www.mozilla.com Weather Central
Voices
Headlines

Taking stock and looking ahead -5/24/2013, 10:02 AM

Holiday precaution -5/24/2013, 10:02 AM

Just who are the idiots in this scenario? -5/24/2013, 10:02 AM

Plan lacking -5/24/2013, 10:02 AM

Fat cats must sublet my people go -5/23/2013, 9:50 AM

Scandal season at Obama White House -5/23/2013, 9:50 AM

Hope for the best -5/22/2013, 3:20 PM

Pulling out the radio and remembering -5/22/2013, 10:41 AM

In Florida, timely injustice -5/22/2013, 10:40 AM

What happened, Mr. President? -5/21/2013, 9:38 AM

August 2014 primaries will be the test -5/21/2013, 9:38 AM

Tornado season -5/21/2013, 9:38 AM

Celebrating 90 years of Rotary -5/21/2013, 9:38 AM

Facts matter -5/20/2013, 9:18 AM

What in the world was the IRS thinking? -5/20/2013, 9:18 AM

Jolie decision sparks hostility, suspicion -5/20/2013, 9:18 AM

Privatization can work, but only if done right -5/19/2013, 3:11 PM

Still fighting over a lost cause -5/19/2013, 3:11 PM

A Kansas education -5/19/2013, 3:11 PM

Anti-American lessons abound -5/17/2013, 9:34 AM

George Carlin said that? Wowzer! -5/17/2013, 9:34 AM

A safer Fourth -5/16/2013, 9:44 AM

For a good cause -5/16/2013, 9:44 AM

Conservative's response -5/16/2013, 9:44 AM

The time has come to tax the titans -5/16/2013, 9:44 AM

Free to fly in the face of convention -5/15/2013, 9:44 AM

County approval -5/15/2013, 9:44 AM

Ignoring the real, fighting the imaginary -5/15/2013, 9:43 AM

Congratulations -5/15/2013, 9:43 AM

Scrutiny of IRS -5/14/2013, 2:15 PM

We must learn from our shared history -5/14/2013, 10:01 AM

The big test -5/14/2013, 10:01 AM

Policymaking crosses paths with busywork -5/14/2013, 10:01 AM

Failed attempt to run away from life -5/13/2013, 9:46 AM

Carpe apple, swallow the seeds -5/13/2013, 9:46 AM

Old adage applies - buyer beware -5/12/2013, 6:50 AM

Tilting at constitutional windmills -5/12/2013, 3:53 PM

County proposal -5/12/2013, 3:53 PM

An honest examination of race -5/10/2013, 9:40 AM

Maintaining the tradition of charitable giving -5/10/2013, 9:40 AM

Help is available -5/10/2013, 9:40 AM

Play it safe on the farm -5/9/2013, 6:48 AM

Where's the progress? -5/9/2013, 9:50 AM

Big doins' at the Golden Rule Cafe -5/9/2013, 9:50 AM

No new tax? -5/9/2013, 9:50 AM

Religious assault -5/9/2013, 9:32 AM

Pondering the new 'bleeding' Kansas -5/8/2013, 10:04 AM

War on Terror: Up close and personal -5/8/2013, 9:39 AM

County in need -5/8/2013, 12:40 PM

Selfless service -5/7/2013, 10:10 AM

Life-changing -5/7/2013, 10:10 AM

Kansas tax policy on the road to nowhere -5/7/2013, 10:09 AM

Administration hands over political ammo -5/7/2013, 10:09 AM

In Texas, black means future danger -5/6/2013, 9:30 AM

Can schools draw line on abortion protests? -5/6/2013, 9:29 AM

Crucial investment -5/6/2013, 9:29 AM

When will it stop -5/5/2013, 3:41 PM

Cork still stuck -5/5/2013, 3:41 PM

Red-state radicalism hastens rural decline -5/5/2013, 3:41 PM

Evolving door -5/5/2013, 3:41 PM

The big picture? -5/3/2013, 7:56 AM

Following up on what's the matter with Kansas -5/3/2013, 7:56 AM

The Wonderful Writers of Oz -5/2/2013, 10:23 AM

Busy month of activities in Kansas Room -5/2/2013, 10:23 AM

Backing the bond -5/2/2013, 10:23 AM

Keystone decision -5/2/2013, 9:26 AM

Defending bad laws -5/1/2013, 9:45 AM

Hefty return -5/1/2013, 9:45 AM

Shining a light -5/1/2013, 9:44 AM

Lessons we learned after Boston -5/1/2013, 9:44 AM

Exposed -4/30/2013, 10:55 AM

Tight-lipped gov masters the 'no comment' -4/30/2013, 10:55 AM

Contributing factor -4/30/2013, 10:55 AM

Changing America -4/30/2013, 10:55 AM

Bills focus on protection, education -4/30/2013, 10:46 AM

Even in tragedy, a nation divided -4/29/2013, 9:08 AM

Wolves in journalistic clothing -4/29/2013, 9:08 AM

KanCare puzzle -4/28/2013, 11:35 AM

'I told you so! Why didn't you listen?' -4/28/2013, 11:35 AM

Special election -4/28/2013, 9:45 AM

Easy answer -4/26/2013, 7:26 AM

Upgrade a necessity -4/26/2013, 7:26 AM

Veiled purpose -4/26/2013, 7:26 AM

Taking steps to prevent bone loss -4/26/2013, 9:45 AM

Safe Ride -4/26/2013, 9:45 AM

Considering the baby-faced bomber -4/25/2013, 10:59 AM

Stop, Shop and Grow campaign kicks off -4/25/2013, 10:59 AM

A conservative's response -4/25/2013, 10:59 AM

The family that eats together stays together -4/24/2013, 9:52 AM

Still learning lessons about education -4/24/2013, 9:52 AM

The Army goes off the grid -4/24/2013, 9:51 AM

Taxing the 'Net -4/24/2013, 9:51 AM

Estimates mean tax debate isn't over -4/23/2013, 9:56 AM

Public business or 'private' conversation? -4/23/2013, 9:56 AM

Do more with less -4/23/2013, 9:56 AM

Sales pitch -4/23/2013, 9:55 AM

Rand Paul gets schooled at Howard -4/22/2013, 1:19 PM

Movement on judges, not liquor sales -4/22/2013, 1:19 PM

Sales tax or property tax? -4/21/2013, 5:08 PM

Where are the leaders, the outrage? -4/21/2013, 5:08 PM

myTown Calendar

SPOTLIGHT
[var top_story_head]

Does cheering erase church-state line?

Published on -11/8/2012, 8:10 AM

Printer-friendly version
E-Mail This Story

In Kountze, Texas, there's not much daylight between God and football on Friday nights.

That's why most fans in the stands cheer loudly when the cheerleaders hoist banners with biblical verses for the football team to crash through as they take the field every week.

Most, but not all.

As has been widely reported in the news, someone (wisely choosing to remain anonymous) complained last month to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which, in turn, complained to Kevin Weldon, the school district superintendent.

Although he sympathizes with the cheerleaders, Weldon followed the advice of attorneys for the district and banned the banners as school endorsement of religion in violation of the First Amendment's establishment clause.

Not to be deterred, some of the cheerleaders and their parents sued Weldon and the district, arguing that the banners aren't school speech, but private student speech protected by the First Amendment's free-speech clause and Texas state law.

Two weeks ago, round one went to the cheerleaders. A Texas state trial judge sided with the students by issuing a temporary injunction allowing them to continue displaying their Bible banners for the rest of the season.

With that decision, the judge turned a small case from a small town into a potentially big case with big implications for how the First Amendment is applied in public schools.

If the cheerleaders ultimately prevail, their victory could open the door for more student religious expression at school-sponsored events, delivered by members of various school groups -- from the cheerleading squad to the student government.

Current law generally permits students to express their religious (or non-religious) views at school events as long as such expression is genuinely student-initiated and not influenced, encouraged or endorsed by school officials.

When they're not representing the school, for example, the Kountze cheerleaders are free as individual students to hold up religious banners in the stands on the same basis as other students are free to hold up banners with other messages.

But they are not free (at least until two weeks ago) to use the cheerleading squad -- a school-sponsored activity that represents the school -- to promote a religious message. That would put the public school in the position of appearing to endorse religion in violation of the First Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

It was, in fact, the high court's decision in another Texas football case (Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 2000) that the Kountze superintendent relied on when he decided to ban the banners. In that ruling, a majority of the court made it clear that school-endorsed religious expression -- even when delivered by a student -- is unconstitutional in public schools.

Christian groups supporting the Bible banners apparently hope that the Supreme Court will take the cheerleaders' case as an opportunity to mitigate, if not repeal, the Santa Fe decision. Since the cheerleaders reportedly made the banners on their own time and dime, they are asking the courts to see the Bible verses as private student speech that carry no school endorsement.

But the problem with allowing school-sponsored groups to promote religion is that it would take us back to the era when public schools imposed one religion (historically Protestant Christianity), denying religious freedom to students of other faiths and no faith.

If Bible-banner advocates in Kountze were suddenly transported to another part of the country -- one of many communities where their faith is in the minority -- would they still favor school-sponsored student groups' promoting one religious scripture (or an anti-religious message)?

Would they be content week after week to see their high school football team run through banners with verses from the Quran, the Vedas or Book of Mormon? Or would they be first in line to demand that the public schools uphold the First Amendment -- and stay out of the religion business?

The genius of the First Amendment (apparently lost on the state judge in this case) is that it protects the right of all students -- evangelical, Catholic, Muslim, Mormon or any other faith -- to wave religious banners in the stands on Friday night.

But it keeps the state, including cheerleading squads in public schools, from endorsing one religious message over another.

Charles C. Haynes is director of the Religious Freedom Education Project at the Washington-based Newseum. chaynes@freedomforum.org

digg delicious facebook stumbleupon google Newsvine
More News and Photos

Associated Press Videos