After intervention from the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Alma (Mich.) Public Schools will now require a church using its facilities to pay a formal rental fee and remove religious items left scattered around a district school.

The school allowed the church to hold Sunday worship services and frequent church events at the school. The church was allowed to make use of the kitchen, gym, stage, and extra rooms, had free use of building supplies and custodial services, and were even allowed to store religious items at the school, including an eight-foot wooden cross that was left on display in the school cafeteria.

FFRF Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert sent a letter to Superintendent Sonia Lark on Oct. 19, 2012, pointing out that the religious symbols left in the school demonstrated “district preference for religion over nonreligion, and Christianity over other religions.” Markert pointed out that this “excludes those who are not Christian and the 19% of the American population that is nonreligious.”

The school district responded on Oct. 23, 2012, informing FFRF that the cross and other religious items were removed or covered. The district further informed FFRF on Jan. 3, 2013, that the church would now have to pay for custodial services and rental of school space.

After a program assistant sent home an inappropriate religious gift with students, the Monroe County (Mich.) Intermediate School District is ensuring that school policy will be followed by the assistant and other staff in the future.

The faculty member works with children as young as 4-years-old, some of whom are disabled, and distributed a gift of play dough to the children with an accompanying letter that contained many religious references and urged people to pray. The letter was titled “CHRISTmas is Jesus’s Birthday” and opened with the sentence “So for Jesus's gift you could be like this play dough, and let Jesus mold & shape Your Life so Jesus Can use you for His Glory! [sic].” The letter instructed on how to pray “if you don’t know [Jesus]” and encouraged parents to find a church that teaches about Jesus.

FFRF Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert wrote a letter to Superintendent Randy Monday on Jan. 7, 2013, informing him that “it was illegal and inappropriate” for the teacher “to give this gift with its proselytizing message to young children in her public school class.”

Legal counsel for the school responded the next day, informing FFRF that the teacher had been spoken to about the inappropriateness of her actions and the violation of school policy regarding obtaining approval for sending items home in a student’s backpack. The letter also informed FFRF that parents of the affected students were notified that the staff member had violated school policy and were “tak[ing] steps to ensure such inappropriate correspondence [would] not occur again.”

Thanks to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, members of the Gideon organization will no longer be allowed in Robertson County (Tenn.) Schools.

After FFRF received a complaint from a distressed parent whose child was ostracized for not taking a bible, FFRF Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert sent a letter to Director of Schools Daniel Whitlow. “Courts have uniformly held that the distribution of bibles to students at public schools during instructional time is prohibited,” Markert informed Whitlow in the Nov. 19, 2012 letter. “Public schools have a constitutional obligation to remain neutral toward religion and to protect the rights of conscience of young and impressionable students.”

Whitlow responded on Jan. 8, 2013, informing FFRF that all administrators had been notified that bible distribution was against district procedures.

Main Street K-3 School (Shelbyville, Ill.) has removed two Christian spirituals from its holiday concert after receiving a letter of complaint from the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

A concerned parent contacted FFRF after her child’s holiday concert included the songs “Mary Had a Baby” and “Go, Tell it on the Mountain.”

In a Dec. 17, 2012 letter to Superintendent Denise Bence, FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor told the school that it was “wholly inappropriate for public schools to perform songs of Christian worship in a public school setting.” Gaylor continued, “Teaching these very young and impressionable students pervasively Christian music in a public school violates the First Amendment.”

Bence responded on Dec. 21, 2012, informing FFRF that the songs would be taken out of the holiday concert and replaced with secular holiday music.

Thanks to the Freedom From Religion Foundation, a house inside George Wyth State Park on Iowa state property will no longer display a lighted cross.

A local complainant reported that a large cross was affixed to the garage of a park ranger’s home inside the state park, and that it was highly visible at night from the highway and within the park.

FFRF Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert wrote a letter on Dec. 14, 2012 to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) informing them that the cross violated the First Amendment. “While it is appropriate for the park ranger to display personal religious items inside his home, it crosses the line when he chooses to display Christian symbols on the exterior of his home,” Markert said. “The inherent religious significance of the Latin cross is undeniable and is not disguisable.”

Markert received a phone call from the Iowa DNR on Dec. 19, 2012, informing her that the park ranger had been directed to remove the cross.

The Cobleskill-Richmondville Central School District (N.Y.) has banned groups from using school facilities for religious worship after the Freedom From Religion Foundation urged them to adopt a revised policy.

FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor sent a Dec. 3, 2012, letter to the school board informing the board that prohibiting the use of school facilities for worship services was “in line with current law and is the best policy option.” Gaylor detailed how start-up churches often take advantage of low school rental to establish themselves and collect church donations on public property, which amounts to “what many of us consider taxpayer subsidy of congregations.”

A church that had been using school facilities retained the American Center for Law & Justice, a religious right legal group founded by Pat Robertson, to object to the proposed changes. Despite this opposition, the school board amended its policies at its Dec. 17, 2012 meeting, adding “Gatherings for the purpose of holding religious worship services” to its list of prohibited uses of school facilities.

Coaches at Spencerville High School will no longer pray with their students after the Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter of complaint to the school district.

Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert wrote a letter on Nov. 6, 2012, to Superintendent Joel Hatfield, informing him that “a public school coach’s participation in a team’s prayer circle is illegal and inappropriate.”

Hatfield responded on Dec. 17, 2012, writing: “As superintendent, I have informed our coaches that they are to no longer lead their athletes in prayer.”

The Freedom From Religion Foundation was able to intervene before students at the Medford (Wis.) Area Middle School were sent to ring bells to raise money for the Salvation Army, a Christian organization.

The Salvation Army lists its mission as “to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.” The group also has eleven Christian articles of faith, and is blatantly discriminatory towards gay people.

After a concerned parent contacted FFRF, Staff Attorney Patrick Elliott sent District Administrator Pat Sullivan a letter on Dec. 13, 2012, pointing out that “while it is laudable for a public school to encourage young students to become active and involved in their community,” the Salvation Army is “an overtly Christian organization.” Elliott detailed the pervasively sectarian nature of the Salvation Army, and asked Sullivan to inform school staff “that they may not continue with their plans to solicit funds for the Salvation Army during the school day.”

Sullivan responded on Dec. 17, 2012, stating that the school was no longer planning to send students to ring bells.

North Georgia College & State University will no longer be including prayers at University-sponsored events after receiving a letter from the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

A concerned student informed FFRF that at an event that was mandatory for some students, faculty members led everyone in several Christian prayers. FFRF Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert wrote a letter on Oct. 12, 2012, to the University president asking her to discontinue the practice of praying at University events. “Including prayer at events at which attendance is mandatory is coercive, embarrassing, and beyond the scope of our public university system,” Markert wrote.

An attorney for the school responded on Dec. 13, writing that the president would “remind [all faculty and staff] that prayers shall not be included in University sponsored events.”

Representatives of the Gideons International will no longer be allowed to distribute bibles in Grant County (Ky.) Schools after a complaint from the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

A concerned parent contacted FFRF after her child was taken out of class to receive a bible. Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert contacted Superintendent Ron Livingood, writing that “Grant Count Schools may not allow Gideons, or any other religious group, to enter school property to distribute religious literature.” Markert also pointed out that by allowing Gideons to distribute bibles to young students, the district was “impermissibly endorsing religion by placing its ‘stamp of approval’ on the religious messages contained in the bible.”

Livingood responded on Nov. 30, 2012, indicating that he had met with district principals and instructed them not to permit Gideons in the schools or on school property.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation’s first-of-its-kind feature production for use as educational filler on public television affiliates aired more than 1,430 times over three months late last year. This is the first such segment featuring discussion of freethought, atheism and focusing on the specific dangers of mixing state and church.

The four-minute “Spotlight on Freethought and the First Amendment” featured interviews with FFRF Co-Presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor. The longer version, over five minutes, included a bonus interview with “secularity” expert, sociologist and author Professor Phil Zuckerman of Pitzer University. Local public TV affiliates were given the option to use either spot, or both, as fillers.

For the first time in the history of Spotlight Productions, more affiliates ran the longer version — “a compliment to Phil Zuckerman,” says Gaylor. The longer version aired 731 times, in 136 station airings. The short version aired 699 times with 142 station airings.

The two shows each reached more than 3.6 million public TV viewers, according to the Nielsen ratings. Markets airing one or both of the spots included high population airings such as New York City and Los Angeles, as well as a diversity of smaller markets nationwide. In the Salt Lake City area, for instance, served by five area public TV affiliates including in Provo, FFRF’s spots ran 62 times last fall.

The broadcasts are audited by Nielson only for the first three months after the show is released. But FFRF’s two “Spotlights” may continue to air for years as filler.

View the videos at FFRF’s YouTube Channel.

Click here for the 4-minute (“abridged”) version. 

Click here for the longer version (“TV version”), including Zuckerman’s interview.

Additionally a “bonus track version” of nearly seven minutes (FFRF special), which includes additional footage with Dan Barker, is currently prominently featured at FFRF’s website homepage, FFRF.org. Click here to view the bonus track. 

U.S. District Judge Terrence McVerry ruled Jan. 22 that the Freedom From Religion Foundation’s challenge to a Ten Commandments monument in front of a Pennsylvania high school will go forward. McVerry rejected a motion to dismiss by the New Kensington-Arnold School District and issued an order that directs the district to file an answer to the plaintiffs’ complaint.

FFRF and two families filed suit in September 2012 against the school district over the prominent placement of a Ten Commandments monument at Valley High School. The district sought to dismiss the case by claiming that it had been “foreclosed” by the Supreme Court’s Van Orden v. Perry decision in 2005, which allowed a similar monument on the Texas Capitol grounds to stand.

FFRF’s brief argued that there are significant factual and legal distinctions between the cases, most notably, that the Supreme Court has ruled against Ten Commandments displays in the school context.

McVerry’s opinion stated that the First Amendment claim “has sufficient merit under our current jurisprudence.” He noted that at this preliminary stage, “there is no meaningful evidence to support the School District’s attack on the merits of Plaintiffs’ case and thus the ‘foreclosure’ argument is unavailing at this time.”

The court issued an order in December that allowed three of the plaintiffs to proceed using pseudonyms, finding that there was a substantial public interest in protecting them from retribution from upset members of the community. The court will hold a scheduling conference in February.

FFRF, with local families, is also suing over a nearly identical violation in Connellsville, Pa. 

Note: Below the following call to action is a copy of the letter FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor sent to Washington State Lt. Governor Owen over inappropriate prayer at the Jan. 14 State Senate session. Click here to view the letter as PDF. We encourage you to read the letter and then speak out against the prayer. 

Take Action!

Please contact the following members of the Washington State government and urge them to take steps to "prevent future constitutional violations by dropping legislative prayer."

Contact

The Honorable Brad Owen
Lieutenant Governor and President of the Washington State Senate
Office of the Lt. Governor
PO Box 40400
Olympia, WA 98504-0400
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Senator Mark Schoesler
Republican Leader
PO Box 40409
Olympia, WA 98504-0409

Senator Ed Murray
Democratic Leader
PO Box 40443
Olympia, WA 98504-0443

Hunter Goodman
Secretary of the Senate
P.O. Box 40482
Olympia WA 98504-0482
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The Honorable Brad Owen
Lieutenant Governor and President of the Washington State Senate
Office of the Lt. Governor
PO Box 40400
Olympia, WA 98504-0400

Re: Unconstitutional Legislative Prayer

Dear Lt. Governor Owen:

On behalf of Washington members of our national organization, which works to protect the constitutional principle of the separation between state and church, I am writing to strenuously object to the overtly political and offensive prayer delivered by Pastor Jon Sanne at the Washington Senate’s first session on January 14, 2013. The Freedom From Religion Foundation is an educational association with 19,000 nonreligious members nationwide, including more than 800 members in Washington. We also represent the 25% of the Washington population, 1.3 million Washingtonians, who are explicitly nonreligious. (Thirty percent of Washingtonians are not Christians).

It is our understanding that Sanne, Pastor of the Calvary Chapel in Olympia, gave an invocation addressed to his “Heavenly Father,” asking the “Lord, [to] bring us back into line with the timeless truths and wisdom of Your Word [the Bible].” Sanne asked his god to “lead us to a blessing, being one nation, under You.” Sanne also took the opportunity to lobby the Senate to overturn the gay marriage bill and referendum, by inviting his deity to “strengthen marriage as You’ve ordained it for our good and Your Glory.” Sanne concluded: “We openly and humbly ask these things in the name of Your Son the Living Savior, Jesus Christ.”

This incident is a perfect example of all that is wrong with mixing government and religion, including legislative prayer. Legislative prayer is unconstitutional, exclusionary, divisive and serves no legitimate secular purpose.

The Prayer is Unconstitutional

As the Supreme Court explained: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.” W. Va. State Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 642 (1943). The Court has rigidly enforced the rule that “The government may not . . . lend its power to one or the other side in controversies over religious authority or dogma.” Employment Div. v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872, 877 (1990).

In sponsoring sectarian legislative prayers, in this case to Jesus, the Washington government, which invited Sanne, is weighing in on three controversies. First, the government is inappropriately taking a side in what is arguably the most enduring religious controversy: god’s existence or non-existence. Second, the legislature is endorsing Christianity by scheduling and approving an overtly Christian prayer. Legislative prayer may not be sectarian. On January 13, 2012, the Supreme Court declined to review a Fourth Circuit decision that overturned a legislative prayer policy because the prayers “continued to reference specific tenets of Christianity.” Joyner v. Forsyth County, 653 F.3d 341, 344 (4th Cir. 2011). That decision held that continual, Christian prayers at a legislative sessions leads “to exactly the kind of ‘divisiveness the Establishment Clause seeks rightly to avoid.’ ” Id. 355. Thirdly, the Washington Senate has appeared to lend its power and imprimatur to a homophobic diatribe. This body owes an apology to Washington citizens, particularly the LGBTQ community, for this outrageous and inappropriate incident.

According to news reports, Senator Mark Schoesler invited Sanne to give the prayer. Schoesler was quoted saying: “He prayed. I asked him to speak, and I don’t censor prayer.” That is precisely why legislative prayers should not be offered. There is no means of assuring that officiants will abide by the narrow exceptions carved out by the Supreme Court.

The prayer here flagrantly exceeded the constraints of the 1983 Supreme Court decision, Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783 (1983), which carved out the narrow exception. The Marsh exception allowed for nonsectarian, nondenominational prayer under certain circumstances. The prayer may not be “exploited to proselytize or advance any one, or to disparage any other, faith or belief.” The Supreme Court has reiterated, “not even the ‘unique history’ of legislative prayer, can justify contemporary legislative prayers that have the effect of affiliating the government with any one specific faith or belief.” County of Allegheny v. ACLU Greater Pittsburgh Chapter, 492 U.S. 573, 603 (1989). The Court explained, “The legislative prayers involved in Marsh did not violate this principle because the particular chaplain had ‘removed all references to Christ.’ ” Id.

The Marsh decision is often misunderstood or misrepresented. Therefore, it is important to see how courts interpret the decision. Time and again, federal courts overturn government-sponsored prayers that are sectarian, denominational, or invoke a particular faith or deity.

When the legislature invites officiants to pray and schedules official prayer, it has a responsibility to ensure that they are nonsectarian. We understand the reluctance to ensure religious speech meets constitutional requirements, but the solution is not to ignore those constitutional requirements, it is to stop conducting government prayer.

Sanne used his status as a “man of God” to lobby the legislature on an issue that has been decided in Washington courts and by the voters. He attempted to use religion to leverage legislation. It is no distortion to say that the purpose of his prayer was to exhort the gathered officials to prohibit gay marriage in the name of Sanne’s god.

The Prayer is Exclusionary

Government officials represent more that just Christians; they represent all their constituents including atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, Wiccans, Hindus and other minority religious views. The Senate’s active participation in a Christian prayer in your official capacity unabashedly promotes that religion over other religions and over nonreligion. Officials may, as private citizens, attend any religious functions they like, the church of your choice, pray, etc. But the federal and state Constitutions — and good etiquette — dictate that government officials avoid prayer in their official capacity and refrain from allowing religious rituals at official ceremonies.

By scheduling prayer, the Washington government sends the message “to nonadherents that they are outsiders, not full members of the political community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored members of the political community.” County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union, 492 U.S. 573, 595 (1989) (quoting Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668, 688 (1984)).

The Prayer is Divisive

The framers of our Constitution recognized that religion is not unifying, but divisive. James Madison thought, “to employ Religion as an engine of Civil policy” was “an unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation.” He also thought “Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”

The Supreme Court has also recognized the divisiveness of religion. In McCreary County, the Supreme Court wrote, “…the divisiveness of religion in current public life is inescapable.” 545 U.S. 844, 881 (2005). In Van Orden v. Perry, Justice Breyer wrote in his dissent that the purpose of the First Amendment is to “avoid that divisiveness based upon religion that promotes social conflict, sapping the strength of government and religion alike.” 545 U.S. 677, 698 (2005). An early Wisconsin Supreme Court justice put it most eloquently:

“There is no such source and cause of strife, quarrel, fights, malignant opposition, persecution, and war, and all evil in the state, as religion. Let it once enter our civil affairs, our government would soon be destroyed.” Weiss v. District Board, 44 N.W. 967, 981 (1890)(Orton, J. concurring).

James Madison, the primary architect of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, and our fourth president, opposed government prayers and congressional chaplaincies. In his Detached Memoranda, Madison wrote, “Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion . . . The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles.” Madison was equally critical of presidential and governmental prayer.

“Religious proclamations by the Executive recommending thanksgivings & fasts are shoots from the same root… Although recommendations only, they imply a religious agency, making no part of the trust delegated to political rulers.” Id.

The U.S. Constitution is a godless and secular document, whose only references to religion in government are exclusionary, such as prohibiting a religious test for public office. It is a fundamental principle of Establishment Clause jurisprudence that the government cannot promote one religion over another, or religion over nonreligion. The framers did not pray when adopting our Constitution. Surely if the founders did not need prayer to write the document that founded our nation, the Washington Senate can successfully conduct its secular business without prayer as well.

We ask that you take immediate action to prevent future constitutional violations by dropping legislative prayer. We would appreciate hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Very truly,

Annie Laurie Gaylor
Co-President

FFRF has awarded Mayan and Balen Essak each $1,000 student activist awards. Freethought activism runs in the family (see sidebar).

For several years, our Wisconsin public high school’s football team has partnered with a private, Catholic high school to create a competitive team. For years, the team’s logo was a simple MS, combining our schools’ first initials.

Last year, our graphic arts program assigned students a project to create a new logo, combining our high school’s logo, a greyhound, with the private school’s logo, a Catholic bishop’s hat with a cross on it. The winning design would replace the old logo. After passing through the football coach, principal and many other school authorities, a design that cleverly combined the logos was chosen and printed on decals for helmets.

For most of the season, the cross-bearing helmets went unbeknownst to us until the school newspaper printed an article about them with a few weeks left in the season. Publication of the situation prompted an immediate response.

The day the paper came out, one of us, along with some other upset peers, brought it to the assistant principal’s attention that we were unhappy with a religious symbol representing our football team and public school. We felt that it was unfair to force people to wear a cross on their heads if they wanted to play football. It was a clear issue of separating church and state.

We brought it to the attention of our parents as well, who, that night, emailed the school board and principal explaining that without swift action, we would be contacting the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

At the school board meeting that one of us attended, the board acknowledged our request. They all had been unaware of the new logo and voted unanimously and with minimal discussion to remove the decals as quickly as possible.

Taking responsibility for the mistake, the principal apologized and had the decals removed before the next game. Unfortunately, many people were unhappy with the decision. One school board member received many emails and phone calls from disapproving citizens across the nation, but there were many local protesters, too.

We had to explain countless times to oblivious peers why having a cross on a public school’s football helmet isn’t acceptable. Many felt that since a private school was involved, they should be allowed to have their symbol represented on the team’s logo.

They couldn’t understand that when a private school partners with a public school, they need to follow the public school’s rules. Students at the private school may have signed up to be represented by a cross, but anyone attending a public school can expect complete freedom from religion in all representations of their school and all school-sponsored activities.

Another common complaint was that since we weren’t football players, and because we weren’t actually wearing the cross, we weren’t directly affected by the logo and shouldn’t care or make such a big deal about it.

On the contrary, it did directly affect us. At every single football game our team had played so far this season, people saw our football team associated with Christianity. People seeing our school as a Christianity-endorsing institution doesn’t just affect the football players. It affects anyone associated with our school district.

Just because we’re not football players doesn’t change the morality of the situation. In the theoretical but entirely possible situation that we wanted to play football, we should not be forced to wear a cross on our heads. The helmet logo was morally and legally wrong; whether or not we play football doesn’t change that.

Some other arguments were even more outlandish. This was one of the emails a school board member received: “Everyone wonders why America is in decline. The answer is simple, our country was founded with Christian values . . . and every time we disavow his image or the cross we are a little less blessed each day. . . . I don’t know what your religious affiliation is, but if you are a Christian . . . think about putting God ahead of your job and political motivations. . . If they don’t like it, tell them to go to another school . . . If you are a liberal, you won’t understand me.”

Obviously, America was not founded on Christian values but on moral principles, which contradict this point of view. Another email received in response to the decision stated, “This has nothing whatsoever to do with separation of church and state and you know it. What it shows is that today’s society is determined to shield this generation from Christianity and remove all mention of God from our lives. Our great country was founded on the belief of personal and religious freedoms and you have now done your part to squash that freedom.”

Actually, it did have to do with separation of church and state. Also, not forcing Christianity upon others seems more like freedom from religion than the freedom suggested in this email.

To us, this issue seems absolutely self-evident. By separation of church and state, it is unacceptable to place any religious symbols on a public school’s uniforms. How so many people are naïve about this idea is bewildering to us. Working to remove the cross from our school’s helmets was a rewarding experience, but also an eye-opening one.

Sadly, far more people than we had ever imagined are completely oblivious to religious symbols in public settings and are too ignorant to other points of view to understand why the cross had to be removed. Hopefully, this has been a learning experience for all.

We just hope that if a situation like this arises, and we aren’t there to fight for our freedom from religion, someone else will.

Jennifer and Sam Essak (at right), parents of Mayan and Balen, as state employees were among the victorious plaintiffs in FFRF’s lawsuit declaring unconstitutional Wisconsin’s Good Friday holiday in 1996. “We’re thrilled to see two generations of commitment to the First Amendment in the Essak family,” said FFRF Co-President Annie Laurie Gaylor. Also pictured by the Robert La Follette bust in the Wisconsin Capitol in 1996 were Good Friday plaintiffs (left) Dan Barker, Michael Hakeem, Richard Uttke and Annie Laurie and Anne Gaylor.