, none of the other students seem concerned, but you can’t help but feel left out. Your family is not Muslim, and though this day is supposed to celebrate the accomplishments of all the students, now your differences have only been highlighted. Rather than feeling a part of something, now you feel more isolated from your classmates than ever.
Furious that the school which supposedly embraces all of its students equally would allow something so obviously exclusive to occur, you and a few of your fellow graduates and like-minded friends form a group to fight for more inclusion and religious tolerance in your high-school. Though the overwhelming majority of the community supports leaving things as they are, you are committed to the idea that no student should ever have to feel as isolated at their own graduation as you did at yours.
The scenario I just laid out is, of course, not a true story. Still, it’s not entire untrue either. It’s based on a story I’ve been following the past couple of weeks in the Spartanburg Herald-Journal. The only difference between my story and the one the SH-J has been covering is that instead of a Muslim call to prayer, it was a Christian prayer delivered by the elected student body chaplain at Dorman High School’s graduation last year that sparked the creation of a group called The Movement for the Respect of Minority Religions, Lifestyles and Individuals. This past week the group held a rally protesting a recent decision by District 6 not to change its policy regarding student-led prayer at graduation ceremonies.
The main reason I used the Muslim call to prayer in my example instead of the Christian prayer that was actually delivered is simple: it’s nearly impossible to understand a minority point of view unless you are of that minority.
Many Christians, even those who consider themselves respectful of other religions and traditions, are likely to scoff at the idea that an overtly Christian prayer delivered at a high school graduation is in any way discriminatory or disrespectful. Call it a blind-spot of the majority I suppose. There’s no malice behind it for most people. It’s just not going to be on the radar. That’s also not to say that their aren’t some Christians who do see the problems with having an explicitly Christian prayer at a public school function, but either way it’s always a good idea to try to imagine things from the other side of the fence now and then.
Still, the sad thing about all this to me is that we shouldn’t have to imagine anything. This sort of thing isn’t supposed to happen here.
The majority of the people who live in the United States are Christians. There’s no disputing that fact. In that one respect our country isn’t much different from the Muslim-majority Jordan, the Hindu-majority India, or the Buddhist-majority Sri Lanka. Where we are different from those countries though, is that we have an expressly non-religious government codified in our Constitution.
Peruse that document sometime and you’ll noticed that among its more striking features is that it doesn’t mention the word God at all, not even once. The words Creator, Jesus, Lord, and all other terms used to denote the divine are also noticeably absent. Far from being a careless omission, those words were intentionally left out. Our Constitution’s only comment on religion in fact is to restrict it from the public arena.
In Article VI, section 3 we find this little ditty: “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United Statesâ€. Then of course the first line of our First Amendment famously reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereofâ€. Those two parts of the First Amendment are normally taken separately as the “Establishment Clause†and the “Free Exercise Clauseâ€, but I like to think of them in a more holistic way.
Without the Establishment Clause preventing the majority of American’s from imposing their religious beliefs on the minority, the Free Exercise clause becomes meaningless. The right to believe what you choose quickly becomes moot once the majority is allowed to ostracize you based on those beliefs. In other words, freedom of religion in the private arena means nothing unless we have freedom from religion in the public arena.
When I think about all that high-minded constitutional talk as it relates to this issue though, I can’t help but wonder something: If the Constitution of the United States can manage without mentioning God, why can’t Dorman High School’s graduation ceremony?
Those students are guaranteed a public education regardless of our religious affiliation, and they have every reason to expect to have a graduation ceremony respectful of their right to believe as they wish. A ceremony led by a Christian prayer obviously doesn’t accomplish that.
In contrast to the obvious discrimination of Dorman’s current graduation ceremony, no one’s rights would be trampled on by removing prayer from graduation ceremonies. If Christian students wish to gather together to celebrate their graduation in some religion-specific way, there’s no reason they can’t do that on their own. In fact, many local churches already have graduation celebrations every year for their members. Why is it important that the school’s ceremony have a religious aspect as well?
Think about my example at the beginning of this column one more time. Imagine that the Muslim call to prayer had been given not at some fictitious school with a Muslim majority student population, but at Dorman. How many parents and students do you think would’ve shown up to voice their outrage at the next school board meeting? How long do you think it would’ve taken District 6 to roll back its policy allowing student-led prayer?
Those parents would’ve been right to have been upset if that had happened, and the students involved with The Movement for the Respect of Minority Religions, Lifestyles and Individuals are right now. The only difference is that the stand they’re taking is an unpopular one.
Religion should have no official place in our public schools. The private religious beliefs of the individual should always be respected, but no one’s beliefs, no matter how popular they may be, should ever be given preferential treatment or official sanction by allowing them into a school function. To do so goes against both the letter and the spirit of our nation’s most treasured legal tradition. Our Constitution holds us all equal before the law regardless of religious beliefs. Here’s hoping that District 6 can learn to do the same thing for its students.
I think you expressed this perfectly; that is, most conventions that otherwise violate the constitution are tolerated by the Christian majority because they have a “majority blind spot” as you put it. By flopping the hypothetical so that Muslims are supposedly exercising their free exercise rights, you back the counter-arguer into the argument of, well, it’s okay because this is a Christian nation. Which is plainly isn’t–the Constitution does not allow religious identity to fall victim to the whims of a majority. That such practices have become widespread and routine is equally of no matter; look at the Delaware Indian River School District situation to see where entrenchment leads.
loading...
A very interesting view on this, and one that many people haven’t considered. Using that analogy could very well give a very clear picture of just how it could feel for a non-Christian at such a time. I agree that there are plenty of smaller, more private opportunities for people of like faiths to gather before, during and after such events, and that they should be welcomed and encouraged. But in a large public setting where people from all walks of life gather, it would more respectful to keep faith and religion out of the picture, focusing more on the real reason why everyone has gathered.
I am of the mind that there is a time and place for prayer, and have often felt a bit uncomfortable with public “invocations” in public, non church settings, and I am a Christian. I have never quite understood the motive behind such activities or the apparent thoughts of necessity.
We Christians often take it for granted the way we see faith is the norm and that its perfectly ok to do whatever we like, forget what other people think. We forget that in many nations people of our faith are in the minority, and the freedoms we enjoy here are not allowed there. We have no idea what it feels like to be that minority in the matter of belief and as a result We forget to be respectful to others who don’t see things as we do despite our religion’s instructions to treat all men with love, respect and dignity.
Hopefully that is changing and that we can all worship as we will, while respecting other’s rights to worship as they will, all while respecting each other as neighbors and friends.
loading...
I agree, Sylvie. Over the years I have attended several high school graduations and feel very uncomfortable with the invocational prayers that lapse into proselytizing sermons. On at least one occasion a listening audience was told explicitly they were hypocrites deserving of hell. As a Christian, this made me burn with shame more than any hellfire and brimstone sermon.
There must be a way to honor the purpose of an invocation, to ask for blessings for the group, without alienating the audience or trouncing the student’s “freedom of religion.”
Personally, however, I believe the solution is no prayer at all at school functions.
loading...
I am a parent to two DHS students, neither of which seem as much concerned about the issue as I’d like. I was unable to attend the rally Saturday, but I do support them. It’s just not right and Christophe so aptly pointed out the “blind-spot of the majority.”
My friend, P.K. Weiss did attend the rally and spoke. She was kind enough to share the transcript of her speech, which I share below.
“My name is P.K. Weiss, and in no way am I an expert on matters relating to separation of church and state. On the other hand, I am a District 6 parent, with four children either currently or formerly enrolled in West View, Dawkins and Dorman, and I do have some thoughts on this matter.
If you haven’t already, please look around and read these red t-shirts we’re wearing: “The Rally for Individuals who Support Religious Equality and Tolerance.†I want to repeat that: “The Rally for Individuals who Support Religious Equality and Tolerance.†Does it say that this is the Rally for Christian-Haters? Does it say that this is the Rally for Atheists? Does it say that this is the Rally for Individuals Who Want to Promote One Religion over Another? No, it says that is rally is for individuals who SUPPORT RELIGIOUS EQUALITY AND TOLERANCE. And frankly? I can’t see the controversy in that. Why would anybody NOT support religious equality and tolerance? This parking lot should be overflowing, and while I’m thrilled to see each of you here, I’m disappointed there aren’t MORE people here.
I believe that there are truths to be found in all religions but that THE truth is not contained in any one religion. I believe that there is tremendous value in listening with an open mind and an open heart to what others believe. I do NOT believe that there is value in telling our youth what they should believe, either directly by a government-mandated religion or indirectly by a government- PROMOTED religion. And I certainly don’t believe that people should stand on a public-school stage, and say into a microphone in front of hundreds of people, how students should conduct themselves spiritually. And although I don’t think there was any ill will intended at the time, it was offensive. It was inappropriate. And it was wrong.
The students who have organized today’s rally . . . who noticed a wrong and worked to right it . . . should be commended. They’ve taken a stand that is often unpopular and misunderstood in this area of the country. They have worked within the system and have been unfailingly polite in their efforts and restrained in their responses. I am proud of these students and honored to have been asked to speak to you at today’s rally. Knowing that there are young people like them in the world makes me optimistic for our future. Please join me in giving them a well-earned round of applause.
I know there aren’t any School Board members or candidates here today. But I hope they get the message of what was said here, either through the media or by word of mouth. And I hope they take the time to really understand what these students are requesting. They’re asking the decision-making adults in District 6 to do the right thing and support their cause. They’re asking to be treated with respect at school functions. That’s not too much to ask, is it?”
loading...
The demand for Muslim schools comes from parents who want their children a safe environment with an Islamic ethos.Parents see Muslim schools where children can develop their Islamic Identity where they won’t feel
stigmatised for being Muslims and they can feel confident about their faith.
Muslim schools are working to try to create a bridge between communities.
There is a belief among ethnic minority parens that the British schooling does not adequatly address their cultural needs. Failing to meet this need could result in feeling resentment among a group who already feel excluded. Setting up Muslim school is a defensive response.
State schools with monolingual teachers are not capable to teach English to bilingual Muslim children. Bilingual teachers are needed to teach English to such children along with their mother tongue. According to a number of studies, a child will not learn a second language if his first language is ignored.
Bilingual Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with bilingual
Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods. Muslims have the right to educate their children in an environment that suits their
culture. This notion of “integration”, actually means “assimilation”, by which people generally really mean “be more like me”. That is not multiculturalism. In Sydney, Muslims were refused to build a Muslim school,
because of a protest by the residents. Yet a year later, permission was given for the building of a Catholic school and no protests from the residents. This clrearly shows the blatant hypocrisy, double standards and
racism. Christians oppose Muslim schools in western countries yet build their own religious schools.
British schooling and the British society is the home of institutional racism. The result is that Muslim children are unable to develop self-confidence and self-esteem, therefore, majority of them leave schools with low grades. Racism is deeply rooted in British society. Every native child is born with a gene or virus of racism, therefore, no law could change the attitudes of racism towards those who are different. It is not only the common man, even member of the royal family is involved in racism. The father of a Pakistani office cadet who was called a “Paki” by Prince Harry
has profoundly condemned his actions. He had felt proud when he met the Queen and the Prince of Wales at his son’s passing out parade at Sandhurst
in 2006 but now felt upset after learning about the Prince’s comments. Queen Victoria invited an Imam from India to teach her Urdu language. He was highly respected by the Queen but other members of the royal family had no respect for him. He was forced to go back to India. His protrait is still in one of the royal places.
There are hundreds of state schools where Muslim pupils are in majority. In my opinion, all such schools may be designated as Muslim community schools with bilingual Muslim teachers. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school.
Iftikhar Ahmad
loading...
Far from being a careless omission as well, one won’t find the word democracy in the constitution. The document is made to protect peoples individual rights, and the idea towards the benefit of the greater good, or that of the majority, is a democratic ideal and is often in opposition to the protection of the minority.
If I didn’t know better, I’d almost think some conservative wrote this piece, though you didn’t come out and say directly that the concept of democracy is severely flawed in a free and just society, you sure did illustrate it.
loading...
Democracy works just fine with a proper system of checks and balances, as of course our system has in place. Actually the 1st Amendment is a great example of how you can ensure minority rights and still have a democratic society. Nice try though.
Now, if you want to debate something off topic like this, I’d suggest moving it over to the forums.
loading...
It’s not off topic at all. Like you said, the majority is christian here. It was probably a majority decision to have a chaplain I’m sure. Democracy is all about majority decisions, at the price of the minority a lot of the times.
The 1st amendment protects freedom of speech, yes, but there are limitations obviously. On that note, there are more and more limitations being put on all of our rights, and the democratic notion of “the greater good” is often supposed justification for that.
Your article is about a minority view and seemingly hinged on conservative talking points about how the constitution is supposed to protect the minority view. It’s not your typical piece, but I welcome the change.
loading...
A friend of mine once noted that the rights of the minority should never be voted on by the majority.
Years ago, I heard someone complain about the majority not having any rights or protections. My thought then (and this may not have been entirely mine) is that the Constitution is designed to protect minorities; the majority can take care of itself.
loading...
Some would say the constitution is designed to protect us from a tyrannical government, and I’d agree.
loading...
Actually, I wasn’t refering to the “speech” part of the 1st amendment, I was refering to the two clauses on religion, both of which are specifically designed to protect minority views, as is the “speech” clause.
Sorry to see that you don’t care for our free speech law either. Most civil libertarians consider our free speech law to be the model of the world. The only real limitations are libel and slander, both of which are notoriously hard to prove in court, with good reason.
It may not be perfect, but it stacks up pretty well against any other nation’s free speech law. We don’t even prosecute holocaust-denying neo-Nazis like they do in some European countries. Everyone here is free to believe what they want, and publish those beliefs if they want as well. Not perfect, but I wouldn’t trade it.
I have to disagree with your assessment that this is somehow an assault on democracy from me. I think you’ve misread things a bit. The fact that these kids were able to hold a rally despite the fact that their views are so unpopular–”assembly” in the 1st amendment– is a testament to democratic rule. The fact that groups such as theirs–small committed groups–are so often able to affect change is a wonderful example of minority rights in a democratic system.
Our system isn’t as simplistic as “majority rule”. If it were, we wouldn’t have had an end to Jim Crow back in the 60’s. Take a look at some of the polling data from back then. It’s pretty eye-opening as far as how few people actually wanted equal rights for African Americans.
Majority rule must be tempered with checks and balances. While not perfect, our constitution set up a government that does that pretty well most of the time. Are there blind spots? Sure. When it comes to protecting civil liberties and minority opinions though, our system does a pretty good job if you ask me.
loading...
I never said I don’t care for our free speech law, if the 1st amendment is what you mean by that.
The hate crime bill of 09′ (now quietly tucked away in the Defense Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2010) is a perfect example of how free speech is under attack. Some point out it would make it criminal for preachers to quote the parts of the Bible that say homosexuality is wrong, whether it is or it isn’t is beside the point here. I personally am not against homosexuality by the way, each to their own I say, -but remember: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
Though my point, it legislates against peoples thoughts and motivations rather then their actions alone.
And what about this new regulatory czar Cass Sunstein’s proposal to ban “falsehoods”.. vaguely defined at the presidents discretion?
I don’t know man, you keep saying “checks and balances make democracy work” in context to a free and just society? -I’d like to hear it.
loading...
Define conservative please.
loading...
Well aren’t we more of a federalist style of government instead of a true democracy? What we got ain’t perfect by any means, but it has mostly worked for the past couple of hundred years.
loading...
The United States of America is a constitutional republic.
On the issue of this article, I’d like to either hear or read what it is that the student chaplain actually said at the graduation ceremony. Thus far I have not seen it published in the local media. I would think people should read it and decide for themselves whether it is objectionable or not. Did the student chaplain actually give what amounts to a sermon to the point that it caused some students extreme discomfort? Or did he/she simply say something like “in Jesus name, Amen” at the end which is kind of innocuous IMO. Or did he/she not talk about Jesus at all but direct it all towards the more inclusive references of God? If the local media is going to keep covering this story then I wish they would run the text of the invocation that was given, if they have already then I guess I missed it.
loading...
I didn’t put it in the OP, but why should a public school have a chaplain in the first place?
There’s no reason for specific religious content of any type, and while I’d like to read the text of the speech as well, I don’t have to read it to know where the line between private religious expression and a public school giving official sanction to a specific religion at a school-sponsored event is.
loading...
I agree chaplain is an odd student office. I wonder what kind of fodder it makes for college applications these days. Must be a carryover from the sixties that no one has bothered to address.
As far as official sanction, from what I know, school administrators have to allow the first volunteer to address the audience in prayer. And heads would roll if anyone thought of coaxing a resident Buddhist or Muslim student to be the first to volunteer.
loading...
I agree that a transcript of the speech would be interesting to read.
That said, “in Jesus name, Amen” innocuous? Really? It’s not a simple common phrase when someone is either A) not religious, or B) is religious, but doesn’t worship anyone by the name Jesus Christ.
Just because the phrase “in Jesus name, Amen” has become normalized in so many people’s homes and churches around here doesn’t mean it’s meant for the public sphere through a microphone over loud speakers where people of various faiths (or no religion at all) are listening.
If all are not represented equally, then people in charge shouldn’t be playing favorites.
Better yet, how about they just cut the thing altogether. It’s public school, not church.
loading...
As I understand it, from several individuals who attended the 2009 graduation ceremonies, what was said that the students found most offensive was that if they didn’t accept Jesus Christ they’d never have stability in their lives.
By the way, the current student chaplain was invited to attend the rally and present her views. School board members and candidates were invited to participate and present their views. And area Christian churches were invited to attend the rally and present their views. The students who organized this event were also interested in opening a dialog and not just in protesting.
loading...
WSPA coverage, published July 15, 2009.
http://tinyurl.com/yjfgacr
The student in the opening of the new video, Brandon David, said, “The chaplain stated that if one did not have Jesus Christ in their life they would not have stability in their life.”
The article sums things up:
“Brandon David is Unitarian Universalist and Hirak Pati is Hindu. They say the student chaplain at graduation said a solid foundation comes with Jesus Christ.”
loading...
ok, here is a silly question. What is wrong with a moment of silence? Other schools have adopted that practice. It allows everyone to take moment to reflect as they choose. I can to say a quick, quiet prayer, others can choose to reflect on how much belly button lint they currently possess. It seems to be a happy compromise. It doesn’t take away our rights to pray, and it doesn’t make others uncomfortable who’s religious practices differ from mine.
loading...
I would have no problem with a moment of silence, and I doubt most others would either. It allows the individual to do whatever he or she wishes without imposing anything on anyone.
loading...
I think a moment of silence is a perfect idea.
loading...
A moment of silence is a wonderful idea but seniors vote on giving a prayer … if the vote is affirmative, they must accept the first volunteer and cannot squelch his expression of religious freedom in any way …
loading...
On one hand, I agree greatly with you all. Separate my church and state.
On the other hand, I think that these stupid know-it-all children just want to create conflict. Which I can’t actually disagree with either. I did a bit of rabble rousing as a young one.
Everyone is far too sensitive. That’s the real source of the trouble. I can stand beside someone praying their asses off and not feel an ounce of awkwardness. If I were at a school that was Muslim by the majority I wouldn’t exactly feel alienated by their prayer. I would just suck up. But I’m tolerant.
loading...
These are not stupid know-it-all children who just want to create conflict. These are young adults who have worked within the system all along the way, even though the process has been tedious and unrewarding. Far from wanting to create conflict, they have gone out of their way to be respectful and polite, and have made a point to invite other voices into an intelligent discussion.
People being “too sensitive” is NOT the real source of the trouble. The real source of the trouble is that inappropriate messages are being delivered at public school functions. Worship Jesus at church. Worhsip Jesus at home. Do not worship Jesus at school, and do not tell our children that they should likewise worship Jesus.
Amen.
loading...
I don’t disagree. In fact, I agree with you greatly. Furthermore, I don’t want children to be indoctrinated in any way on my dollar. Of course, being a single person with no children, I don’t much care to pay for your children or their education but, that’s a bit off subject. Point being, you’re right and you’re wrong. Keep God out of school (cool everyone’s happy, except for the morons that think that this will somehow lead to the degradation of society). But, let’s be honest, everyone has become far too sensitive. I think the knuckle dragging meat heads call this the feminization of America.
loading...
You’ve really got to lay off those right-wing talking points Hagerman. They don’t suit you.
For what it’s worth, I don’t really disagree with the idea that people are often too sensitive, but I don’t really think that applies here.
This is about a school allowing a blatantly Christian speech at a public school graduation. Nobody’s whining about being offended. They just want what is Constitutionally right.
This speaker went so far as to say that people without Jesus in their lives would have no stability. In another setting that’d be no big deal. Just tell the guy to get over himself and go on about your business. But the public school setting makes this a whole different thing.
loading...
Stand for seven minutes while you’ve come to celebrate a milestone in a loved one’s life and see how tolerant you feel after being told about the hell that you deserve or that you are a worthless hypocrite.
Some of these students who volunteer to do the prayer make a mockery of the meaning of the word invocation. Its purpose is to seek blessings for the group, not to serve as a call to the altar.
However, educators are required to allow students to say whatever they want, lest their freedom of religion be denied. Too bad the students graduate without learning a lesson in creating an inclusive, positive speech full of goodwill that exudes decorum and graciousness …
loading...
Can we get a thumbs sideways button? I’m too indecisive.
loading...
Good job with this Christopher. It is encouraging to hear about the young people involved in the effort to defend their rights (and ultimately all our rights). I live in housing that receives federal funds, but owned by Christians. The same issue is apparent here. I find it presumptious and offensive for the owner/managers to practice their religious preferences at our ‘community’ events.
loading...