Cheerleaders in Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia, have been told they can no longer voluntarily display banners expressing religious sentiments.

Community members are rallying around Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School cheerleaders after they were banned from displaying signs with Bible verses urging fans and players to “commit to the Lord” and “take courage and do it.”

The banners — the paper ones that football players crash through at the beginning of games — have been common sights in the school’s football stadium since 2003, local officials say.

“The cheerleaders are not trying to push a religious cause, to shove religion down someone’s throat,” said local youth minister Brad Scott, who was LFO High’s class president in 2004. “The cheerleaders are just using Scripture to show motivation and inspiration to the players and the fans.”

So here we go again. Religion has long been part of the fabric of America, from the Bible being taught in schools to states (not the federal government) in early America having official churches to Congress opening its sessions with prayers. Yet, today we’ve devolved to a state in which not only are localities forbidden from deciding what “religious” symbols and ideas will prevail in their institutions, but even students’ religious expression is often suppressed. How did we reach this point?

People will often mount legal arguments when debating this issue, but, really, confining ourselves to that guarantees a loss. This is because the relevant law here, the First Amendment, hasn’t changed; it is the interpretation of it that has, and this is the result of cultural change. People have come to believe that our modern perversion of “the separation of church and state” — which, even properly understood, is itself a perversion of “congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion . . .” — is a moral imperative.

That is to say, many have come to believe that any kind of religious expression in the public sphere is some kind of grave trespass. Thus, it would be wise for us to address this on a moral level and explain why this isn’t so.

What if I said to you that all the American-Indian place names dotting our map must be struck from it or that history involving black people should be purged from school textbooks? You would rightly recognize this as completely arbitrary and view it as indicative of prejudice. But is it really any different from deciding that all religious elements must be purged from school, regardless of their quality or social and historical relevance? Here you may say, “Come on, Duke, it’s not even remotely the same thing.” Well, let’s find out.

What if I said the following to an atheist: If religious ideas really are handed down by God, the Creator of the Universe, Author of All, don’t we have an obligation to infuse our public square with them? Isn’t it then incumbent upon us to instill children with them in school? Now, this is where the atheist will roll his eyes and say, “Well, you may believe the ideas are God’s handiwork, but not everyone agrees with you. I believe they’re just man-made.” Is this checkmate? Yes, it certainly is . . . for the atheist.

Here is how you respond: All right, but if these ideas are man-made just like “secular” ones, why do you discriminate against them? Why do you say that man-made ideas we happen to call “secular” may be in the public arena but man-made ideas we happen to call “religious” may not be? If they’re all man-made, wherein lies the relevant difference?

Getting back to my racial discrimination analogy, it’s more apropos here than you may imagine. After all, regardless of the civilization, discrimination has often been justified with the idea that the targeted group is something less than human. But it becomes much harder to justify when it’s realized that the groups’ members are people just like everyone else. Likewise, how do you justify discrimination against religious ideas if you believe they’re people-made just like every other idea? If it’s just a “feeling” that they don’t “belong,” you start to seem a bit too much like the KKK or Black Panthers.

Of course, being sub-human isn’t the only thing that would justify discrimination; being something more than human would justify the brand known as favoritism. That is, if we discovered that some among us were divine, they’d deserve a special place. But, then, what if we discover that some ideas are divinely inspired? The point is that religion has the advantage over secularism in this debate; after all, it at least makes the claim of divine pedigree. Thus, there may be a reason to confer upon religion higher status than secularism — but never lower.

Now, at this point, certain “friends” of faith — such as the very slippery “Reverend” Barry Lynn — may disgorge the old argument that the reason to be so zealous about purging religion from the public sphere is to protect faith. Wow, with friends like that, who needs communists? Yet this reminds me of how some people would justify slavery by saying it was for the slaves’ own good. Just as with religion, they had to be kept in private hands because they just couldn’t negotiate the real world all by themselves.

At the end of the day, atheists are left with the argument that having religion in the public square is offensive, and this is in fact what’s often claimed. And this is why I say they’re guilty of prejudice. What’s offensive is completely subjective. For example, some people may find sharing a swimming pool with people of a different race to be offensive. And I certainly find much of secularists’ handiwork so, things such as multiculturalism, feminism and radical environmentalism. But does this fact alone mean they shouldn’t be in schools? There is no constitutional right to not be offended.  

There will always be values transmitted through education; thus, we must ensure they’re the best ones possible. But just as you don’t find the best job candidates by arbitrarily disqualifying people based on racial labels, you can’t find the best ideas by arbitrarily disqualifying beliefs based on labels (i.e., “religious”).

Aside from applying reason, we also need action. Many years ago slaves in Brazil developed the martial art of Capoeira, but they disguised it as a dance because their masters didn’t like the idea of them learning self-defense. Likewise, when we can’t overtly defy our atheist philosophical slave masters, we should at least be clever.

And here’s an idea for the Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe cheerleaders: Your next banner should read “Commit to You Know Who.”   

Moreover, remember that advantage religion has over secularism. If atheists are correct, we can at least say that the right to religious expression is a struggle for civil rights. But if we are correct, it is a matter of a certain kind of divine right.

Either way, our place is not at the back of the school bus.

Selwyn Duke is a columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush Limbaugh Show, at WorldNetDaily.com, in American Conservative magazine, is a contributor to AmericanThinker.com and appears regularly as a guest on the award-winning, nationally-syndicated Michael Savage Show. Visit his Website.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (12)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

Brian Westley said:

Assuming your conclusion Sorry, since the objector isn't known, you can't state it was an atheist. It could have been a Jew or a Muslim or a Hindu who objected to Christian messages at official school functions, or even another Christian who doesn't want public schools to interfere with religion. The Santa Fe lawsuit over prayers before school football games were brought by Jewish and Mormon families, not atheists.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 02, 2009
Votes: +0

Dave Wenta said:

	"Commit to You Know Who" "Commit to You Know Who": Brilliant...I love it and cannot wait to use it!
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 02, 2009
Votes: +1

American Citizen said:

	Freedom of Speech? Hey, remember that? It was neat.
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 03, 2009
Votes: -1

Brett Green said:

Sophistry sophistry Noun 1. the practice of using arguments which seem clever but are actually false and misleading Freely jumping between religious and legal arguments makes for a pretty dubious argument. Making a Muslim, Hindu, or atheist football player crash through a sign that declares him a coward for not accepting Christ as his savior is not simply offensive and annoying... it's intimidating and fascist. What if the banner said 'Embrace communism'? How would this be different in any way? Yet, somehow I think you'd be arguing differently... and that's why I call this sophistry.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 04, 2009
Votes: +2

Susan Q. said:

... Who cares what high school cheerleaders in Fort Oglethorpe, Georgia have to say…About anything? Apart from high school boys in Fort Oglethorpe and the town pedophile…Nobody! You can’t tell me that some adult, fire-and-brimstone, Southern Baptist (probably working at the school) didn’t have a hand in all this “commit to the Lord” and “take courage and do it” foolishness. But: “The cheerleaders are not trying to push a religious cause, to shove religion down someone’s throat, said local youth minister Brad Scott...The cheerleaders are just using Scripture to show motivation and inspiration to the players and the fans.” Does Scott really think the rest of the country is stupid enough to buy that piece of rotten baloney? If those little Georgia Peach, Fort O, cheerleaders really want to motivate their team of adolescent boys, they don’t have to use some silly banner to do it. Know what I mean? This kind of thing is exactly what youth minister Scott says it isn’t; pushing a religious cause and trying to shove religion down someone’s throat. Why can’t these people just be honest enough to say it – “Hey, we’re Christians; the mighty, mighty Christians! We wanna make you a Christian. Christianity is the one and only true religion. Christianity is American and if you don’t like it, move to North Korea.” Youth minister Brad Scott may not say that, but I’ll bet he thinks it. And if that’s true, then he and the folks clutching their Bibles in church this morning are not all that different from the stinky Taliban guy clutching his Koran in some dirt hole on the Pakistan border. And that’s why we have to fight them there as well as we have to fight them here. Because, come on, it’s not so much your soul that they are after; it’s your body; and worse yet your mind. You know - “Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” Can I get an Amen on that somebody? .

report abuse vote down vote up

October 04, 2009
Votes: +1

Kenneth Creech said:

	... Susan why do you even bother to read? Open your mind.
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 04, 2009
Votes: -2

Susan Q. said:

	... "Open your mind" - That's a good one Kenneth. Open your own mind buddy.
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 04, 2009
Votes: +2

RichardR369 said:

	Non-Christian Attacks Why do non-Christians go into Christian Dominant areas and then attack Christianity instead of starting their own school? Because it's their goal. Strip the 1st Amendment rights and then shove atheism down our throats declaring freedom of religion. Open your minds people. Quit attacking others and start your own schools.
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 05, 2009
Votes: +2

Susan Q. said:

... Is this "open your mind" some sort of cult thing? To answer your questions though: 1. We already have our own schools. Ever hear of the public school system? Don't need to open new ones without prayer time. (You can always home school if you don't like it. That's a great option for your kids.) 2. Because you bring the fight to the enemy and not wait for them to set up a state religion as they would like. You would like that right; American being interwoven with Christianity and all? 3. And...You guys are just so much fun!

report abuse vote down vote up

October 05, 2009
Votes: -2

Sheesh said:

	... Susan Q. is a troll. She's just looking for a fight. Don't give her the satisfaction.
	report abuse vote down vote up

October 05, 2009
Votes: +0

Susan Q. said:

... "Troll" - Now there's word that Duke fans find a way to work into a dialog a lot. I guess I like the standard "open your mind" piece of business much better. It it has that sixties, Timothy Leary ring that you don't expect coming from a parrot. Have you folks ever had an original thought? Or, do you get all your lines directly from the pulpit and talk radio? A nice quote once in a while is okay, I guess. But most of the time you all sound like you're reading from a Michael Savage script. I'm surprised that no has said that "liberalism is a mental disorder" yet. How come you don't wanna fight? You big strong Christian Promise Breakers afraid of a girl?

report abuse vote down vote up

October 05, 2009
Votes: +1

whitey said:

... As an individual who has spent a large amount of time over the years pondering deep issues and remaining agnostic towards religion, I have in the last 3 years learned of the concerted effort of communists and those who can not be named (or they will sling mud and scream bloody murder...) to undermine Christianity and Muslim beliefs (ie: those with beliefs which are contrary to the group that can not be named). There is a double standard at work whereby these atheists, and this other group, will work hard to promote degenerate behavior and lifestyles while attacking that which has been the norm for centuries. Heck, the UN planned parenthood group wants to teach masturbation to children in the age range of 5-9. These people are attempting to promote base, degenerate, animal-like behavior in order to control the population via scientific processes (in particular behavioral attitude conditioning and brainwashing). People like Susan are actively participating in these activities. For instance, she promotes homeschooling if you have problems with public schools, but the problem is, they will still make you pay out of your pocket to brainwash children in public schools even if you DON'T have children, or you home school your own. This is theft and if you don't pay to help brainwash children(via property taxes), they will send out armed goons to steal from you and/or kill you. The common folk are, without knowledge, engaged in an unconventional war to subvert and destroy the culture and replace it with a slave culture. For scientific references to this agenda please look up Bertrand Russell's "The impact of Science on society", B.F. Skinner's "Walden II", and of course, Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World". Naysayers are either ignorant, or the enemy. And until people start viewing them as enemies who are engaged in unconventional war against them, they just aren't taking matters seriously.

report abuse vote down vote up

October 06, 2009
Votes: -2