Judge rules for cheerleaders in Bible banner suit
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - A judge stopped an East Texas school district on Thursday from barring cheerleaders from quoting Bible verses on banners at high school football games, saying the policy appears to violate their free speech rights.
District Judge Steve Thomas granted an injunction requested by the Kountze High School cheerleaders allowing them to continue displaying religious-themed banners pending the outcome of a lawsuit set to go to trial next June 24, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said. Thomas previously granted a temporary restraining order allowing the practice to continue.
School officials barred the cheerleaders from displaying banners with religious messages such as, "If God is for us, who can be against us," after the Freedom From Religion Foundation complained. The advocacy group says the messages violate the First Amendment clause barring the government - or a publicly funded school district, in this case - from establishing or endorsing a religion.
Republican Gov. Rick Perry and Abbott spoke out in support of the cheerleaders on Wednesday. Perry appointed Thomas to fill a vacancy on the 356th District Court, and he is running for election to continue in the post as a Republican.
Abbott also filed court papers to intervene in the lawsuit and sent state attorneys to support the cheerleaders' position that the district's ban violated their free speech rights. The Texas Education Code also states that schools must respect the rights of students to express their religious beliefs.
"It is the individual speech of the cheerleaders and not in fact the government speaking," David Starnes, the cheerleaders' attorney said, according to KDFM television. "It is not just one girl or one person in the group that comes up with the quote, but it's on a rotating basis that each girl gets to pick the quote. That is their individual voices that are being portrayed on the banner."
Thomas Brandt, the attorney representing the school district, said the superintendent had acted to comply within existing legal rulings.
The Anti-Defamation League issued a statement in which it called the judge's decision misguided.
"Public schools are for children of all faiths or no faith, and these banners were clearly being displayed in the context of school-sponsored activities," the group said. "Faith is a profoundly personal decision, so students should not be subjected to an exclusionary school-sponsored religious message on campus or be forced to choose between attending quintessential school events - football games - or being subjected to an unwanted religious message."
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, which is dedicated to the separation of church and state, argued 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."
Perry said Texans should encourage 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."
District Judge Steve Thomas granted an injunction requested by the Kountze High School cheerleaders allowing them to continue displaying religious-themed banners pending the outcome of a lawsuit set to go to trial next June 24, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said. Thomas previously granted a temporary restraining order allowing the practice to continue.
School officials barred the cheerleaders from displaying banners with religious messages such as, "If God is for us, who can be against us," after the Freedom From Religion Foundation complained. The advocacy group says the messages violate the First Amendment clause barring the government - or a publicly funded school district, in this case - from establishing or endorsing a religion.
Republican Gov. Rick Perry and Abbott spoke out in support of the cheerleaders on Wednesday. Perry appointed Thomas to fill a vacancy on the 356th District Court, and he is running for election to continue in the post as a Republican.
Abbott also filed court papers to intervene in the lawsuit and sent state attorneys to support the cheerleaders' position that the district's ban violated their free speech rights. The Texas Education Code also states that schools must respect the rights of students to express their religious beliefs.
"It is the individual speech of the cheerleaders and not in fact the government speaking," David Starnes, the cheerleaders' attorney said, according to KDFM television. "It is not just one girl or one person in the group that comes up with the quote, but it's on a rotating basis that each girl gets to pick the quote. That is their individual voices that are being portrayed on the banner."
Thomas Brandt, the attorney representing the school district, said the superintendent had acted to comply within existing legal rulings.
The Anti-Defamation League issued a statement in which it called the judge's decision misguided.
"Public schools are for children of all faiths or no faith, and these banners were clearly being displayed in the context of school-sponsored activities," the group said. "Faith is a profoundly personal decision, so students should not be subjected to an exclusionary school-sponsored religious message on campus or be forced to choose between attending quintessential school events - football games - or being subjected to an unwanted religious message."
The Freedom From Religion Foundation, which is dedicated to the separation of church and state, argued 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."
Perry said Texans should encourage 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."
"You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then, you can stand up and sing about the "land of the free". -quote from The American President
 Here's the thing- they cannot stop an Atheist cheerleader from posting his or her thoughts either. So, I have no problem with these naive little girls posting their indoctrinated messages at a football game. It's all bringing back such memories for me, having graduated high school in North Texas in the late 80s. Big hair and Bibles for everyone! Yee-Haw! Here's hoping that there's a kid quoting Mark Twain or Richard Dawkins during their next game! Free Speech is for all of us!
 @two loonshoping that there's a kid quoting Mark Twain or Richard Dawkins during their next game!"
Â
Better - "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.
Mahatma Gandhi
 @two loons I agree with your Free Speech for everyone--- in a positive way...bring on the Twain-- bring on anything that encourages kids! The part about "these naive little girls posting their indoctrinated messages" Super nice of you
I wonder which team God wants to win? Clearly God likes football.
Ugh. Texas. That is all.
Great! I can't wait to bring some Yoga Sutra posters to our next local high school game.
Â
Om Ganesha Namaha. Namaste!
Sounds good to me.
Oh brother, why can't these kids do something more productive with their faith, like spreading peace, understanding, tolerance, etc..., instead of exploiting divinity and faith to win High School football games. Â You know, do as Jesus would do... Â Â
@31F and, what would that be?
 @Pastor Coale  @31F You are a pastor and have to ask that question? Seriously????
 @31F LOL
If you read the signs, they have nothing to do with cheerleading. It's obvious that their church is using these girls as recruitment foot soldiers. I guess that church just needs more money.
OR maybe they just like their faith. Either way it freedom of speech.
 @Barlion LOL
Take your signs to your church and display them inside on Sunday where they belong.
Says who? You? Pshh. Freedom of speech.
 @Lord Farquad I like you both on this one. While I would like to see an end to all religion, I must accept that I cannot impose that upon others, who also have the right to express their views. See, Christians? That's how it works. We coexist.
 @Barlion So don't read the article. The Word doesn't belong in a church.
 If you read the quote from the article, the Freedom From Religion Foundation shows their true colors. They said, "If the majority of the cheerleaders were atheists, would a court support their 'right' to hold up a banner insulting Christianity or all believers?" They're about insulting and persecuting Christianity; not about freedom from religion. There's a difference.
 @777 They're also about promoting critical thought. I'll certainly concede that many Atheists are way too insulting towards Christians, but the reverse of that is also true. We're all mean to each other and very emotional about this topic.
@two loons I've heard a lot of so called athiest's on this venue as well as others who condemn all religous beliefs in general and Christians in particular. I've yet to hear any Christians condemning Athiest's or Agnostics for their beliefs. We think they're wrong or misguided but at least in America they do have a right to their express thier opinions.
 @Furd Yeah, well one poster certainly proves the rule... just like Gary Ridgeway "proves" that "all men are rapists and murderers", and Alexis Wright "proves" that all women are - uh... "wh...s".
 @Mej47 You must not read very many of the posts. There is at least one poster that is extremely vitriolic towards non-believers.
Good for them.A judge with common sense who believes in the 1st Amendment.Â
They are setting the stage for ridicule if their team doesn't perform on the gridiron. Then again, maybe it's a good way to psych out the visiting players.Â
Hmm, this usually pops up AFTER Halloween, and it tends to involve Christmas trees. Â
Well, it really boils down to who purchased the paper and the pens...
 @JLS1950 heh, sounds about right to me.  even as an atheist, i couldn't care less what the cheerleaders want to jot down on a sign.  i'll bet they are exceptionally nice kids/families - ever christian family i know is.
 @nobelprizeme  @JLS1950 I know some really nice Christians too, and happen to be related to some extraordinarily mean ones. I only want to add that I know some awesome Atheists as well, and that morality is something we choose with or without a belief in a higher power.
 @nobelprizeme There is a reason why that may be, although I have to admit I have seen the ugly "christian" as well. The important thing to remember is that ANYBODY can say they are Christian, but Jesus said the proof is in the "fruit".
Â
"Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Â
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law."
 @SouthofSeattle Not sure this will interest you at all, but I'll say it anyway and maybe someone will get something out of it.
Â
The "apple" - the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil - has nothing whatever to do with "wisdom". Scripture commends wisdom - but not what this tree represents.
Ancient Hebrew is a language of "word pictures" - of metaphors and allegory. This is not to say it is not "true" - it is just that it is deliberately structured to speak truths through examples. The "Tree" is such a case.
The key to it is, first, that "knowledge" here (the original Hebrew word) does not mean experiential knowledge, but rather means unproved "head knowledge" - actually akin to speculation. Then, the turns "good" and "evil" strongly suggest a *relative* sense rather than an absolute one. And scripture tells us that God does not accept "relatively good": Isaiah 64:6. Gos is pretty much "my way or the highway" when it comes to judging good vs. evil.
Now, before you start quoting retributive passages from the Old Testament (Tanach) let's understand that Acts 15:19-20 essentially cancels all that for modern Christians, turning it all into a teaching tool but not "law".
So the point here is that the "tree" was not about learning how to tell good from evil at all: it was about being able to justify a "lesser evil" on the basis of some "greater evil". But God's instruction in context was "obey" - not "stack-rank your choices and choose the lesser evils". The correct choice is to refuse ALL evil.Christians are not called to "do good works" (cf. Matthew 7) - we are called to OBEY by keeping ourselves from ALL evil.
However, that Acts 15 passage rises again, and denies Christians any scriptural authority to force other people - especially non-believers - to behave as God has called US to behave. We can invite. We can recommend. We can participate in government and help pass laws against actual victimization - murder, assault, robbery, theft, perjury, etc. - but we really do not have scriptural authority to try to make people "behave righteously" for righteous' sake. Our primary tool is to invite people to join us in the promise of Eternal Life through Jesus - and let the Holy Spirit sort out inside them how they ought behave based on scripture and the words of Jesus.
But compromise is an abomination in the eyes of God. This is a lesson I think far too few Christians especially in this nation have ever learned - and especially with respect to politics. Right now many Christians are compromising their walk in order to try to "return" to "traditional values". But again, God does not accept compromise or "the lesser of two evils": to God, willfully doing ANY evil is a betrayal and proof of unfaithfulness.
To understand the standards to which Christians are supposed to be holding *themselves* (not particularly others) read Matthew 25:31-46, Matthew 28:18-20, John 13:34, Acts 15:19-20 and Galatians 5:22-23: this covers the most important parts of the matter. If someone says they are in Christ and they are not doing these things, you may question whether they really are at all.
 @JLS1950  @nobelprizeme Personally, I like apples. Like Eve. Ahhh...wisdom.
The problem is, this creates the appearance that if you want to be a cheerleader at this school, you have to be a Christian. That's not right.
 @RedRaven Cheerleaders are elected by the student body at large based upon who does the best flip-flop and splits and other important shiz like that. So, the squad themselves can end up with a variety of viewpoints.
 @RedRaven Just HOW does it create that appearance? I'm guessing that if there's a cheerleader that doesn't want to participate, when it's her turn to 'pick a verse' she can leave the banner blank <g>
 @Commenter87643  @RedRaven Or, she'd be free to quote someone herself- like this: http://i.imgur.com/1wNNG.png
 @RedRaven as opposed to being a christian and having to hide it from the increasingly slanderous atheists in the open public?
 @nobelprizeme  @RedRaven I do not want to impose my Atheists ideal upon you, nor do I want Christianity forced upon me.
Cheer-leaders are elected by the entire student body, so I do not think this creates an appearance that one must be a Christian to be a cheer-leader.
Only have one question: if a kid wanted a "There is no God" banner, would the anti-religion clubs have a problem? Separation of church and state is an INVENTED phrase. Doesn't exist in the constitution. It says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"; so how'd we get to this point? Really, so a cheerleader banner is now tantamount to passing a bill in congress saying we're all going to be Christians/Muslims/Wiccans? Well sorry, atheism is also a religious view. You going to keep that out as well? Kind of doubt it. Religious folk are not the only hypocrites in this debate (at least we can admit there are hypocrites in our midst).
 @Equalforall How about a POSITIVE BANNER from the Atheists! Hard Work+ Team Work= Success--- OR ANYTHING positive! Seems like that would promote the Atheist view in a POSITIVE way--
So if Jewish students put up signs with sayings from the Talmud, or Muslim students put up signs with sayings from the Koran, the community would accept this? Heck no! I disagree with the Judge but luckily I don't live in Texas. (Nor do I ever plan too) One of the most backwards states in the U.S.
 @yentaleh Actually, phrases from MANY other religions are posted here and there, without people realizing where they came from, people just think they're insightful thoughts.
 @Commenter87643 I am referring to this case Commenter, I really doubt the cheerleaders have signs from just "anywhere" the signs are clearly Christian in nature and therefore, it is touting one faith over another.
 @yentaleh Using your thought process it'd be wrong for the kids to prefer M&M's to Reese's.
 @yentaleh  @Commenter87643 sure it is- but the individual girls have the right to free speech. Cheer-leaders are normally elected by the student body at a try-out observed by the entire school and voted on by the students. The squad itself has no say in who is elected. Therefore, I see no problem here, despite being an Atheist.
 @yentaleh I agree with the judge.  The community doesn't (should't) enter into the equation.  We have both a right to free speech and a right to freedom of religion. Â
 @DeadRabitz  @yentaleh Agreed, and I must add that we also have the right not to be religious at all, and to have an opposing viewpoint. We should be respectful of each other when discussing our views, or we should agree not to discuss them with each other if we cannot be respectful. I fail at this sometimes, but I will continue trying, because I don't think Christian-bashing gets me anywhere, though thoughtful discussion of opposing views is something I enjoy.
 @DeadRabitz So what about those students who are Jewish or Muslim, and they put up signs that tout their beliefs, and the signs were torn down by other students or the community, do you think the same Judge would side with them? There lies the rub, what maybe free speech to some may not be for others. If the Judge sides with those students of other faiths then I would agree with the Judge, but if chances are that this Judge is putting his own beliefs in front of equality, there is the problem. All faiths or no faiths......end of discussion.
 @yentaleh  @DeadRabitz So did this happen? Or is this just something you made up? The tearing down of signs etc?
 @DeadRabitz ...and whereas the First Amendment does in fact guarantee "free exercise", it DOES NOT in fact guarantee any "right" to be shielded from such exercise by others! There is a right to freely express one's faith, but "freedom 'from' religion" is not and never has been part of the picture!
 @JLS1950  @DeadRabitz I have the right to not be religious, and to speak about that. You have the right to be religious and to speak about that. What's the difference?