Skip to comments.Parents Sue School over 'Lord's Prayer'
Posted on 05/02/2002 4:48:32 PM PDT by TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!Edited on 04/22/2004 12:33:21 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Christine Skarin and her daughters are suing over Woodbine High School's graduation song.
WOODBINE, Iowa — Christine Skarin and her twins have struck a sour note with a lot of people in their farming community of Woodbine, Iowa, but this small-town dispute isn’t the same old song-and-dance.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
They can't arrest 'em and they can't hold them in contempt...hint, hint.
We are all asked to do and say things out of NON other than RESPECT for others. This song cannot harm them.
Did I get all of the cliche's and buzz-words in there?
the essence and power of political correctness.
You maybe could have squeezed "compassion", "diversity", and "shoving their Atheism down our throats" ,in lieu of 'forcing their narrow-minded prejudices on the whole town', but other than that, I think you did a very good job. But you did forget to be "outraged" or "concerned" over their attempt at "cultural genocide".
the essence and power of political correctness.
See: Ayn Rand Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal Chap. 20 "The New Fascism: Rule by Consensus" For details
Since Kyle's mom is acting like a perfect horse's @ss, you just know that *someone* will unleash a blunt commentary of her. Sure enough, Eric Cartman clears his throat, steps to the front and belts out:
Weeeell, Kyles mom's a b!tch, she's a big fat b!tch
She's the biggest b!tch in the whole wide world.
She's a stupid b!tch, if there ever was a b!tch
She's a b!tch to all the boys and girls.
There's more, but you get the idea. I love the part in the article where "mom" whines about "finding out who your friends really are". Yeah... I'll bet!
I thought the twins were a BOY ANd a girl...not TWO girls!!! geesh...and ATHIESTS!!! What a Proud momma.
Sure....sure ...this has nothing to do with anti-Christian bigotry at all. Christians just *happen* to be the targets.
The people of Woodbine, Iowa just found out that this old bag and her daughters aren't friends to the town.
Bingo! If you do not believe in that religion, it is just another song to you.
And a God whose ethic is the basis for the very freedom under which they protest.
NEWS April 2, 2002: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ICLU brings lawsuit against school that requires students to sing the Lord's Prayer at graduation
The Iowa Civil Liberties Union Foundation yesterday filed a lawsuit against the Woodbine Community School District in west central Iowa challenging the district's practice of having the school choir sing the Lord's Prayer at it's graduation ceremonies.
The suit, filed on behalf of two students and their parents, alleges that the practice of requiring students in the choir to sing the prayer violates the religious freedom of choir members. The ICLU is also arguing that including the prayer in the graduation program represents the government endorsement of a particular religious view in violation of the First Amendment.
"The Lord's Prayer represents a deeply personal affirmation of faith for millions of Christian's worldwide," said Ben Stone, executive director of the ICLU. "The government has no business forcing kids to sing such a prayer. This is about recognizing the dignity of people who don't happen to agree with the majority on a religious matter," said Stone.
The case is being brought on behalf of Donovan and Ruby Skarin, who are sophomore members of the high school choir, and their parents, Christine and Donald Skarin, all of Dunlap, Iowa.
The younger Skarins, who are twins, are suing in order to stop the school from forcing them to sing the prayer. Their parents, who pay taxes in support of the school, are suing to stop the district from spending taxpayer dollars in support of an official, government prayer, as well as to protect their parental right to raise their children free from government religious coercion.
The Skarin twins, who are 14 years old, feel uncomfortable being forced to sing the Lord's Prayer. "The prayer which they are having us sing for graduation is basically forcing us to sing praise to a God that we don't even believe in," said Donovan Skarin.
Ruby Skarin laments how the school's policy basically forces her to be disrespectful to her classmates. "I know that I am not giving the prayer the respect that I know they feel it should be given," she said.
The high school choir has performed the Lord's Prayer at Woodbine's graduation ceremony several times in the past. The Skarin twins were forced to sing the prayer last year. The ICLU believes the prayer was also included in ceremonies in 1995 and 1999. It may have been sung in other years as well.
Despite being asked by community members to remove the prayer from the program this year, district officials decided that the graduation ceremony, scheduled for May 19, 2002, would once again include the prayer.
This represents the fifth time in twenty years the ICLU has been involved in a school prayer lawsuit, although it has been nearly a decade since the ICLU went to court to stop a school-sponsored graduation prayer. The ICLU won in the district court in all five cases.
In 1993, the civil liberties organization won a district court ruling involving the Sheldon and Marcus school districts. On appeal, the case was dismissed on the unrelated issue of standing.
In the 1980s, the ICLU prevailed in three cases. In 1989, the ICLU successfully defended the West Monona school district after it was sued by a minister who wanted to force the district to include a graduation prayer. In 1985, a federal judge told the Leon school district to drop a graduation prayer after the ICLU brought suit on behalf of a graduating student. And in 1982, the principal of Thomas Jefferson High School in Council Bluffs was told by a federal judge to stop leading students in prayer at school-sponsored Christmas and Easter services. The plaintiff in that suit, Milton Abramson, received death threats.
To those who believe school-sponsored prayers should be allowed if a majority want them, the ICLU's Stone had this to say: "If we allow a small town to set up an official religion, then only people of that religion will ever live there, and religious intolerance will rule. All you have to do is look at the Middle East, Ireland and the Balkans to appreciate how lucky we are in America that we don't allow a religious majority to use the government to coerce religious minorities."
The federal lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of Iowa, Western Division, which is located in Council Bluffs. The plaintiff's seek an injunction, but are not asking for monetary damages. In addition to the ICLU's Legal Director, Randall Wilson, the Skarins will also be represented by Professor Sally Frank and law students at the Drake Legal Clinic in Des Moines.
Professor of Law
The Constant Struggle for Justice
It has been said, "Justice is a constant struggle." From an early age, I learned the truth in that quote. As a child, I watched nightly news reports of William Kunstler and others defending the Chicago 8 and dealing with a judge and prosecution intent on jailing them because they opposed the policies of the United States government. I also saw the movie, "Inherit the Wind," depicting Clarence Darrow's defense in the Scopes trial of a teacher's right to teach evolution. Together, they inspired me to be a lawyer to fight for the rights of protesters, for freedom to dissent and for the protection of the oppressed.
As a lawyer and law professor, I have represented protesters frequently. I also have represented victims of discrimination and poor people in housing, family law and domestic abuse cases. Both in my teaching and my practice, I have tried to help the disenfranchised. With constant struggle and good preparation, lawyers can work toward the restructuring of the system and the attainment of justice.
This is the work of the public interest lawyer. We see the problems of the system and work with our clients and others to achieve justice for them and for society as a whole. It's a massive undertaking, but gratifying work. And sometimes, we even win.
A.B., Princeton University;
J.D., New York University School of Law;
M.A.T. in Clinical Education, Antioch University.
Areas of Expertise
Professional skills, including clinical education; Women's Rights.
Law clerk for civil court judge in New York City and teacher at legal clinics at Antioch University and New York Law School; also brought and won a landmark sex discrimination case against Princeton University and its all-male eating clubs.
"Eve Was Right to Eat the 'Apple': The Importance of Narrative to the Art of Lawyering,"
Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, a re-examination of the Eve narrative that proposes criminal defenses that she might use.
Organizes and provides representation for survivors of domestic violence.
Activist with peace organizations.
No agenda here folks, just decent lawyers upholding the constitution. Move on now....
See my post #30 above. The ACLU is anti-Christian. You will find the ADL and PFAW often joining them in cases. Nobody is fooled.
You got me. I am. Took someone like you who has been on FR for 8 days to uncover the secret I've kept since signing on to FR 4 years ago. Really had people fooled at the Anti-Clinton protests and at the Florida recount rallies for Bush in 2000.
Btw..where were you when Clinton's Secret Service was making occasional housecalls to freepers and many of us were wondering if we would be audited for what we said here?
Now, my mind would probably change if the song were part of a set that included mostly secular music and if the girls fully understood that being in the choir would occasionally require them to sing religious songs--as art, not as religion.
I'm usually supportive of religious expression by individuals in schools, but this seems to cross the line.
It will only be a prayer if the singer makes it so. Just ask Barbra Streisand who has recorded Christian songs for years. Actually I always thought it strange to hear her sing "Ave Maria" or a truly Christian Christmas song. But she's been doing it for years.
Some folks just want to make a stink, I guess.
Ignore these pathetic people who's ears, and hearts cannot bear the word "GOD".
No it is not.
Justice Hugo Black, when he was head of membership for the largest Klu Klux Klan cell in the South, made new recruits swear to Separation before they were admitted to the Klan. Black was a nativist and anti-Catholic bigot. When he became a Justice of the Supreme Court, he wrote Separation of Church and State into first amendment law in 1947. The Supreme Court in the last two years has not endorsed Separation , whether holding for religious groups or against them. The US Supreme Court has dropped the Separation metaphor, which was never in the First Amendment anyway. They have not yet replaced it with anything. So we had Separation from about 1947-98, not before and not since.
Jefferson was a Unitarian. In many states his church was supported by state taxes. Church services were held in the House of Representatives until after the Civil War. Our first congress authorized the printing of thousands of Bibles and gave land to missionaries in order to convert Native Americans to Christainity. Jefferson attended a 4 hour communion service at the Treasury Department. Even the chambers of the Supreme Court were used for church services.
"Separation of Church and State" is a recent liberal construct. It has no consitutional basis.
Isn't Professor Frank a typical ratty looking hippy-dippy commissar? A creature right out of Dr. Zhivago. Looks like her boss, Donald Stone, is friends with the Commies at the National Lawyer's Guild.
Come To The NLG Midwest Regional Conference in Iowa
March 1-3, Boyd Law Building, University of Iowa
Featured speakers include Leone Bicchieri (National Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice), Dan Holub (Director of the University of Iowa Institute for Labor Studies), Nick Johnson (UI Law Professor, and former head of the Federal Communications Commission), Bruce Nestor (President, National Lawyers Guild), Sandra Sanchez (Iowa Immigration Rights Project), Mac Scott (NLG National Student Coordinator), Ahmed Shawki (Editor of the International Socialist Review). Ben Stone (Director of the Iowa Civil Liberties Union), Jeffrey Weiss (Education Director of the American Friends Service Committee), Adrienne Wing (UI Law Professor and consultant to the South African Constitutional Committee), and many more . .
Report of the Senate
Fact-Finding Subcommitteee on
Un-American Activities in
California, no. 11, 1961
Since our last report is still in print and since this Communist front, organization is described therein at length, we cite our readers who are interested in learning more about this particular organization to our 1959 report at pages 20, 126-135, 137, 144, 197.
It is still extremely active throughout the United States, and has powerful chapters in virtually all of the large cities in California.
Since this organization has long been characterized as Communist-dominated by this Committee and other official agencies, and since it has been cited before the Subversive Activities Control Board in Washington, D.C., virtually all of the members who were attracted to the organization because they believed it was a completely independent liberal organization of attorneys filling a need for a group more liberal than the American Bar Association, quickly withdrew when they discovered the true nature of the control of the National Lawyers Guild leaving a membership of individuals who either didn't care if it were known they were persisting in their membership with a Communist front organization, or whose records of ideological conviction would naturally impel them to gravitate toward such an organization.
The ACLU: Past, Present, and Future
Executive Director: Ben Stone
446 Insurance Exchange Bldg.
Des Moines, IA 50309
Phone: (515) 243-3576
Isn'ta it amazing that on a conservative forum there are people saying they think this or that speech should be allowed. My God, we are lost. What they think they want to hear means nothing. What the First Amendment was intended to protect and encourage means everything.
You might be interested in an 1802 letter from Thomas Jefferson to Baptists who were being persecuted because they were not part of the Congregationalist establishment of Connecticut: Jefferson Letter
The 1791 First Amendment says, "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 to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
To me that says keep government out of religion. It also says CFR is clearly unconstitutional. If you use the First Amendment to fight CFR, are you going to ignore the rest of the First Amendment as far as religion is concerned? You practice what religion you want, and I'll practice mine. Keep government (and government schools) out of it.
Better than that, let's stamp out the abomination of government schools altogether so that no faction can use government force to impose their belief system on others against their will. Religion is certainly pervasive enough to survive without government sponsorship. Isn't it? Without government school monopolies the free market would spring into action providing schools to serve the varying needs of the community and nobody would be forced to pay for, or participate in, the promotion of doctrine they oppose. Frankly, I don't see how an honest christian can stand in support of the continuation of government run schools.
To establish a rapport with the Baptists (Jefferson was a Unitarian , a group closely allied with the feared Congregationalists), Jefferson borrowed from the words of Roger Williams, a prominent Baptist preacher:
"When they have opened a gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the Church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself, removed the candlestick, and made his garden a wilderness, as at this day. And that there fore if He will eer please to restore His garden and paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto Himself from the world.."
The "wall" metaphor was one directional. The church was to be protected from incursion from the state not the other way around.
This is made evident by the following:
When, in late 1820 and early 1821, Massachusetts went through the exercise of revising its Constitution, the attempt to separate church and state was opposed successfully by the eloquent Daniel Webster, among others. Channing, and a number of other Unitarian ministers, sided with Webster. In an eloquent sermon in December 1820, titled Religion a Social Principle, Channing defended the union of church and state, arguing that religion is not merely a personal matter between God and human beings: ". . .Therefore, Society ought, through its great organ and representative, which is government, as well as by other methods, to pay homage to God, and express its obligation."
Thomas Jefferson wrote on June 22, 1822:The question arises that if Jefferson's Danbury letter does advocate a separation of church and state as some claim it does, what was Jefferson doing proselytizing for and being in a congregation which opposed such a notion?
"I rejoice that in this blessed country of free inquiry and belief, which has surrendered its conscience to neither kings nor priests, the genuine doctrine of one God is reviving and I trust that there is not a young man now living in the United States who will not die a Unitarian."
Channing was the most prominent Unitarian minister of the day. Jefferson surely knew about the debate which had raged one year before he made the comment above.