Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JonathanChance · 03-14-2003, 09:50 PM

Check out this letter to the editor from my local paper:

Quote:

FROM DENNIS PAPE

Menominee

The beginning of the dismantling of the "indispensable supports" of our society, morality and religion, referred to by President George Washington in his farewell address, was the 1947 Everson case. In that case, the Supreme Court first referred to a separation of church and state in the First Amendment.

In effect, one pillar of support was toppled, not by a consensus of the American people, but by the strike of a justice's pen. What a Great Depression, the Civil War and two World Wars could not do, a Supreme Court decision accomplished with the help of the American Civil Liberties Union. Since 1947, the courts have decreed: A verbal prayer offered in a school is unconstitutional, even if it is both denominationally neutral and voluntarily participated in.

Freedom of speech and press is guaranteed to students unless the topic is religious, at which time such speech becomes unconstitutional. Stin vs. Oshinsky, 1956; Collins vs. Chandler Unified School District 1981.

If a student prays over his lunch, it is unconstitutional for him to pray aloud. Reed vs. Van Hoven, 1956.

It is unconstitutional for kindergarten students to say: "We thank you for the flowers so sweet; We thank you for the food we eat; We thank you for the birds that sing; We thank" you for everything." Even though word "God" is not contained in it, someone might think it is a prayer. DeSpain vs. DeKalb County Community School District, 1967.

It is unconstitutional for a war memorial to be erected in the shape of a cross. Lowe vs. City of Eugene, 1969.

In Omaha, Neb., I0-year -old James Gierke was prohibited from reading his Bible silently during free time... the boy was forbidden by his teacher to open his Bible at school and was told doing so was against the law.

George Washington warned us, in his farewell address, to "with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion." The historical backdrop of his address was the French Revolution, where the churches were being burned and those who refused to be silent about their faith were being led to the guillotine. The streets of France ran red with blood as the pillar of religion was replaced by the sinking sand of reason. Morality was soon a matter of changing men's opinion.

We must endeavor to restore God to His rightful place in our nation, as militantly and methodically as the anti-God humanists and secularists have removed him from the marketplace of ideas. They have effectively used the weapons of deceit and falsehood. We have the greater weapons of truth and persistence. Asserting our faith and our loyalty to God and his word will not be popular, but the alternative is to forfeit our freedom and resign our children to the tyranny of a world without hope.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Remember, I have to live amongst people like this.

LaFlavor · 03-14-2003, 10:18 PM

wow, you live in marinette, WI? i'm really sorry. i was up there over the summer and fall for two co-op terms with the kimberly-clark mill.

unfortunately, that isn't limited to the marinette/menominee area. even back here in atlanta we get stuff like that.

SLD · 03-14-2003, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JonathanChance
Check out this letter to the editor from my local paper:

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Remember, I have to live amongst people like this.

You must respond to stop the spread of such lies and immediately write a letter to the editor. The Supreme Court has never ruled that a child cannot pray in school. To state the opposite is a complete and utter lie, and those who write such letters or columns know it, but prefer to keep repeating this false mantra in order to scare their followers into giving them more money. A clear example of the lie is that there is no such Supreme Court case as Reed v. Van Hoven, not in 1956 not ever. The Supreme Court has never even discussed the issue of a child praying at lunch. Furthermore, there is no Supreme Court case of Despain v. Dekalb County, not in 1967, not ever.

After some research I did locate the two cases, but they are not what the writer claims. The Despain case was from the 7th Circuit and involved forced prayer - not voluntary prayer. The Reed case was one District Court judge's opinion in 1965 that after school use classrooms for religious meetings violated the establishment clause. That case of course was rendered null and void by much later Supreme Court precedent.

There is also no Stin v. Oshinsky case in the Supreme Court. There is a 2nd Circuit case, Stein v. Oshinsky but the court never said that religious speech of students is unconstitutional. It did however state that student led prayers in the classroom are just as unconstitutional as teacher led prayers in the classroom.

I would venture to guess that the other cites are bogus as well or otherwise grossly distorted. You've caught them with their pants down - now go get 'em. (wait a minute, that's not exactly what I meant to say

) Exposing the fundamentalists right's lies about C-S issues hurts their cause and letters to the editors are great ways to do so. If you want some help writing a strong letter, we'd all be glad to pitch in.

SLDER

JonathanChance · 03-15-2003, 12:06 AM

Here is what I have so far.

Quote:

Dear Editor:

Mr. Dennis Pape�s letter of 14 March 2003 is full of complete and utter lies. The Supreme Court has never ruled that a child cannot pray in a public school on an individual basis. To say that the Supreme Court has done so is a lie, and people like Mr. Pape know it. For example, There is no such Supreme Court case as Reed v. Van Hoven. Despain v. Dekalb County, the case in which Mr. Pape claims the the Supreme Court forbade students from saying grace before eating lunch does not exist either. In fact, the Supreme Court has never even taken up the subject of prayer before lunch in a public school setting.

I did some research on the Internet, and found out that Mr. Pape has grossly distorted the facts in a number of the cases he cites. The Despain case, which was from the Seventh Circuit court, and never reached the supreme court dealt with a forced prayer, not a voluntary one. The Reed case was nothing more than the opinion of a District court judge in 1965 that said that after school use of classrooms for religious purposes was a violation of the Establishment clause, and therefore unconstitutional. This case was renderd null and void by later Supreme Court decisions.

Many of the other cases cited by Mr. Pape are also either bogus cases or serious distortions of what the cases were really about. Maybe Mr. Pape should do a better job of checking his sources before making a fool of himself on the opinion page.

I think it looks good. Feel free to add yor suggestions. I'd like to keep it under 300 words, and I have 263 in this letter, according to Microsoft Word.

simian · 03-15-2003, 05:43 AM

First, let me say the fundy letter reads like something Pape got via e-mail and put his own name on (I have see this several times in the local paper here). At least the Omaha part seems to be verbatum from here. If you can track down an e-mail circulating that is the exact text he submitted in his own name, it is worth mentioning (if it predates the letter).

For the last sentence, I would suggest something less personally inflammatory. Perhaps something like:

I have seen many letter like the one Mr. Pape submitted. All of them state that Christians are horribly persecuted in this country. Yet, a simple checking of even just a few of the "facts" in these e-mails show them to be in error. And yet they get passed on as though they were factual. I would think the Bible would have something to say about bearing false witness...

Simian

Javaman · 03-15-2003, 05:58 AM

That Omaha part is fairly widespread. I did a Google search for the phrase "reading his Bible silently during free time" and came up with a bunch of stuff... but I was never able to find anything objective that referred to a real pending (or otherwise) case.

Also, some politician is perpetuating a bunch of this junk here

I would probably leave out the phrase "on the internet" from your letter as it adds nothing but may detract from the message.

A

Javaman · 03-15-2003, 06:02 AM

My suggestion for the opening of the second paragraph would be to change:

I did some research on the Internet, and found out that Mr. Pape...

-to-

After some research, I found that Mr. Pape...

Or something along those lines.

Caligula · 03-15-2003, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Freedom of speech and press is guaranteed to students unless the topic is religious, at which time such speech becomes unconstitutional. Stin vs. Oshinsky, 1956; Collins vs. Chandler Unified School District 1981.

Collins Vs Chandler says that school employees, students, and outsiders can't give prayers at school assemblies, even if attendnce is voluntary. Link

lisarea · 03-15-2003, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Javaman
That Omaha part is fairly widespread. I did a Google search for the phrase "reading his Bible silently during free time" and came up with a bunch of stuff... but I was never able to find anything objective that referred to a real pending (or otherwise) case.

I looked this part up, too. All of the references to it seem to refer to the February 1989 of the "Intercessors for America" newsletter.

Here's their website, which seems to have no reference to the incident:

Intercessors for America

At least one reference indicated that the kid would be suing, but a search on his last name didn't produce any court cases.

So, essentially, this is an unsubstantiated claim from a very biased organization. No court ruling or anything. So, even if it wasn't completely fictional, it's just one misguided teacher, in early 1989 at the latest, who said something stupid.

If I recall correctly, there's a similar case, where a student was told not to bring his bible to school. I've seen it referred to in sermons and heard people refer to it as a case where the ACLU came in, unbidden, and sued to force the kid to leave his bible at home; but when I looked it up, it turned out the ACLU defended the kid.

There's just a very clear inability to understand what CSS is really all about. Distinctions that seem obvious to us are completely lost on some of these people.

Shadowy Man · 03-15-2003, 09:48 AM

Quote:

A verbal prayer offered in a school is unconstitutional, even if it is both denominationally neutral and voluntarily participated in.

Is there even such a thing as a "denominationally neutral" prayer?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-14-2003, 10:18 PM	#2
LaFlavor Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Atlanta, GA, USA Posts: 267	wow, you live in marinette, WI? i'm really sorry. i was up there over the summer and fall for two co-op terms with the kimberly-clark mill. unfortunately, that isn't limited to the marinette/menominee area. even back here in atlanta we get stuff like that.

03-15-2003, 05:43 AM	#5
simian Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: St. Louis, MO area Posts: 1,924	First, let me say the fundy letter reads like something Pape got via e-mail and put his own name on (I have see this several times in the local paper here). At least the Omaha part seems to be verbatum from here. If you can track down an e-mail circulating that is the exact text he submitted in his own name, it is worth mentioning (if it predates the letter). For the last sentence, I would suggest something less personally inflammatory. Perhaps something like: I have seen many letter like the one Mr. Pape submitted. All of them state that Christians are horribly persecuted in this country. Yet, a simple checking of even just a few of the "facts" in these e-mails show them to be in error. And yet they get passed on as though they were factual. I would think the Bible would have something to say about bearing false witness... Simian

03-15-2003, 05:58 AM	#6
Javaman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Nebraska Posts: 1,708	That Omaha part is fairly widespread. I did a Google search for the phrase "reading his Bible silently during free time" and came up with a bunch of stuff... but I was never able to find anything objective that referred to a real pending (or otherwise) case. Also, some politician is perpetuating a bunch of this junk here I would probably leave out the phrase "on the internet" from your letter as it adds nothing but may detract from the message. A

03-15-2003, 06:02 AM	#7
Javaman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Nebraska Posts: 1,708	My suggestion for the opening of the second paragraph would be to change: I did some research on the Internet, and found out that Mr. Pape... -to- After some research, I found that Mr. Pape... Or something along those lines.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.