Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review July 18, 2000 / 15 Tamuz, 5760

Ann Coulter

Ann Coulter
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
James Glassman
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Debbie Schlussel
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

The state's religion -- TO THE EXTENT any Establishment Clause principles can be discerned from the Supreme Court's rulings on the matter, the court's position seems to be that invocations of the G-word can be permitted only around responsible adults who couldn't possibly swallow that religious hocus-pocus.

Congress can begin sessions with a prayer, Congress can have a paid man of the cloth on its payroll, and the nation's coins may proclaim "In G-d We Trust." Even the Supreme Court can still begin sessions with "G-d bless this court" -- since that has clearly had no effect, anyway. But all religious references must be kept away from impressionable children!

In its latest term, the court advanced the cause of stamping out G-d in public venues inhabited by children in a case called Santa Fe Independent School District vs. Doe. It now turns out that the Constitution requires that high school students be prohibited from mentioning G-d in speeches at football games.

The court's most recent prior ruling on prayer in school came in a 1992 case called Lee vs. Weisman. Apparently fearing that Rhode Island was on the cusp of establishing Reformed Judaism as the state religion, the court held that a Providence school had violated the Establishment Clause by allowing a reformed rabbi to give the invocation at a high school graduation ceremony.

The point on which the court relied most heavily in Lee was the enormous gravity of a high school graduation. Citing "(r)esearch in psychology," the court found that it would be nearly impossible for a student to avoid the graduation ceremony. Indeed, the Lee court droned on at some length about the psychological importance of high school graduation ceremonies.

"(I)n our society and in our culture, high school graduation is one of life's most significant occasions. ... (I)t is apparent that a student is not free to absent herself from the graduation exercise in any real sense of the term 'voluntary,' for absence would require forfeiture of those intangible benefits which have motivated the student through youth and all her high school years."

Obviously these guys are a lot further away from their high school years than we like to remember. Getting into a good college, obtaining a job or -- I don't know -- learning something are other possible "intangible benefits ... motivat(ing) the student through youth all her high school years." But a stupid little graduation ceremony? Senior prom is more significant.

In any event, that was where the court stood on prayer near a school until its latest ruling on the potentiality of prayer at a high school football game. In deciding the Sante Fe case, those great avatars of "stare decisis" when it comes to abortion promptly dumped the legal principles they had enunciated in Lee just eight years earlier. The court held that a wholly student-initiated speech at a football game constitutes an unconstitutional "establishment" of religion, too. (There was an imminent danger that the speech might spin out of control into a prayer.)

It seems the court was kidding in Lee when it banned religious references only from those precious high school events with "intangible benefits which have motivated the student through youth and all her high school years." Now the court has decided that high school football games have to be G-word-free zones, too. As long as this court sits, prayer will never corrupt the ears of a cheerleader.

Most sinister was the fact that the pregame student speech was supposed to "solemnize the event." As Justice Stevens explained, the "requirements that the message 'promote good citizenship' and 'establish the appropriate environment for competition'" suggested that "a solemn, yet nonreligious, message, such as commentary on United States foreign policy, would be prohibited." Consequently, the court found, the school policy practically required the designated student to speak in tongues.

If it constitutes an "establishment" of religion for cheerleaders to overhear a fellow student voluntarily mentioning G-d over a bullhorn at a football game, one is left wondering what kind of religious expression is permitted at public schools? As luck would have it, the court answered that in another decision announced the same day.

The court let stand a lower court ruling that struck down a public school policy requiring that students studying the theory of evolution be encouraged to "exercise critical thinking and gather all information possible and closely examine each alternative toward forming an opinion." Do not engage in critical thinking when contemplating the theory of evolution! Do not consider alternatives! Do not view the theory of evolution as something about which you can form your own opinion!

You must believe in the state's religion.

JWR contributor Ann Coulter is the author of High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton. You may visit the Ann Coulter Fan Club by clicking here.


07/14/00: Reform it back
07/11/00: Keating for veep
07/07/00: Gore invented 'Clueless'
07/04/00: The stupidity litmus test
06/30/00: O.J. was 'proved innocent' too
06/27/00: The last guys 'proved innocent'
06/23/00: Serious Republican candidates don't get serious press
06/19/00: They weren't overzealous this time
06/16/00: Evolution of the strumpet
06/13/00: Actual journalistic malpractice
06/09/00: I did not have sexual
relations with that ... man!
06/06/00: IRS turns Bubba's screw
05/30/00: Too corrupt to be an Arkansas lawyer
05/26/00: Choose liberalism
05/24/00: Violence against coherence
05/22/00: Developmentally disabled Republicans
05/16/00: For womb the bell tolls
05/12/00: Asylum from Georgetown
05/10/00: The truth is out there, even for the clueless
05/08/00: Barbie is a liberal Democrat
05/02/00: Moving the goalpost
04/28/00: The bastardization of justice
04/25/00: How Monica Lewinsky saved the constitution
04/24/00: It's sunny today, so we need gun control
04/19/00: No shadow of a doubt -- liberal women are worthless
04/14/00: It takes a Communist dictator to raise a child
04/11/00: The verdict is in on Hillary
04/07/00: Vast Concoctions III
04/04/00: 'Horrifying' free speech in New York
03/31/00: Campaign finance reform brings out worst in senators
03/28/00: All the news that fits -- we print!
03/24/00: Net losses all around
03/20/00: To protect, serve --- and be spat on
03/16/00: Thank Heaven for the consigliere
03/13/00: Vast concoctions II
03/09/00: The bluebloods voted against you
03/07/00: The Tower of Babble
03/03/00: Vast concoction
03/02/00: Hillary's sartorial lies
02/28/00: You have to break a few eggs to make a joke
02/22/00: I've seen enough killing to support abortion
02/18/00: A liberal lynching
02/15/00: McCain and the flag
02/11/00: The Shakedown Express
02/08/00: To mock a mockingbird
02/05/00: Summing up Campaign 2000: 'Oh, puh-leeze!'
02/01/00: A Confederacy of Dunces
01/28/00: Dollar Bill's racist smear
01/24/00: How high is your freedom quotient?
01/21/00: Numismadness
01/18/00: How dare you attack my wife!
01/14/00: The Gore Buggernaut
01/10/00: The paradox of discrimination law

© 2000, UPS