To the Editor,
Though I live across the continent on the shores of the other seaboard, I believe I share equal concern with the apparent majority of Cranston citizens and high school students about the court’s recent protection of one individual’s identity at the egregious compromise of the many. Quite simply, when one person utilizes the court (or any enforcement institution, for that matter) to protect their own rigid values to force flexibility of society to accommodate themselves from having to accommodate the opinions, values, beliefs or lifestyles of others that they do not share, the institution has been used to enforce fascist thinking and values.
It does not surprise me, in this day and age of American court worship of the individual, that this young lady’s egocentricity met with destructive approval. The sad thing is the message to her that she has this kind of power, the perfectly wrong message any teenager should receive from a high authority like the court.
Personally, I do believe in the separation of church and state, but if such a separation is enforced in the context of sanctioning fascism in a free country, the paradigm of the nation has been contradicted by that court, and it has failed as a traitor to the nation it is meant to serve. It then must be allowed to let the slogan prevail and others left to determine their personal response to it on their own. A reminder applies here: The most destructive individuals in history were atheists – Hitler, Stalin, Mao, who massacred millions upon millions of their own people who demonstrated any individuality that accommodated another’s individuality – being different than themselves or their wicked leaders.
I feel it equally important to point out the obvious here – that for those who feel offended by the student who took this court action to threaten her, what in the name of God is Christian about that? Their hypocrisy is greater than hers. If they actually believe in the banned school’s slogan, they must apologize to her, be firm in their belief and know that the presence of a slogan on campus is nothing more than a symbol drawn in the sand at the edge of stormy waters. The way for the community to prevail is for the objecting students and citizens to live the slogan and in doing so transcend the necessity of its literal written and spoken presence. Let the young woman have her “Freedom of Speech” to proclaim her atheism and dominate what can and cannot be said by others. No greater justice can prevail than to become in one’s heart what one’s opposers wish to control, for no one can ever control your spirit. That is a truly “Land of the Free.”
Sincerely,
Lonner Holden
San Rafael, California
You are clearly mistaken. Upholding the First Amendment by not allowing a religious artifact - which a PRAYER banner clearly is - is in no way "enforcing fascist thinking and values," but instead reaffirming a very important facet of a secular government. How dare you label Ms. Ahlquist as "egocentric" merely for recognizing that something was unconstitutional and standing up for her rights as an American citizen, no matter how small of a minority she represents.
Also, your association of atheism and "the most destructive individuals in history" is as offensive as it is false. Hitler stated in his autobiography that he believed he was "acting as the agent of our creator" and "doing the lord's work" by exterminating the Jews - clearly not an atheist. It's also a misrepresentation to label Stalin and Mao as atheists, as they both eliminated religion not for any secular belief system, but to increase their own power and have themselves be thought of as gods. To equate atheism to these despicable people is ignorant and condescending.
Stop feeding into the media-created firestorm of this "war on religion" BS conspiracy theories. The holocaust was a war on religion, not this. This was simply a educated girl who saw something that clearly went against the Constitution of the United States.
I thank Lonner Holden for a well thought out letter to the editor regarding Ms. Ahlquist's activism. I can't say enough how much I disagree with many of the letter's conclusions. I believe it is pretty hard for a 16 year old not to be egocentric and so much of Holden's letter contradicts itself. I also find references to Hitler, Stalin and Mao to be irrelevant in this context. It is amazing that people will always use personages from other and historically different cultures to describe what is truly American. It might be from the lack of understanding American history or the American experience does not fit the argument well. I doubt those individuals such as Hitler would even understand the concept of liberty or dissent.
The real culpable parties in this chaos are the same people that could have avoided this issue by removing said artifact or making other acceptable accommodations. The school superintendent and the elected school board failed in their duties to protect the school system and the City of Cranston. This is a legal case that had little or no merit. I am sure that legal counsel advised their clients (the superintendent/school board) well before the lawsuit that they would not succeed if they proceeded. Shame on them and instead of the voters "throwing the bums out" because they would not fight this case to the Supreme Court, the citizens should throw all of them out because they are either fools or pandered to the electorate. It was the "ego" of the superintendent and school board that drove this case and will cost the city about $200,000 in legal cost. Again, shame on them.
Now to Ms. Ahlquist. The less you speak on this issue the wiser you sound. Liberty is more about responsibility and less about asserting one's rights. You will undoubtedly extort an apology and maybe some money from the local florist shops and you are certainly the poster girl for the RIACLU. You might even get a "book deal", "TV movie" and show up on “Ellen”. You will probably get a lot of scholarship money. But, in the quest for asserting your own liberty you drew a line in the sand. Whether I agree with you or not, there needs to be a tolerance in a free and equitable society like ours. Debate about such issues is always welcomed in my book and political dissent is important to free and just society.
Where you drew the line is that you hurt a lot of innocent people, including yourself and your family. You do not owe an apology and despite Holden’s recommendations, you will not get one from most people you will meet. There is no shame in what you did and there is a fine line between brave and foolhardy. Please now devote yourself to the aftermath of this action and what will replace said artifact. It would be unwise to leave that space blank and a constant reminder of this event. It is also unwise to accept a scholarship or money based in this action but you probably already know that is the case.
Has anyone read the First Amendment? No law was created by hanging the prayer banner. Government has made no law concerning freedom of religion or the practice thereof. The kids didn't have to recite or even look at the banner. So explain where this banner is a violation of the First Amendment. The only violation I can think of was the teachers and students being told not to talk about the ruling.
The First Amendment Establishment Clause requires that the gov't (which includes public schools, as they are paid for by taxpayer dollars) remain neutral when it comes to religion. Prominently displaying a banner of a PRAYER is clearly not neutral and a promotion of religion. Whether students are required to look at it or not is irrelevant, that's not how the law works.
There are several court cases throughout the past 50 years upholding similar decisions. What it comes down to is pretty simple: schools cannot promote prayer, in the classoom or on a wall.