The First Amendment and Time Machines

RE THE "PRAYER" LAWSUIT: Nope, on my last post, I didn’t include the “debate” going on at the OC Register, preferring to concentrate on the remarks and views of academics. That was no guarantee of quality, it seems.

But the Reg’s readers are very interested in the lawsuit. The Reg article, which appeared on the 23rd, has thus far attracted 90 comments!

I perused them and found most of them to be pretty predictable.

There are exceptions, but, mostly, here’s what passes for debate among the OC Reg’s readers:

At 11:45, alleykat1 wrote:
Keep religion out of public schools, okay? Thanks.

At 11:54, kakalaki wrote:
Keep homosexuality, and liberal indoctrination out of our public schools, okay? Thanks.

Gotta love the old Reg and its Neanderthal “base.”

The Reg has run a poll, asking, “Should prayer be part of community college events?”

The results so far:

Yes. It's a longstanding tradition that should be upheld. 58%
No. It's a violation of the separation of church and state. 42%

That’s better than I expected.

Evidently, some readers—including some who wrote to Inside Higher Ed!—are unfamiliar with the 1st Amendment of the Constitution. No, it isn’t only about free speech. It includes the famous “establishment clause,” followed by the “Free Exercise Clause,” etc.:

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.

As many (though, evidently, not all) know, the phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Constitution/Bill of Rights. The phrase seems to trace back to a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence. (He was a Deist.)

There is a decent discussion of the 1st Amendment and differing interpretations of the Establishment Clause in Wikipedia.

I’m struck by the popularity of the odd notion that we can entirely settle questions regarding the meaning of the rights enumerated in the Constitution/Bill of Rights by identifying what their authors intended—as though the notion of “intention” were simple.

Naturally, I am very interested in the question of what the “founding fathers” were thinking. But I am equally interested in the conversations and convictions inspired by their words in the subsequent two centuries. The Constitution—and our ideals as Americans—are a tradition that necessarily adjusts and seeks relevance and meaning as time passes.

And so a reliable jaunt in a Time Machine is not the sine qua non of answering the crucial questions.

Santa Ana Canyon, 1887

THE YORBAS, PART TWO:

I had lunch with my folks today. I mentioned the Yorba Cemetery to them and, to my amazement, they knew something about it.

Turns out back in the old days—when our family first moved to the States—my folks loved to take the family to historical sites. In about 1962, they somehow heard about the Yorbas and about their cemetery and Adobe. So, one Saturday, we drove up the Santa Ana Canyon to find ‘em.

Back then, evidently, there was no freeway—I vaguely remember the old two-lane highway winding up the canyon, mostly hugging the south side—and the road to the spot where Bernardo Yorba established his ranch was pretty much in the middle of nowhere. (Now, it's wall-to-wall suburbia.)

My folks found the monument commemorating the enormous adobe structure—it was demolished in the twenties—and then they drove to the cemetery that was close by.

It wasn’t locked up. We strode inside and took a look around.

“Did you take any pictures?”

“No.”

In 1970, my dad (and I) started a Boy Scout Troop (#536) at Trinity Lutheran Church, which sat atop Nohl Ranch Road in Anaheim Hills, about where the road crests. (We had been with Troop 850 in Villa Park.) As it turns out, an “important” part of the Yorba family lived in that neighborhood, just up from the canyon floor, and so we got to know “the Yorbas.” --Some of ‘em, anyway.

My dad launched into stories about meeting Mr. Yorba’s mother at the “Yorba compound.” Evidently, she was very nice, very old world. She always insisted on giving him a bag of oranges when he visited.

I kinda remember ‘em. Sheesh.

Picture: Bernardo Yorba II, 1880.

P.S.: I looked up my old Church—Trinity Lutheran—and learned that, in 1985, "the church voted unaminously to withdraw its membership in the ALC [American Lutheran Church] because of theological liberalism and the synod's abandonment of the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy." Trinity is now a member of "The Conservative Lutheran Association." Gosh.

Discussion about the prayer lawsuit

I'VE BEEN monitoring comments to recent articles in the academic press on the SOCCCD “prayer” lawsuit (Westphal v. Wagner). They’ve been pretty much what you’d expect, I suppose.

We’ll start with the Chronicle article, which attracted only seven comments. (I've selected only two of these.)

CHRONICLE OF HIGHER ED

● The first commenter was pithy. “Geoz32” said “good.”

● Another commenter who goes by the handle “22218459” scolded both sides of the suit:

It is a reproach to ALL sides in this argument that it continues to go on. If the plaintiffs and defendants in this suit would consistently follow the ideals they cite, they would communicate sufficientl [sic] to accomodate, rather than litigate.

INSIDE HIGHER ED

For some reason, there were many more comments on the article that appeared in “Inside Higher Ed.”

● “Ind2002” of Pace University opined:

I have always been baffled by the obsession with public prayer, whether within the context of school ceremonies, football games, etc. I fail to comprehend why people who wish to pray cannot do so in their church, or the privacy of their home, or within themselves. Why the need for this type collectivism?....

● But Thomas M. Ratliff, an administrator at Indiana Wesleyan, offered a very different perspective:

Every human should be allowed to say whatever they want. Americans are supposed to be free to do so, even if someone else doesn't like it or agree. It is not suppression of other's rights to say something they do not want to hear, it is fundamental to the growth experience we are to have as living beings. 
I commend the college officials for consistently making their stand and speaking what they believe is appropriate in their hearts. May others be so bold as to continue to believe that we are actually free in this country and not enslaved to censorship.

● Meanwhile, Mike Landry of Northern State U wrote:

Wow! Not only does Saddleback College have the best jazz station I've ever heard (I listen online), but they have an administration with courage and common sense. There was ... a Western/County music dinner theater kind of thing in Colorado Springs. Each evening before the dinner, one of the cowboys would begin the meal by saying something like: "Before we eat, around here we pray. If you don't pray, that's fine. It won't hurt you." Glad to see Saddleback standing for a tradition deep within Western civilization.

● RSP expressed a different view:

… I too fail to understand why so many people insist on imposing their views on others in public settings. Those individuals with differing views are forced to listen, they cannot walk away. They are also, in a very real sense, forced to respond in the way that the speaker is wishing them to respond--forced to participate. If they don't, they risk being viewed as an outsider and subject to discrimination (even if that discrimination is subconscious). It's my understanding that the constitution, in part, was designed to protect the minority viewpoint....

● “pg” wrote:

I find it interesting that many individuals in the US who criticize theocracies elsewhere have no problem advocating public prayer and occasionally other acts of religious fanaticism. … In this so-called melting pot where all different races, ethnicities, and faiths reside, why can't religion be kept a personal matter?....

● Dale pounced on the appeal to tradition:

Tradition...tradition....tradition.... I keep hearing this plea for tradtion. Please. We're an educated people. Once upon a time, it was tradition to own slaves and burn witches at the stake. Can't we do better than that?
....

● Diogenes opined:

Courage? Seems more like bullying. "Hi. I'm your fundamentalist Christian administrator and we are now going to pray to my exclusive god. Sorry about yours…."

● Don Heller at Penn State weighed in with:

[Ratliff wrote:] "Every human should be allowed to say whatever they want. Americans are supposed to be free to do so, even if someone else doesn't like it or agree."

…[T]he courts have consistently ruled that public agencies - such as Saddleback Community College - have to tread lightly in their use and promotion of religion. The actions reported here tread very closely to the line the courts have delineated in ruling that public agencies not promote religious views. Ultimately, it will be up to a court to decide, but in the meantime it appears that SCC will spend a lot of money defending its actions, money it obviously cannot spare given the budget situation in which California finds itself.

● G. Tod Slone opined:

Bravo to the five brave professors for engaging this lawsuit and to Karla Westphal, in particular! They bring hope to the heart! Students, however, shouldn’t be encouraged to speak anonymously. Instead, they need to be encouraged to “go upright and vital, and speak the rude truth in all ways” (Emerson). ... 
It is mind-boggling to think that, at a public California college, such religious séances occur during mandatory faculty attendance events. Rather than be “baffled by the obsession with public prayer,” as one anonymous entity stated, we need to stand up and decry it openly! Without separation of church and state, we’ll end up like one of those islamist nations, where butchering women who leave their husbands is the order of the day….

● Sue Donna Moss wrote:

Perhaps the solution for all these people who think that it's fair to the rest of us to open events at public institutions with prayer would be to follow them up with an obnoxious, sarcastic three minute lecture from a secular humanist. Maybe the religious wouldn't be so quick to cram their ancient superstitions down our throats react when they discover that turnabout is fair game?

● Marcus Timbaugh, a prof. of Economics, said he liked prayer:

I like prayer. Whether or not you let me do it in public will not stop me from praying for you. 
Do me one favor though. Stop being hypocrites and playing the victim everytime someone prays in public, when your institutions systematically cram your atheistic views down students throats every day. There is an undeniable truth that thoughout [sic] most non-religious campuses, it's OK to be of ANY group, so long as it's not Christian. It's time to drop this double standard....

ADDED AT 6:30 p.m.:

● Bradley Bleck, who teaches English at Spokane Falls CC, asked

… [T]here might be religious freedom in theory, but there is certainly no freedom from being bullied by those who can't follow the dictates of Christ: 
“And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you" (Mathew 6 5-6).


● A fellow oddly named “Charles Darwin” offered this unpleasant comment:

Well, Saddleback college, it's nice to hear from you. Things have been a bit boring in the old grave lately, the Bears suck this year, and the Cubs, well, don't get me started.
 So imagine my delight in reading that you adminstrators at a publicy-funded institution of higher education get to decide what color God your good people get to pray to. Good for you!
 When I get Power, I think i will make everyone pray to science.
 You slobbermouthed, brainless, Faux-Noose watching idots [sic] are going to join me in hell for this. I can't wait.

● MathProf noted that

Many members of this opposition [to trustee prayer, etc.] are not opposed to religion, or the public expression of religion. We are opposed to the privileged position given to one religion -- Christianity -- at the expense of other religions: Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism etc….

● Diogenes came back, looking for Marcus:

Actually Marcus I don't know what's more amusing: your straw man stereotypes or the weakness of the rest of your "argument."
 I tend to follow the teaching of an inspired man who said, "Do not pray in public as the hypocrites do..." You ought to read his book someday instead of slapping people with it.

● TT saw thing very differently:

… Just how far are we going to allow PC to dictate our lives[?] In this issue some speak of tradition, there is nothing wrong with tradition, and by the way I don't think the concept of tradition applies to slavery.
 Bottom line is Saddleback has an average enrollment of 39,000+ students and staff/faculty 2,000+ and 8 people are objecting to the this practice. Stop the world, I want to get off!

● Meanwhile, according to Hannha,

…[H]ow reasonable is it to expect the non-christians to just tune out or put up with it? What if it were a hebrew or muslim or wiccan or buddhist prayer; would christians be OK to just "go along"? 
I say, keep it simple--no prayers at all at public school functions. The cultural demographics and dynamics that made it easy for such prayers to go unchallenged in decades past have radically changed--for the better….

● CL expressed an unpopular view concerning democracy:

…We live in a democracy where the majority rules. If the majority want prayer at an event, then prayer occurs. For those opposed to prayer, don't pray. If you find it offensive, plug your ears….

● Predictably, others, including CC Prof, rebutted CL

…The Bill of Rights ... specifically limits or constrains majority rule. A majority of Americans could decide that everyone must be Catholic (or agnostic, etc.), but any legislation to that effect would be unconstitutional because of the 1st Amendment….

● And Jason said:

Actually, wer're not a democracy where "the majority" rules. We are a REPUBLIC, where the rights of the minority get protected in the consititution.…

● Don Rucker of Azusa Pacific U said:

… First, Thomas Jefferson made it clear to the Danbury, Connecticut Baptists that the "wall of separation" between the government and religion was for the protection of religion. In fact, that wall was to prevent the establishment of a national religion. It was not intended to prevent prayer anywhere. Also, it was intended by our founders that Christianity was fundamental in the founding of our nation….

● Annoyed PhD was amused by Sue Donna Moss’s crack about religion and superstition:

…God have mercy on all of us and the BS we have to put up with that flows out of "educated" people's mouths on college campuses. I hope your research is comforting to you in times of need and sadness.

● Jeremiah thought that believers should heed the Bible:

Consider the words of.…Jesus…: "When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray on street corners and in public so that others may se them…..” Enough, already! Forget the ACLU, the Constitution, and all earthly law! Heed Matthew 6: 5-8 and get over it!!!

● Robert at Multnomah suggested:

… I'm not advocating for defense of public prayer like this or not, I just think that common sense and pragmatism demands that we step back and honestly ask ourselves if it's really hurting anyone. … Also, bare in mind that people with religious "rituals" have to mind far more rules in society to avoid offending others than most of us are willing to acknowledge… Remember folks, everybody is being repressed and oppressed by somebody in some circumstance somewhere if you look hard enough...you're not the only one….

● Dr. Anonymous said

The First Amendment says only that there shall be no Established Church and no law relating thereto. That is all. I grew up saying the Lord's Prayer every day in school. It hurt no-one, and no-one complained. Christianity is the religion of the American nation; it also has been at the heart of the American experience since 1620.  So: Jews, Muslims, and the various brands of atheism feel "on the outside" when prayers are said at public functions. Well: They ARE on the outside. And in their hearts they know it.

Well, for today anyway, Dr. A gets the last word.

COMMENTS:

Anonymous said...
The poor oppressed Christians, all so worried about others' viewpoints being "crammed down their throats." 

The rest of us have to put with their mythology on a regular basis, and it often creeps into legislation. They long for the next auto-da-fe while they whine about how put upon they are.
12:54 PM, November 28, 2009

Anonymous said...
I send my kid to community college to be educated, not prayed to. I have the option of sending my kid to a private faith-based college, but chose to send him to a public institution. I suggest your Board of Trustees stick to the issue of educating kids and stop wasting hard earned taxpayer money defending their "right" to force their christian beliefs down the public's throats.
6:03 PM, November 28, 2009

Anonymous said...
Good lord; who knew that the Chronicle had such neanderthal readers?----but also some thoughtful and educated ones, thankfully. 

¶ What an impasse we seem to have reached in this bizarre country. It's hard for me not to think that a certain LACK OF INTELLIGENCE keeps the Christian-types from seeing who is really being bullied in this country, from legislation and proposed health care "reforms" (let's take away any real legal right to abortions for women who can't afford them) to public prayer everywhere we turn. 

¶ Reminds me of noisy jerks at the movies: when you ask them to be quiet, they'll say, "hey, live and let live." Uh--yeah; that was MY point.

I mean: some of it is just plain stupidity. Very depressing.

Thanks so much for pressing the lawsuit!

  --MAH
6:32 PM, November 28, 2009