Photo Credit: Facebook
AUSTIN, Texas (TheBlaze/AP) — A group of teenage cheerleaders is expecting to hear Thursday from a Texas district judge whether they will be allowed to continue displaying Bible verses at high school football games. TheBlaze first told you about this case and atheists’ so-called “War on Football” at the end of September.
The cheerleaders at Kountze High School sued after district officials told them to stop using scripture — such as, “If God is for us, who can be against us?” — on banners displayed at football games. The district banned the use of religious messages after the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), an atheist activist non-profit, complained that the messages violated the First Amendment prohibition on government establishing a religion.
Then, as TheBlaze also reported, State District Judge Steve Thomas issued an injunction allowing the cheerleaders to continue using Bible verses until he made a decision. He set a hearing for Thursday, when he was expected to rule on the cheerleaders’ case.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott filed court papers to intervene in the lawsuit, calling the district’s prohibition an unconstitutional infringement on the cheerleaders’ rights to free speech. The Texas Education Code also states that schools must respect the rights of students to express their religious beliefs.
The FFRF, which is dedicated to the separation of church and state, also intervened saying in the context of a football game it was unclear who was responsible for the messages, the school or the cheerleaders.
“The speech in question is government speech or, at a minimum, school-sponsored speech,” the group said in court papers. “If the majority of the cheerleaders were atheists, would a court support their `right’ to hold up a banner insulting Christianity or all believers? The district has every right to simply prohibit all run-through and on-field banners.”
Gov. Rick Perry also has spoken out in favor of the cheerleaders.
“Anyone who is expressing their faith should be celebrated, from my perspective, in this day and age of instant gratification, this me-first culture that we see all too often,” Perry said Wednesday. “We’re a nation built on the concept of free expression of ideas. We’re also a culture built on the concept that the original law is God’s law, outlined in the Ten Commandments.”
–
Related:
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (97)
Black Manta
Oct. 18, 2012 at 3:50pmYou people aint see anything yet…Illuminati (the light bringers) which are the fallen angels…hate God…and in your ignorance you will feel the wrath of God because you choose to follow satan instead of reading the bible…laugh now, but you will feel the pain later…Revelation 12:9…read it if you care….
Report this comment
judojake
Oct. 18, 2012 at 3:21pmAs a Christian I do not want “religion” or prayers in public schools. If “religion” is taught in public school then my children will have to listen and be taught besides Christian, Muslin,Hindu, Budist, etc prayers and ways of worship to their, in my belief false gods. As far as that sign goes, if you don’t believe in what it is saying it really shouldn’t bother you all that much. It’s just another advertisement, just like any you would find on the walls of the playing fields in many sports arena’s.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 3:29pmWith that, . . . you must also be willing to let your kid be taught from a teacher from a denomination that you disagree with, . . . and without much that can be done to stop it. You must also allow for a muslim teacher to teach passages from the Quran.
Report this comment
davecorkery
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:47pmI am as hardcore an atheist as you could find. I think the cheerleaders should be allowed to carry (almost) whatever banner they want. Then I will be allowed to get my friends to talk to the kids in the schools about the benefits of realizing their is no such a silly thing as a god, and that snakes can’t talk. Fair is fair.
Report this comment
blackyb
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:33pmThe Bible clearly states not to put other Gods before him. This is America, the blessed of God. Believe it or do not, but leave if you do not like it. Those who come here are guests. They are owed nothing but for us to leave them alone in their private worship. They should never try to come in here and flount what they are worshiping and try to make it mainstream for this country was built upon the principals of the One True God. This is our country. If they do not like it, then they can go back to where they are more comfortable in their dealings.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 2:32pmI was born here. This is my country too. Go ahead and worship whatever “god” you choose. No problem with me. Keep tax dollar funded organizations FREE of specific non-credible ideologies, and I will be fine with that.
But this “leave the country then” statement is absurd. You support a freedom of speech until it critiques your OWN beliefs that YOU believe to be true. This country was ALSO founded on slavery. This country was also NOT founded on most of the Old Testament laws. Just perspective.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 2:54pmI personally recommend for those who truly dislike and detest our heritage and foundation to consider moving to France or China, and leave our national founding principles and values alone. Their Marxist agenda is based foreign ideologies anyways.
“This country was ALSO founded on slavery.”
Not true. Jefferson made a clause in the draft of the Declaration decrying the practice. BUT, because it was of the upmost importance for all Colonies to ratify the Constitution, stay united, and defeat the British, we had to COMPROMISE.
Frederick Douglas, a real patriot who adhered to the spirit of the Constitution, and did not wish to fundamentally transform it, unlike many liberal atheists and Marxists today, said, “Had the Constitution dropped down from the blue overhanging sky, upon a land uncursed by slavery, and without an interpreter, although some difficulty might have occurred in applying its manifold provisions, yet so cunningly is it framed, that no one would have imagined that it recognized or sanctioned slavery.”
Report this comment
SexyHeathen
Oct. 18, 2012 at 4:19pmIf this is really about what this country was founded on – we should have teachers teach native american religions to students. Fortunately it isn’t – the issue is about whether ANY teacher should be able to indoctrinate kids with ANY religion – not just Christianity.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 5:26pmLet local schools, local towns and local parents decide how to educate their own kids. Keep the federal Government out. That’s the real issue.
Report this comment
blackyb
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:30pmAs it says in the Bible the young will be leading the old. His coming is near. Everyone better grab on to this and allow these children to stand for Christ. Christ said anyone who offends these children would be better if a mill stone was around their necks and they were cast into the sea. Those who put a stumbling block to prevent the children who want to worship of Christ will be dealt with by God Almighty. This country was founded upon Christian principals and if this country does not stand up and defend this, they will become as those third world countries who abandoned God for idols and phony Gods. The country will become poor and people will be as dead inside. My advice would be to let the youn people alone in their rightful worship.
Report this comment
ReynMansson
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:15pmUnfortunately non-conformists seldom exists in highly regimented cultures like footballers and cheerleaders but statistically at least a couple of the players forced to run through this display of inappropriate quotes from a books of mythology are non-believers. Yet this display is clearly represents a tacit approval of a particular belief system and as such should be banned. I would hope a couple of players would refuse to run through here but football like Christianity teaches obedience, subservience and surrender to others control.
I am grossly offended that a school, a Governor and an AG would support this blatant disregard for the rights of the minority.
Report this comment
III_percenter
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:38pmWhat I want to know is why is it that the minority religion (atheism) is the one that is being promoted in public schools. If most people in the country are not atheists, why are we the ones that have to leave and go to private or charter schools to get a decent education. Shouldn’t it be the other way around at least? If you’re an atheist, you have the same right to found a school and teach whatever you want. Why is it that the Christians are the ones that need to “keep their religion in its place” but atheists can silence anyone they want? Or not even just Christians but “religious people” are the ones ostracized even though we are the vast majority. Perhaps the solution is to scrap the failed public education system altogether and put education back in the hands of parents where it belongs. That way, atheists can continue to teach secularism and they can have what are today’s public schools and the rest of the country can teach what they want etc. Strange how messed up everything gets when the government takes power that doesn’t belong to it. If the argument is to have a “standard” everyone must teach, the question remains: why teach the minority religion? Shouldn’t the families decide by popular vote what they want taught in their schools?
Report this comment
I support God's Israel!
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:45pmA Warning to Every Proud Ruler:
http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/90-450/a-warning-to-every-proud-ruler
Report this comment
SoNick
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:24pm@3percenter
A few answers to your questions…
What I want to know is why is it that the minority religion (atheism) is the one that is being promoted in public schools.
You can keep repeating it over and over but atheism is not and will never be a religion. To use an old analogy: “If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby”.
If most people in the country are not atheists, why are we the ones that have to leave and go to private or charter schools to get a decent education. Shouldn’t it be the other way around at least? If you’re an atheist, you have the same right to found a school and teach whatever you want.
It is not the Government’s business to teach religion, as the First Amendment clearly states. If you want your kids to go to public school AND get a religious education, send them to Sunday School on their own time. And stop saying that atheism is “taught” in schools. It’s not.
Report this comment
SoNick
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:28pm@3percenter (contnd)
Why is it that the Christians are the ones that need to “keep their religion in its place” but atheists can silence anyone they want? Or not even just Christians but “religious people” are the ones ostracized even though we are the vast majority.
Welcome to the Republic, where the common good does not mean that the majority is always right. Ostracism would mean singling out and pushing aside one specific religious group. Secularism is the opposite of ostracism. By stating that religion has no place in public schools, it prevents any religious hierarchy. Also, the Supreme Court ruled that praying in public schools was a direct violation of the Establishment Clause over 40 years ago. Get over it.
Perhaps the solution is to scrap the failed public education system altogether and put education back in the hands of parents where it belongs. That way, atheists can continue to teach secularism and If the argument is to have a “standard” everyone must teach, the question remains: why teach the minority religion?
Again. Atheism is not a religion, nor is it being “taught” in public schools. Not mentioning religion in class does not equal promoting atheism. Also, stop using atheism and secularism as synonyms. They are not. In fact, I know priests who are also staunch secularists.
Report this comment
SoNick
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:29pm@3percenter
Shouldn’t the families decide by popular vote what they want taught in their schools?
No, they shouldn’t. When parents get to decide the curriculum, we end up with absurdities like creationism being taught in science classes as a valid alternative to evolution.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:38pmThis argument is ridiculous. Why don’t you get off your ****, be a parent, and teach your children the values you want instilled in them in your home? Why pass that responsibility off to some haggard teacher in a publicly funded institution? I submit that this type of attitude toward parenting (and the many hours of TV watching kids have don over the last 3 decades) is largely to blame for the moral decline in our country… not the absence of God in schools. Teach your God in your home, and when you go out be examples for Him instead of whining about the public school system not doing YOUR job.
Do you do any damage control at home with your kids? Do you spend time with them to counter the liberal CRAP they are force fed in the public schools? If not, then I hope you’ll start, and fast. If so, then I would consider including the inculcation of your morals and beliefs into your children there, where you can also monitor their adherence and obedience to your teachings as opposed to leaving that to some teacher whom you do not know.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:52pmWhy should atheists have the exlusive benefit of public schools? Why shouldn’t they also be the ones that have to home school their kids, or pay extra money to send them to private or charter schools? Are atheist now some protected class of citizens, or better than others? Shouldn’t schools be run locally and by parents? Why should a federal judge dictate the education of my kids or my town?
Report this comment
jscottkemp
Oct. 18, 2012 at 2:44pm@sonick – Sorry to have to contradict you. But – by any objective definition – secular humanism (atheism) is a religion.
Report this comment
jscottkemp
Oct. 18, 2012 at 2:48pm@sonick – How can you say “Perhaps the solution is to scrap the failed public education system altogether and put education back in the hands of parents where it belongs.” And then in the next breath (the next post) deny parents the right to choose curricula?
Report this comment
SoNick
Oct. 18, 2012 at 2:57pm@jscottkemp
These are not my words. I was quoting from 3percenter’s post.
Report this comment
jscottkemp
Oct. 18, 2012 at 3:04pm@sonick – I apologize. I mis-understood one of your posts.
Report this comment
SoNick
Oct. 18, 2012 at 3:08pm@jscottkemp noproblem buddy. I must admit these three posts were kinda longish
Report this comment
SexyHeathen
Oct. 18, 2012 at 4:31pm“@sonick – Sorry to have to contradict you. But – by any objective definition – secular humanism (atheism) is a religion.”
Atheism – a disbelief in the existence of deity
Atheism is not believing in God – that’s the definition most atheists use. Like not believing in Santa or not collecting stamps. Believing in something is a religion, not believing in something is not a religion. I’m not using any fancy word tricks here.
According to this definition all babies are atheists and all animals are atheists because they don’t believe in God. All the atheists I know understand that the definition of atheists most commonly used includes babies and animals. Calling atheism a religion is saying that animals and babies practice a religion – which is absurd.
Report this comment
judojake
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:29pmJust a couple saying that kind of cover Christian belief. ” Christians are Christians by Faith, not explanations” and “Just because Faith doesn’t make sense to you, doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense to GOD”
Report this comment
III_percenter
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:15pm“If the majority of the cheerleaders were atheists, would a court support their `right’ to hold up a banner insulting Christianity or all believers?”
What kind of argument is that? That is not what is happening. No cheerleader is holding up a sign “Atheists are going to hell.” (I think we can all leave that to the lunatics at the Westboror Baptist Church). The signs are Biblical exhorations and encouragements. If you don’t find that encouraging, then it should have no affect on you at all: it should just be a brightly colored banner. Atheists (secular humanists as some above posts have pointed out) would be closer to a parallel if they put up something like “All things can be accomplished through human effort.” Obviously, as a Christian, a disagree with that statement in its purest form but I wouldn’t seek to see it banned especially not to stoop so low as to legally brow-beat a team of teenage girls. I don’t attend public sporting events because the use of alcohol and the oft-times distinctly sexual gyrations of young women in front a screaming crowd. What do I do about it? Stay home. I don’t sue to force people to comply with my beliefs or cram someone’s lifestyle into a small segment of society so I don’t have to be confronted with something at offends my sensebilities. You don’t like the football environment? Stay home.
Report this comment
jscottkemp
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:59amThe issue seems to be:
Which is more important?
– the cheerleaders right (given to them by God and recognized by the US constitution) to free expression of religion, or
– the FFRF’s supposed right to not be offended by the cheerleaders’ expression and their assumption that it represents an expression paid for by taxpayer funds.
This is an easy one, guys.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 11:04amPerhaps on the surface, that’s how simple the argument is. I do not want these girls’ right to free speech diminished in any way. Indeed, I swore an oath to defend their right to free speech and religion, but I also do not want my tax dollars being spent to promulgate a theological message at a public institution. You would also not want your tax dollars to fund public institutions that promulgated an atheistic message. This is the crux of the argument.
Report this comment
jscottkemp
Oct. 18, 2012 at 11:09am@ChrisDiamond – I am not terribly concerned about tax dollars being spent @ public schools to promote atheism (or more accurately, secular humanism). Indeed, I believe that this is being done all the time and I still pay my taxes. I do, however, home-school / private school my children.
You are being disingenuous when you say that you are unwilling to diminish the girls right to free speech but … nevertheless you are advocating diminishing their right to free speech. You can’t have it both ways.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 11:39am@JSCOTTKEMP
We also send our girls to private school. Next to marrying their mother, it is, without a doubt, the best choice I have ever made.
Also, I agree with the classification of atheism as, more appropriately, secular humanism. An atheist worth his or her salt must admit that they likewise cannot absolutely disprove the existence of God. It is more convenient to type ‘atheist’ though. =P
You are perfectly free to not concern yourself with schools that promote secular humanism, and I would agree that most of them already do. I would imagine this had at least a little bit to do with your decision to send your children to private school. I applaud you.
I am not being disingenuous. As sentient and free human beings, I want these girls to express themselves and worship however they wish. No one is asking that these girls not be allowed to pray, or to invoke the name of God in their speech. They are saying that there is a conundrum created by the venue of a school function to make such a declaration for God, and the appearance it creates of the promotion of a deity. Tax payer funds are used to pay for this area, and though you may not object to secularism in schools you pay for, others of us do object to the promotion of that message being funded by our tax dollars. It’s like the swift and harsh punishment for active military members who vocalize their political opinions in uniform… See what I mean?
Report this comment
jscottkemp
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:04pm@ChrisDiamond – Please posit a scenario where:
- the girls’ right to free speech is not diminished, and
- the appearance of their banners at football games is not allowed.
I cannot see how removing their (privately funded and personally created) banner can be seen as anything other than a diminishment of their right to free speech.
You cannot have it both ways. One principle or the other must be considered paramount.
I think that the decision is really pretty obvious. Free speech is more important than possible offense.
Report this comment
checkmate0831
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:25pmHere’s a novel idea, how about we let the people of the town decide…majority rules.
Report this comment
gingerbread
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:34amAre there still people listening to these ATHEISTS nut jobs? So they find a liberal judge to rule in their favor, SO WHAT! YOU DON’T HAVE TO OBEY A STUPID LAW. Did MLK obey a stupid law? No way, he disobeyed the stupid laws and dared the government do something about it. We are now learning to fight back against tghese idiots. What is the liberal judge going to do? Throw all these kids in jail? NOOO. Fine all these students?NOO. Maybe fine the school? That’s not a good idea either. So, my advice to all the christians that feel that their CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTIES are being trampled by these ATHEIST HUT JOBS. DO YOUR THING, AND DARE THESE “NUT JOBS”, ALONG WITH THEIR LIBERAL JUDGES TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.
Report this comment
Gustav
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:49amAtheists are not nut jobs, but anyone who tries to take a freedom or right from another is. Demeaning those who do not believe in god doesn’t do anything. Just stick to all of our rights and you win. The problem is the First Amendment is not being followed, we have somehow added a clause that states religion can never be shown in a public place. That clause doesn’t exist, and never should. When government endorses an establishment of a certain religion, then we have a problem. That isn’t happening either.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:51amBeware of conspiracy theories. . . . .that they “find a liberal judge to rule”.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 11:00amDear Gingerbread,
First, slow down, pussycat. Take a breath, or some meds. Now… Let’s try to work through your post.
First, you begin with an ad hominem. Atheists do not share your faith, so we are nutjobs. Right. Way to start!
Second, you are absolutely correct about obeying stupid laws. We are duty-bound to disobey them, if I read Jefferson correctly. So, by this shared logic, it is our moral duty to smoke weed because it is unjust and immoral for the FEDGOV to say we can’t decide what we put into our own bodies, right? No, I am not being facetious.
Third, our ‘conservative’ chief justice gave the winning vote on the Constitutionality of Obamacare. Don’t stick a label on everything and proclaim it is right or wrong because of the label.
Fourth, your liberty to worship your God is not, in any way, being infringed upon by the FFRF effort. In fact, they are trying to protect the rights of non-theists to not have publicly funded institutions promote, proclaim or sponsor a theist message. Would you want your tax dollars paying for a public institution that posted banners asking, “If God is real, why doesn’t He heal amputees?” Or, “If God is real, then he kills 65,000 children each day with starvation.”? Of course you wouldn’t. Likewise, we do not want our tax dollars being used to fund the promulgation of the Christian message.
It is an error to assume that only liberals are atheists. Are you familiar with anarchocapitalism?
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:07pmOur Obligation to acknowledge our Creator is being arbitrarily infringed upon by the FFRF. In fact, they are trying to violate the rights of all citizens to freely express themselves. Washington, Adams, Jefferson, et al, took their constitutional Oaths on the Holy Bible and said “So help me God”, while getting paid as public servants, and while standing on public land. We do not want our tax dollars being used to fund the promulgation of a Marxist message that promotes the destruction of God or religion in public or private.
Report this comment
cessna152
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:25amHey atheists if God does not exist then neither do these banners. Why the concern?
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:30amThe banners can be seen and touched. The banners do exist, and every secularist and theist with eyesight would submit this is true. There is no proof, however that the subject written about on the banners exist.
I implore you, for your own sake, before you venture into the debate, you might learn a little bit about logic and argumentation. Your statement is one of the absolute worst contributions to the subject matter I’ve yet had the unfortunate displeasure of reading.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:33amfstdt
Report this comment
jefftavolieri
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:33amChris, you really think he’s interested in learning? Or logic? Or rational thought?
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:47am@JeffTavolieri
Touche, sir… Touche.
Report this comment
jscottkemp
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:54am@ChrisDiamond – I disagree with your statement that there is no proof that the subject written about on the banners (God) exists. I cannot let it go unchallenged. The fact that you deny the existence of the proof (6000 years of well-attested history) does not harm the proof.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 11:29am“Well attested” is a stretch, . . . . but for the sake of argument, I will grant you that the history shown in the bible was accurate with other culture’s histories and confirmed by archeology today. At best, . . . you would have a book that included literal events into its writings. So what! Just because a story CAN include a real city or person. . . does NOT mean that ALL the information included in that account is accurate. You cannot dismiss the possibility [the very LIKELY possibility] that stories were enhanced with magic to show a culture of people more favoribly. . . or to scare neighboring cultures that “they had a powerful god on their side”. This “evidence of 6000 years of history” is hardly compelling that “there is also a god”.
Report this comment
Gustav
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:23amI am an antsiest. I’m not offended one bit by any religious beliefs. I welcome them as long as they aren’t violent. I believe in the First Amendment. I believe we take it way too far! It has nothing to do with banning religious speak in a public forum, or at a government run establishment. “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.”
Cheerleaders signs do not contradict the first amendment whatsoever. Congress sure as hell isn’t “Establishing” religion by these signs made by teenage girls. If people want to sink so low as to bring up the public funding of a $5 sign, get over it. There is nothing harmful in the signs, be a mature adult and realize that a sign isnt going to possess your mind and make you think differently. If it does you are weak. Remember, I am an atheist but truly happy or my religious neighbors and family members.
We are going too far with the First Amendment, it was never written to protect your sensibilities. For those who want to put up Pro Athiest signs? Totally legal, just the same, but what’s the point? Trying to hurt is my guess. And if that is your point, then it’s pointless. These cheerleaders are not trying to hurt anyone. The first amendment is beautifully written, lets stop seeing it for what it isn’
Report this comment
tallscot
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:42amIf God didn’t want atheists to exist, he wouldn’t have created them, right? If he didn’t want these lawsuits to happen, they wouldn’t happen, right? God has a plan, right? :)
What I don’t get is the contradiction that everything happens in the way God wants it to happen, but we need to make a sign and say a prayer to get God’s attention so a football player doesn’t get injured. If a player gets injured, that’s God’s will, right? There is a huge contradiction here. Why did God want that boy to become paralyzed in that football game? It’s God’s will and no sign can influence God’s plan…right?
People are bloody hypocrites in regards to free speech on both sides of the aisle. Most people want freedom of speech if they agree with the speech. Liberals shut down conservative speech on campuses and conservatives shut down free speech if it’s “unpatriotic” (Natalie Maines, Bill Maher being fired are just two examples).
You had people outraged that a masque was going to be built near Ground Zero, which is clearly worse than trying to stifle free speech.
There are very few libertarians that really believe people should be truly free. Everyone wants to control other people’s behavior in SOME regard. Gays can’t get married, people can’t use 100 watt light bulbs, people can’t buy a gun, people can’t buy beer on Sunday.
I can’t buy beer on Sunday! Why is that?
Everyone is a hypocrite.
Report this comment
Obama Snake Oil Co
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:45amI believe that is the fairest statement to be made on this link. Tolerance. Its what is in the consitution and as you stated, very well written.
Report this comment
jrc99
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:17amSounds like the cheerleaders got the atheists to think. No wonder they are PO’ed! God Bless the Cheerleaders of Kountze High! RAW RAW!!! ;-)
Report this comment
alrunner58
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:02amAtheists can’t stand anyone who is grounded and has moral and values. They’re pathetic.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:10amNice Strawman there, Al.
Non-religious does NOT equate to “immoral”, or “lacking values”.
Report this comment
ghostsouls
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:19amMost of these people are not atheists, they just claim to be to get their 15 minutes of fame….They need to all agree on one symbol for themselves, and it can be displayed next to all religious things, that way they are represented as well.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:27am@AL
“Atheists can’t stand anyone who is grounded and has moral and values. They’re pathetic.”
Why do you assume that only religious people (and we can safely assume you mean Christians) are “grounded and have moral values?” Hitler was a Catholic. Was he grounded, and a person of moral values? Jimmy Swaggart was a Christian televangelist who ended up paying a prostitute to expose her breasts while he rubbed one out. Was that moral?
As an atheist, I derive my morality from two basic principles: I own myself (including that I don’t own anyone else, no one else owns me and I am fully responsible for myself), and that the initiation of force or violence against others is immoral; that the only moral use of force or violence is in self-defense.
If I want to use cocaine, speed, heroin, marijuana, quaaludes or whatever, I should have the full authority and right to do so. BUT… if, under the influences of these substances or not, I should damage or kill someone, damage their property, or inhibit their ability to exercise their rights then I should be held fully accountable. Likewise, if my choices cause me tremendous harm, I have NO right to expect you or anyone else to pay for even a portion of my medical expenses.
Theft is wrong because i have no right to someone else’s property. Assault (and murder, rape etc) is wrong because it is the initiation of force and infringement on a person’s property right of self.
And all this without a myth as the basis
Report this comment
stumpy68
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:41amDeavonReye
They could prove your statement by ceasing the attacks
on those who are religious attacking someone for beliefs
that harm no one is immoral.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:07amStumpy, not being difficult [seriously]. . . .can you reword your post. I’m not really following.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 10:17am@Stumpy68
First off, there is no attack on believers. The ‘attack’ as it is usually so cleverly worded by The Blaze, is on the use of public funds at a public institution to promotoe or sponsor the sanction of God. As a tax payer who does NOT believe in God, I do not want my tax dollars funding the promulgation of a religious message, just like you would not want your tax dollars funding the promulgation of an atheist message. I would bet dollars to donuts you would be on the other side of this debate were the cheerleaders holding up signs that said, “If God is real, why doesn’t He heal amputees,” or “If God is real, then He kills 65,000 children every day through starvation.”
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 11:58amI hereby move the motion for the Declaration of Independence to not be applied to offended, militant atheists. They don’t want to recognize unalienable rights from God or that we’re created equal. So be it. Don’t grant them that which they don’t want. They are too weak to accept the concept that we as individuals and as a body politick are answerable to a higher authority, and are not free to do whatsover we want as we want. I know, I know, Cuba and North Korea don’t agree, but Thank God our founders recognized their obligation to appeal to the Sumpre Judge of the World for the rectitude of their intentions, and not to trust in their own inventions.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:15pm“They are too weak to accept the concept that we as individuals and as a body politic are answerable to a higher authority, and are not free to do whatsover we want as we want”…
If the “higher authority” is some sort of unseen, unfelt, unheard, non-credible “god being”, then why WOULD I “accept that concept”? And no, . . . we aren’t “free to do whatever we want, as we want.” That’s why we have varying levels of concequences in our judicial system. Even so, . . . I don’t rule my life by “trying to keep out of prison”. I don’t do MANY things because they are immoral. No other reason. No appeal to a “non-existent authority” to do so.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:44pmJudges don’t get to decide what varying levels of consequences we have. We’re a Representative Government, Constitutional Republic and Common Law Nation. We have three distinct and separate branches of Government. There’s no legislating on the bench.
As regards to OUR Revolution (not to be liken to that of godless France). A cover letter by John Hancck (1776) was attached to the Declaration of Independence, as it was sent to the British authorities, and read, “Altho it is not possible to forsee the consequences of human actions, yet it is nevertheless a duty we owe ourselves and posterity IN ALL OUR PUBLIC COUNCILS to decide in the best manner we are able and to trust the event to That Being who governs both causes and events, so as to bring about his own determinations.”
Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Henry Lee (1825), said the Declaration of Independence “was intended to be an expression of the AMERICAN MIND”. (Note: NOT French mind)
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:00pmAnd to whom do judges answer to? And on what foundation is our Constitution established?
BUT, I guess DeavonReye is mad that it doesn’t say:
We’re all perfect and are our own God. To do what ever you want is to live, but to humble oneself to higher authority makes you a slave. There is no love in the world, for no one truly cares about anyone else. Whoever trusts in his own made up works is fine. If you believe that you could do whatever you want without repercussions, and believe in your heart that your acts have no effect or consequences to you or others, there is no need to worry about anything regarding truth and justice. We can trust in our own imaginations, resulting in righteousness, and pridefully declare our goodness, resulting in our own utopia of peace.
Yep, that pretty much sums up the degenerate, modern day Liberal’s manifesto right there.
“On Monday last the Circuit Court of the United States was opened in this town. The Hon Judge [Supreme Court Justice] Paterson presided. After the Jury were impaneled, the Judge delivered a most elegant and appropriate charge… Religion and morality were pleasingly inculcated and enforced as being necessary to good government, good order, and good laws, for “when the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice”… After the charge was delivered, the Rev. Alden addressed the Throne of Grace in an excellent, well-adapted prayer.” – New Hampshire Newspaper from Portsmouth 1800.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:27pmWho decides what’s immoral? Is incest immoral? Who decides? Society, nature, the state, one’s community, or individuals? Passions and emotions do not define laws or rights. Common sense, sanity and reason has obviously escaped the liberal’s mind.
Thomas Jefferson said, “The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.”
Charles Carroll, signer of the Declaration of Independence, said, “Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure (and) which insures to the good eternal happiness, are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments.”
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:28pmGeorge Washington, said, in his Farewell Address (September 19, 1796), “Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 2:22pmColt, . . . first of all, . . . where do you get that “I am mad”? And do NOT put words in my mouth that I never said. You are being deceitful to suggest them as my words.
As I have stated before, . . . being non-religious does NOT mean that “I can do whatever I want”.
*disclaimer – when I use caps, it shouldn’t be seen as “angry”, but as an emphasis on a word, only.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 2:44pm“Colt, . . . first of all, . . . where do you get that “I am mad”?”
I’ve read your many of your posts in other articles, and is not exactly indicative of your posts here. Regardless, I was being overly sarcastic in the use of the word “mad”, as was the rest of the comment.
I did not say being “non-religious” meant you could do all that you want, but that morality is best tempered and contained if founded on, defined, and characterized by, religion, and, as is evident in the history of our nation, by the pure and simple religion of Christ Jesus. Of course, you personally contest that. I however, chose to provide historical primary sources to make my case, and not comtemporary personal preference.
Report this comment
funjumper
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:26am“Who can be against me”……the liberal school boards, the liberal courts, the liberal teachers union, basically Democrats in general.
Report this comment
starman70
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:37amAccording to past rulings, if it is student led or generated, it’s legal. Wanna bet this judge overturns that ruling?
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:37amDon’t forget the rational conservatives, free thinkers, and skeptics. . . who AREN’T liberals and generally GOOD people [as much as any christian person out there].
Report this comment
huey6367
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:20amHey atheists, if you don’t like what you see, ignore it. We ignore you everyday.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:12amI understand the legal argument the FFRF is making, and I also understand the issue of the cheerleaders’ right to free speech. I would not advocate the ladies having their free speech about God, religion or anything else diminished. Indeed, I swore an oath to defend their freedom of speech and freedom to worship regardless of what they say, or who/what/if they worship.
The legal issue is that there is an appearance that the school, a public entity funded by public dollars, is either making the religious statements, or sponsoring the religious statements made by students. That much should be considered a no-no. Would you want tax dollars spent to promote or sponsor my message of atheism? Of course not. Would you want action taken against students at that (or any) school who paraded signs saying, “Religion is a myth,” or “If God exists and is all-knowing and all-powerful, then he is responsible for the death via starvation of roughly 2 million children a year”? Yes, you would. And since you recognize that, then you can’t simply discount the argument being made by the FFRF.
We can’t make such a claim against a private school when the school makes their religious views, stand and affiliation known publicly, because they do not receive public tax dollars. For this reason (and many, MANY others) I hope more people will choose private schools. I am sick and tired of the government doing so poorly by our kids, despite taking more money from us to do ‘better’.
Report this comment
ToddH
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:26amGood post, ChrisDiamond.
I’ll bet everyone would be going private if they weren’t held to the govt. mandate to pay up for the cruddy public school education anyway. That’s why I’m such a strong supporter of the school voucher system. Let the parents decide where their tax money goes.
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:02am@ToddH
Thank you. My wife and I chose to make the financial sacrifice to send our children to private school, and the investment has been more than well worth the cost. In just 2 and a half months at the private school, my children are performing so much better in academics, learning faster… last spring while they were still going to public schools (with 30 and 32 other students in their classrooms respectively), I wondered how in the world my children would ever learn. They were both struggling, but got no attention from their teachers, and had over an hour of homework each per night… at 5 and 6 years old!. Now, in classes with 16 and 14 students (and each classroom with it’s own teacher’s aid to help), my youngest is reading two levels ahead of where her older sister was just 6 months ago in public school. My oldest daughter is discussing subject-verb agreements and other grammar rules with me. As far as I am concerned, this is the smartest investment I can make in the most important part of my future (and OUR future): my children.
For folks who think you can’t afford private school, I would encourage you to look around and investigate. There are MANY private orgs and persons across the country who donate generously to provide scholarships for the purposes of sending kids to private schools.
Report this comment
omgfolks
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:15amOH POO! What we have hear is a simple case if you don’t like don’t read it. Pure and simple. If the Attorney’s want to raise issue and energize this SHAME ON THEM. THE REAL ISSUE IS THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO SAY AND THINK WHAT EVER THEY WANT. If the Anthiest do not like then do not listen or look. WE IGNORE THE ATHIEST SO THEY SHOULD BE ADULT ENOUGH TO DO THE SAME> STOP WASTING COURT TIME OF BS>
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:39am@OMGFOLKS
Like I said, how would you feel if the football team of your local school paraded signs saying “Your God is a fairy tale,” or “God kills 65,000 children every day through starvation,” or “If God is Real, Why Doesn’t He Heal Amputes?” would you not be pissed about a public school allowing that? I bet you would, and based on your post, I would also bet you are not intellectually honest enough to admit it.
Report this comment
Winedude
Oct. 18, 2012 at 11:55amChrisDiamond: A long time ago, when I was young and both my parents were still alive, they always told me that my education (mostly private schools) was my inheritance. I worked hard in school to make the inheritance as valuable as possible. I did the same for my kids and they too are doing well in their chosen fields. It’s sad what has happened in our public schools. For a brief period in my life I did substitute teaching to stay off unemployment compensation. In the brief time that I worked doing this I noted that most of the problems in public schools wasn’t the teachers but rather the administrators, from the school staff to the county office of education…damned bureaucrats!!!
Report this comment
blackconservchristian
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:16pmYou seem very concerned about this topic since you’ve commented on most of the posts that are in support of the cheerleaders and the banners. Since when is a banner that gets torn to pieces before a football game comparable to government “ESTABLISHING” a religion? Why do those who take that viewpoint always leave out the free exercise clause? I know you’re gonna have a long response but the fact remains that recognizing a religion does not violate the 1st Amendment. Why are so many Americans so sensitive and we have this “no one should be offended” mentality in America. I pray that you find Jesus and His redeeming Blood will set you free. :-)
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:11amI personally [because it is my right] find the signs ridiculous. However, IF the students put them together using their own time and money, then they should be able to display them where they want. A violation would be in a school making it manditory that students believe it.
We’ll have to see how the court decides.
Report this comment
Gonzo
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:05amGay Pride Parades are ecouraged in America, but Bible verses…why, we just can’t have that!
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:13pmWe can’t quote bible verses in public schools because it might offend athesit students or their parents, but we sure as heck can give teenage boys free condoms and tell teenage girls where abortion clinics are located, all without their parents knowing a thing. America, WAKE UP!
Report this comment
golfer8805
Oct. 18, 2012 at 3:46pmBible passages in school! That’s a great idea. How about this one? Numbers 15:32-36 While the Israelites were in the wilderness, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. 33 Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, 34 and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. 35 Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp.” 36 So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the Lord commanded Moses. What wonderful morality to teach our children.
Report this comment
johnjoe
Oct. 18, 2012 at 7:40amWhich would you rather the teens do. praise God and try to follow his laws or fun arround gitting into trouble. FFR, you have misplaced valiues. I have no problem “tolerating all views, but saying that WHY can you not tolerate mine?
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:56am“Which would you rather the teens do. praise God and try to follow his laws or fun arround gitting into trouble. FFR, you have misplaced valiues. I have no problem “tolerating all views, but saying that WHY can you not tolerate mine?”
First, you assume that if the children are not promoting and serving God, that they will be up to no good. This is patently absurd. Religious children also ‘fun around’. In fact, it has been my experience that the religious kids cut loose even more wildly than the secular kids. No one should make the argument that religion and religiosity universally translates into virtue and moral behavior.
Second, tolerance is not the issue. The issue is that it appears as though the school, a publicly funded institution is either promoting or sponsoring a sanction of God. Would you want your tax dollars to pay for the promulgation of my atheism? Would you not have a similar reaction if the local school’s football team paraded banners with statements like “God kills 65,000 children each day through starvation,” or “If God is real, why doesn’t He heal amputees?” I’m rather certain you would, but not certain whether or not you are honest enough to admit it.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 12:13pmI stand with John Adams, when he proclaimed, “Statesmen, my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free Constitution is pure Virtue, and if this cannot be inspired into our People in a greater Measure than they have it now, They may change their Rulers and the forms of Government, but they will not obtain a lasting Liberty. They will only exchange Tyrants and Tyrannies”. The Bible states the most important moral lessons better than any man made book. Fisher Ames said that, primary author of the first Ammendment, who also advocated for Bibles to be used in public schools.
The believe, recognition or acknowledgement of a God does not establish a religion, or sanction anything. Even Satan beleives in a God, but wholeheartedly detests him, and makes void his existence through his actions. Why should you have a say in a local school that is hundreds of miles away from you, and whose town and culture is probably different than yours?
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:00pm@COLT1860 (hoping this comment will actually post, since my others are not)
“but it is Religion and Morality alone…” Either Adams was combining the two as mutually exclusive to each other, or they are unique to themselves. One can be religous and moral, and one can be moral without religion. Likewise it is patently absurd to conclude that religion is, or must mean virtue, and lack of religion must mean a lack of virtue. I’m sure you know many believers who have behaved in unvirtuous manners, and so I won’t list the more publicly known ones.
I wonder how Adams felt about Romans 13, and how he would feel about Paul’s declaration of governments as ordained by God when he sees what our government does today… theft, lies, murder, deceit, endless warring, entangling alliances, social and corporate welfare…
“The Bible states the most important moral lessons better than any man made book.” This was Mr Ames’ opinion, as I assume it is also yours, and you are both entitled to it. This does not make this statement true. It makes it an opinion.
I got a chuckle out of you referencing one non-existent entity’s belief in another non-existent entity. But I am curious, how could Satan void God’s existence through any action?
Of course I don’t have a say in anything a school hundreds of miles from me does, but my federal tax dollars fund it, and I would like a say in how those stolen funds are spent.
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:44pmOur founders considered Religion, morality and virtue all very important. They believed they depended on each other. “The great pillars of all government and of social life [are] virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor, my friend, and this alone, that renders us invincible.” Patrick Henry, REVOLUTIONARY GENERAL; LEGISLATOR; “THE VOICE OF LIBERTY”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA
All you have stated are personal opinions which refute nothing that I posted. You bring up some moot or irrelevant arguments or topics which don’t matter much. Romans 13 makes Authorities answerable to God, as were our Representatives in Congress Assembled when they appealed to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of their intentions.
“I am curious, how could Satan void God’s existence through any action?” Read the context of that statement. I know I have parents, but if I disobey, rebel, fight, argue, and run away from them, then I make their parental guardianship and authority to mean nothing to me, as though I had no parents.
“Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?”
Report this comment
colt1860
Oct. 18, 2012 at 1:48pmOur founders wanted to avoid a massive, over ecncompassing, centralized, national Government. Why should a federal judge or supreme court justice deny a local school or town from deciding their own rules? It was tried in Germany under Hitler, and it worked wonderfully to forcefully advance national socialism. Where in the Constitution is the federal Goverment (any Branch) granted power or jurisdiction to deal in matters regarding Education?
Report this comment
toiletclogga
Oct. 18, 2012 at 7:39amSincerely held religious beliefs should not be constrained by our government. Christian, Hebrew, or moon god!
Report this comment
ChrisDiamond
Oct. 18, 2012 at 9:40amI agree, but they should also not appear to be promoted by publicly funded entities.
Report this comment
ThePostman
Oct. 18, 2012 at 7:18amLet me just say, from direct personal experience, that the Texas Judicial system is rife with corruption all throughout every part of it. There is no justice in Texas, only foolishness and massive waste of resources on lawyers. Anyone going to court in Texas is a fool. Anyone hoping for any resemblance of justice in Texas, is a fool. That, I have learned. It starts with the AG, Greg Abbott, who has turned the AG office into a farce. He is a politician, not a judge. He made his million suing a neighbor because the neighbor’s tree limb allegedly fell on him while he was jogging in front of the neighbor’s house. Nice. More than likely, he was up in the tree spying on the neighbor’s wife. That’s what we have in Texas.
Report this comment
kickagrandma
Oct. 18, 2012 at 7:58amOh, puleeze…..
Report this comment
kickagrandma
Oct. 18, 2012 at 7:13amPRAY, AMERICANS.
PRAY, CHRISTIANS.
This decision is all about GOD and HIS PRESENCE in and HIS BLESSINGS over our country. Are we HIS people, HIS nation, or not?
PRAY, Judge. Your eternal life may well depend on whether you confess JESUS or not. Here’s your chance to stand up for HIM in a country that still is filled with people who love HIM. We are praying for you and your courage. In JESUS’ mighty name, amen.
Report this comment
DeavonReye
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:09amNo, . . .it isn’t about that. It is about the legality of having such signs in public places where the public pays for via taxes. The court will decide.
On this topic, see my post below…
Report this comment
ForeignWatcher
Oct. 18, 2012 at 7:07amPerry is so right, we do love it when muslims celebrate their faith on the streets, dont we? Everyone that celebrates their faith must be a good guy!
Report this comment
Cajun83
Oct. 18, 2012 at 7:22amThey’re not banned from doing so. The simple fact here is that “Separation of Church and State” has nothing to do with keeping religion out of schools and courthouses. It has everything to do with keeping government regulation out of religion.
From the Texas Constitution: Sec. 6. FREEDOM OF WORSHIP. All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences. No man shall be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent. No human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience in matters of religion, and no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious society or mode of worship. But it shall be the duty of the Legislature to pass such laws as may be necessary to protect equally every religious denomination in the peaceable enjoyment of its own mode of public worship.
Report this comment
kickagrandma
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:01am@Cajun ~~~ and that certainly EXCLUDES everything muslime, doesn’t it? Oh, yes it does!
Report this comment
ToddH
Oct. 18, 2012 at 8:15amIf this is the idea of the cheerleaders then let it go. I would understand the FFRF objecting if the principal or someone in authority over there ordered the cheerleaders to make these banners, but if it is up to them and they wish to express their faith on the fields, more power to them.
KickAGrandma,
I’m an atheist but if the school football game I was watching was majority Muslim, then it wouldn’t surprise me at all if they raised a banner saying “Allahu Akbar” or some other lovely reminder to put us back into the spirit of 9/11.
Such a banner would not be illegal, would not be charged so in a U.S. court, but there might be backlash for it, over which I would not be surprised. We each can express our opinions in this country but that does not protect us from disapproval from the majority if they happen to disagree.
In fact, they should feel lucky we don’t kill people who insult Christ in the West the way they kill people who draw cartoons of Muhammed no matter where they live.
Report this comment