The ACLU's threats
In August 2004 near Baton Rouge, Louisiana, the American Civil Liberties Union settled a lawsuit contending the Tangipahoa Parish public schools were mixing religion with government. The settlement stipulated there would be no public-address broadcast prayers before games, no PA-broadcast student prayers, and no school official participation or encouragement of student-led prayers.
On Wednesday, the ACLU claimed in a court filing that the schools have consistently flouted that settlement. Specifically, the ACLU wrote that Shane Tycer, a private citizen (not a school employee) waiting for the start of a baseball game, noted the absence of the usual public address announcer, so he grabbed the microphone and started the game with a prayer: “Lord watch over these teams and keep them and all of us safe. In Jesus’ name. Amen.” Apparently, the mention of Jesus was enough to throw the ACLU into conniption fits, because as everyone knows, any mention of Jesus is enough to entice the whole crowd to bow at the foot of the cross.
"Defendants believed that they could nullify the agreed upon Consent Judgment and Court issued permanent injunction by carrying out the prohibitive acts through Mr. Tycer, a willing aider and abettor," the ACLU wrote. It added that someone should have tried to stop Mr. Tycer, or at least should have removed him from the PA booth and "repudiated" his actions.
Thus, the ACLU essentially accuses Mr. Tycer of conspiracy with the school officials, because both the principal and the regular PA announcer happened to arrive late for the game, and Mr. Tycer claimed he was unaware of the settlement. "If not an employee, he was clearly an agent of the Board," the ACLU wrote. "He was using the high school’s equipment and facilities, with the high school’s approval. He was performing the same functions and duties of . . . the regular play-by-play announcer."
Yeah, he spontaneously grabbed the microphone and said a prayer. That makes him "an agent of the board," acting with the school's approval. Hogwash.
The court filing continued that the settlement was "extensively publicized . . . (and) was discussed extensively at school board meetings, which were widely attended. For either defendants or Mr. Tycer to contend that . . . he was not aware of it, they would have to assume that everyone had taken leave of their common sense . . . It is submitted that that is how he was able to reach the illogical conclusion that, as long as he was not an employee or agent of the Board, he could give a pregame invocation."
I can practically hear the hyperventilation of the writer. He knew it! I know he knew it! He had to know it! If he claims he didn't know it, he's a stupid hick!
What a bunch of hooey. The ACLU has made enough of a fuss about public prayers led by government employees that it's not a stretch for someone to assume that, as a private citizen acting of his own accord, it would be OK to say a quick prayer. But no, the ACLU will have none of that. It sues the school district for not having enough common sense to avoid "government sponsorship of religion," and then rejects any claims of ignorance by claiming the district and its patrons have enough common sense to know better.
What takes the cake, however, is something I haven't been able to verify. The Baton Rouge Advocate prints an AP story, which reports that the ACLU's court filing said: "The consent judgment is repeatedly violated by these individuals because they do not believe anything will happen to them. Their refusal to comply with the consent decree should and must result in their removal from society."
If this quote is true (and it's not in the court motion available on the ACLU's website), I think the ACLU is calling for the judge to impose jail time. But picture for a moment if a conservative claimed someone (pick one — a judge, an abortion doctor, a liberal politician, the ACLU — or insert your own) was breaking the law and needed to be "removed from society." How long would it take before Howard Dean or Chuck Schumer or Al Gore was screaming that the conservative was threatening said subject and calling for that subject's death and/or destruction?
Seems like a bit of a double standard to me.
(HT: BOTW)
On Wednesday, the ACLU claimed in a court filing that the schools have consistently flouted that settlement. Specifically, the ACLU wrote that Shane Tycer, a private citizen (not a school employee) waiting for the start of a baseball game, noted the absence of the usual public address announcer, so he grabbed the microphone and started the game with a prayer: “Lord watch over these teams and keep them and all of us safe. In Jesus’ name. Amen.” Apparently, the mention of Jesus was enough to throw the ACLU into conniption fits, because as everyone knows, any mention of Jesus is enough to entice the whole crowd to bow at the foot of the cross.
"Defendants believed that they could nullify the agreed upon Consent Judgment and Court issued permanent injunction by carrying out the prohibitive acts through Mr. Tycer, a willing aider and abettor," the ACLU wrote. It added that someone should have tried to stop Mr. Tycer, or at least should have removed him from the PA booth and "repudiated" his actions.
Thus, the ACLU essentially accuses Mr. Tycer of conspiracy with the school officials, because both the principal and the regular PA announcer happened to arrive late for the game, and Mr. Tycer claimed he was unaware of the settlement. "If not an employee, he was clearly an agent of the Board," the ACLU wrote. "He was using the high school’s equipment and facilities, with the high school’s approval. He was performing the same functions and duties of . . . the regular play-by-play announcer."
Yeah, he spontaneously grabbed the microphone and said a prayer. That makes him "an agent of the board," acting with the school's approval. Hogwash.
The court filing continued that the settlement was "extensively publicized . . . (and) was discussed extensively at school board meetings, which were widely attended. For either defendants or Mr. Tycer to contend that . . . he was not aware of it, they would have to assume that everyone had taken leave of their common sense . . . It is submitted that that is how he was able to reach the illogical conclusion that, as long as he was not an employee or agent of the Board, he could give a pregame invocation."
I can practically hear the hyperventilation of the writer. He knew it! I know he knew it! He had to know it! If he claims he didn't know it, he's a stupid hick!
What a bunch of hooey. The ACLU has made enough of a fuss about public prayers led by government employees that it's not a stretch for someone to assume that, as a private citizen acting of his own accord, it would be OK to say a quick prayer. But no, the ACLU will have none of that. It sues the school district for not having enough common sense to avoid "government sponsorship of religion," and then rejects any claims of ignorance by claiming the district and its patrons have enough common sense to know better.
What takes the cake, however, is something I haven't been able to verify. The Baton Rouge Advocate prints an AP story, which reports that the ACLU's court filing said: "The consent judgment is repeatedly violated by these individuals because they do not believe anything will happen to them. Their refusal to comply with the consent decree should and must result in their removal from society."
If this quote is true (and it's not in the court motion available on the ACLU's website), I think the ACLU is calling for the judge to impose jail time. But picture for a moment if a conservative claimed someone (pick one — a judge, an abortion doctor, a liberal politician, the ACLU — or insert your own) was breaking the law and needed to be "removed from society." How long would it take before Howard Dean or Chuck Schumer or Al Gore was screaming that the conservative was threatening said subject and calling for that subject's death and/or destruction?
Seems like a bit of a double standard to me.
(HT: BOTW)
posted by Ken @ 2:48 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home