Rhode Island high school student Jessica Ahlquist has taught her school officials a useful lesson on civics this week. The Cranston High School West student won her challenge to a large prayer mural displayed at the school with a federal judge ordering its removal as a violation of the separation of church and state.
U.S. District Court Judge Ronald R. Lagueux issued a 40-page ruling Wednesday but I have not been able to review it (and this morning it is still not on Lexis/Nexis).
In the complaint below, the ACLU details how Ahlquist tried to engage her friends but found few allies in her campaign to have the prayer removed. She was undeterred by the peer pressure and created a Facebook account to campaign for its removal.
When she learned that the School Committee had established a subcommittee to consider the Prayer, she mustered her courage and spoke against the Prayer at its meeting on November 30, 2011 (11/30/11 Min. at 10) (“But, as an atheist, I have the right to go to school and not feel discriminated against by the people who are praying there.”) “When [Plaintiff] said she was an atheist, someone in the room let out a small gasp and J –A- heard some quiet whispering. She felt they dismissed her beliefs and feelings, and made her feel entirely alone, causing her to wonder whether she was irrational for feeling the way she did. She also felt extremely nervous and unwelcome at this meeting.” (Pl. Int. # 5 at 8)
Plaintiff also spoke out against the Prayer at the Subcommittee meeting of February 22, 2011 (2/22/11 Min. at 7) and at the School Committee meeting of March 7, 2011 (3/7/11 Min. at 60 and video of entire proceedings, Pl. 19). At the February 22 subcommittee meeting, Plaintiff again was made to “feel very intimidated and nervous, as well as hated. Speaking was much more difficult that night because she felt that many of the people in the room were angry at her and disliked her personally for speaking out against the prayer.” (Pl. Int. #5 at 9) After the March 7, 2011 meeting and after she filed the law suit, Plaintiff received bullying and intimidating taunts, comments and threats at school, on her way home from school, and on-line. (Pl. Int. #5 5 at 10-14; JA Dep. at 40-44)
At a meeting on the issue, local board members publicly proclaimed their faith and the need for the religious statement. Committee member Traficante identified himself as “a person of faith” and noted that as a coach he made sure to start every game with a prayer with the team. He insisted on preserving the display as part of the “obligation as School Committee members to protect and defend the moral values of our students and that banner helps us to express that[.]” Chairperson Iannazzi’s went further to say that the country “was founded not on freedom from religion but freedom of religion. Each person has the ability to practice whatever religion they want. That does not mean that they have the freedom from religion being practiced.” Obviously, the federal court disagreed.
The school insisted on fighting this well-based challenge despite a long line of cases contradicting the positions of the school board. As the Court noted in Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (2009), “[b]y accepting a privately donated monument and placing it on city property, a city engages in expressive conduct[.]” It further stressed that a permanent monument is, “by definition, a structure that is designed as a means of expression.”
This girl stood up to not just peers but politicians to fight for the values of separation of church and state. In doing so, she gave her friends a lesson in civic responsibility and gave her school board a lesson in constitutional values. At a time with separation principles under attack, Jessica added a case in the win column for a society where faith is a personal not a public priority.
Congratulations to the lawyers of the Rhode Island ACLU in this important victory and again to Jessica Ahlquist and her parents.
Facts are so inconvenient to belief.
Yeah, let’s do go down that road, ignoramus.
“The Constitution really does not address that other than the 1st Amendment which really just says no law will be established prohibiting. It does not encourage or discourage, per se. Plus I really do not read this as promotion any specific ‘religion’.”
The incorporation doctrine applies the Bill of Rights to the states by virtue of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. Also, the very process of amendment means “an alteration proposed or put into effect by legislative or constitutional procedure”, ergo, the 1st Amendment is the Constitution, dingus. As to what the Constitution says, it says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. This that government cannot endorse a religion nor prohibit a religion. What endorsement and prohibition mean is further refined by jurisprudence, specifically the jurisprudence of Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971) – which formulated the test:
1) The government’s action must have a secular legislative purpose;
2) The government’s action must not have the primary effect of either advancing or inhibiting religion;
3) The government’s action must not result in an “excessive government entanglement” with religion.
and Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 460 (2009); which as the Professor notes stated . . .
“[b]y accepting a privately donated monument and placing it on city property, a city engages in expressive conduct[.]” It further stressed that a permanent monument is, “by definition, a structure that is designed as a means of expression.”
Clearly the actions of the school violate the second and third prongs of the Lemon test and the refinement of the third prong of the Lemon test found in Pleasant Grove.
“But hey let’s keep going down this road of catering to the MINORITY and making sure everyone gets a participation trophy and is happy. It is working so well and making our country so GREAT”
Well bad news for you, slick. This isn’t a Christian country, it’s a secular country by the terms of the Constitution, and it wasn’t Christianity that made this country great. You claim you aren’t a Christian, so you’re a minority too. I’m glad to see that not only are a vulgarian, but a contrarian as well, in addition to being too stupid to realize that this case defends your rights not to be coerced by the majority in matters of faith. All of this presupposes that you aren’t simply a Christian zealot troll “lookin’ to piss off some of them heathen lib-ruls” – which you obviously are. The sad part is that you don’t get that the joke is on you.
Carry on, theocrat troll.
The only person you are fooling is yourself.
Hummmm…yeah I see the problem. Someone that quotes the Constitution on Separation of Church and State when they themselves are ignorant on the subject. This is really just a blown out of proportion phrase used by Tomas Jefferson in a letter he wrote.
The Constitution really does not address that other than the 1st Amendment which really just says no law will be established prohibiting. It does not encourage or discourage, per se. Plus I really do not read this as promotion any specific “religion”.
But hey let’s keep going down this road of catering to the MINORITY and making sure everyone gets a participation trophy and is happy. It is working so well and making our country so GREAT….
Oh and shame shame again…such language. I just called her a C**T. You starting dropping the vulgar language…BAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Apparently you don’t believe in the Constitution either, Sean.
The Establishment Clause forbids the government from forcing the religion of any group on others no matter if that religion is held by the majority or not.
As to the language?
You’re the one who used it first, so if you’re offended by that let me be the first one to say fuck you very much.
I do so hope that doesn’t offend your delicate unconstitutional sensibilities or that of the majority whose boots you choose to lick rather than stand up for your right not to have a God you don’t believe in either forced upon you by the mechanisms of state. You’ll make a fine pet for your theocratic Christian overlords. Until they decide to burn you at the stake for being a heretic.
Whatever you say Gene…btw I also do not believe in GOD. I just do not go around trying to tell the other 90% of American that they have to change things just for the MINORITY. 😉
But yeah whatever you say…
Thanks for setting me straight. I feel better….
Oh, and such language…shame on you…LOL
You mean the decline of society as illustrated by a man is so insecure in his beliefs that he feels the urge to call a young woman, a young woman who doesn’t share said beliefs and has the Constitutional right not to share said beliefs, a stupid cunt?
Methinks the laddie doth project too much, Sean.
LOL!!! Good one…
Sean,
I am sue you don’t have to know a note of the music to get the beat….
Not really into music…
Well Sean….everyone needs a Drum Major….applying to Florida A&M anytime soon….
Just enjoy watching the decline of a society…that is all.
It is quite amusing…
Gene, I see that Sean is off his medications.
You should work to cultivate a more positive self-image, Sean.
Sorry about your affliction.
BAHAHAHAHAH….what a stupid C**T….
“After the March 7, 2011 meeting and after she filed the law suit, Plaintiff received bullying and intimidating taunts, comments and threats at school, on her way home from school, and on-line.” -from the posting
http://jessicaahlquist.com/
Another light in the darkness. Good for her.
The song from the movie Lillies of the Field could be sung by a group outside the building where the school board meets.
Aaaaamen, Aaaamen, A a men, Amen , Amen. {next verse}
Duuumb schmucks, Duuumb schmucks….
Duuumb schmucks inside , inside.
Seeend them South, Seeend them South…
Seeend them South, them South thence South.
The plaintiff can lead the choir. I will fly to Rhode Island to join.
Post the First Amendment right over the toilet in the Faculty Mens Room when they are not looking. That is the only time they read anything.
Post the court decision on the Public Bulletin Board if they have one. If they ake it down, then file suit number two.
If you are in the Fifth Grade in this school district then it is time to start your own group. We call our group The Cult of The 5thGrade. The premise of the group is that adults are too busy to read much or pay attention to basics. Like these schmucks here trying to preach and not teach. The first project might be to get T shirts which say: Teach Dont Preach. You can buy iron on letters at Staples that will adhere to your T Shirt.
A good name for your group in that particular school might be:
1stAmdtDontTreadOnMeGroup. But, then they might send you to New Hampshire.
A job well done, Ms. Ahlquist. Brava, indeed.
Oh my….. Separation of Church and State……
Madelyn Murray O’Hair would be happy….When I lived in Austin….I had the privilege of working with the Attorney that argued this case….as well as later in my Austin sojourn I met John….
From Mass Humanities:
http://massmoments.org/moment.cfm?mid=292
Roger Williams banished October 9, 1635
On This Day… (October 9)
…in 1635, Puritan minister Roger Williams was found guilty of spreading “newe & dangerous opinions” and banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Before leaving England in 1630, Williams had seen heretics whipped, imprisoned, and burned at the stake. He called for religious freedom, a serious threat to the social order, and avoided arrest only by fleeing to Boston. Once in Massachusetts, he began preaching religious tolerance. The colony’s leaders agreed with the English authorities that this was nothing less than “Satan’s Policy.” They denounced his views and forced him out of the colony. He took refuge with the Narragansett Indians, whose chiefs sold land to him and his followers. They established a new settlement and named it Providence, in thanksgiving to God.
I’m sure Roger Williams would be proud of Jessica!