Opinion: Column

Day off draws fire from FFRF

While Jesus’ beard, long hair and affection for Hacky Sack may peg him as your typical college student, the Bible — and a lack of 2,000-year-old universities — suggest otherwise. However, I’d like to think if the Son of God did go to college to become a carpenter, he probably would’ve attended a place like Madison Area Technical College. After all, woodworking is pretty technical, and we all know his dad was too uptight to help with tuition. So imagine how happy Jesus was last Friday when, fresh off a pick-up basketball game with Mother Theresa and the two dead Beatles, he looked down on earth and saw MATC had cancelled classes for the day. I bet he high-fived JFK and made a bad joke about how it was going to be a “Good Friday” (you’d laugh — it’s Jesus). But not everybody is laughing at what seems to be an innocuous day off, as the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Madison’s grumpiest constitutional watchdog, is readying a lawsuit quicker than you can moan, “Jesus Christ.”

Before we dive into how the FFRF isn’t really about “freedom,” let’s lay out the facts of the matter. Kids at MATC got Friday off. For Christians, Friday is known as Good Friday, the day Jesus died on the cross. Thirteen years ago, a federal judge ruled it was unconstitutional for the state to recognize Good Friday as a holiday. MATC is arguing the day off is part of the teachers’ union agreement, which calls for days off to grade tests and attend workshops. FFRF thinks it’s a bit too circumstantial and says the class-free Friday was in violation of the Constitution. You can decide what you think for yourself. Personally, I don’t care why I get days off — I just like sleeping in. If celebrating Charles Manson gave me a four-day school week, I’d be all for it.

But this isn’t about Charles Manson. Or even Jesus. This is about one local group’s absolute need to force their view upon the populous. FFRF claims to stand for the Constitution, but in reality, they only stand for themselves. Easily, the greatest aspect of FFRF is the name. Never in school were we taught the Bill of Rights offered Americans freedom from religion; instead, we are ensured freedom of religion. The difference is staggering. Freedom of religion suggests, no matter what God you choose to believe in, no one will threaten you for your beliefs. Or lack thereof. Freedom from religion, on the other hand, implies America is a country where religion simply doesn’t exist, like the old Soviet Union or Hot Topic. If I ran a group that claimed to defend the Constitution, I’d try to make sure the name didn’t need to bend the Bill of Rights to fit my goals.

This is not a situation that warrants a lawsuit from anyone. We’ve become far too sensitive to circumstances we don’t agree with, and we’ve apparently started letting too many people into law school. Whenever the courts get involved, it’s important to ask this question: Who was hurt? Obviously, the Christians weren’t, although Mass makes going to school look like Universal Studios. But even for people of other faiths, or people without faith, it’s difficult to see why this would be so upsetting. It’s a day off, damn it. There’s no need to dig for ulterior motives. Just go throw a Frisbee.

FFRF is built on fear. Like Marx, they believe religion is the opiate of the masses, and they will sue whoever it takes to ensure God is not seen in any public place nor spoken of by anyone who gets their paycheck from the state. I’ve never been one for monuments to the Ten Commandments outside of town halls or separate courts for Sharia law, but this is simply unreasonable. Although we’ve done a poor job showing it the last 230 years, America is, at its foundation, a country of tolerance. FFRF is an institution fueled by its own intolerance. You can argue all day over whether God is real, but I’m confident if he’s up there, he’s not trying to screw anybody over. Except maybe the Vikings.

To be blunt, you guys are like the fat lady who sues McDonald’s for making her fat. You have an unrealistic expectation of this country. America does not want to shut God out. America wants to let him in, along with Allah, Shiva and whatever Tom Cruise thinks is out there. For Christ’s sake, there are worse ways to spend time than praying, and I’ll give you one: filing lawsuits.

Sean Kittridge ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in journalism.

Have a thought? We welcome your input, but please be polite and stay on topic wherever possible. Your comment may be deleted if it is inappropriately off topic or promotional or if it is unnecessarily rude or contains personal attacks. We may delete comments for other reasons as well. Just keep it simple and focus on your points as respectfully as possible.

We allow and encourage comments employing satire, wit and irony to make points. Do not flag comments just because you disagree. Flagged comments will be immunized from further flagging unless they stray far from the guidelines and do not add to the discussion. Before flagging a comment you think is offensive, consider your time might be better spent rebutting it than censoring it.

blog comments powered by Disqus

23 older comments

user-pic

solid article

user-pic

Well said sir. I would also like to point out that the phrase “separation of Church and State” appears no where in the Constitution, and is instead found in Thomas Jefferson’s private writings.

user-pic

haha! hot topic…

this is def one of my favorites, sean. good job!

user-pic

I’m not sure if this applies to MATC, but a lot of college kids use Good Friday as a travel day. Usually, classes are less than half full, so professors tend to cancel classes anyway.

user-pic

Good article but a quick note at the end…Allah, in Islam, is God, the same one that Christians and Jews believe in. It’s redundant to say “Americans want to let God in, along with Allah.”

user-pic

Fantastic article!!!

user-pic

1:30, are you kidding? “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”? It’s the FIRST AMENDMENT. Just because some talking point catchphrase isn’t there doesn’t mean the actual idea isn’t.

user-pic

Finally! This is perfect, absolutely perfect. Intelligent people have long noted the difference between freedom “of” vs. freedom “from” religion. You hit the nail on the head when you called them the “grumpiest constitutional watchdog.”

Also, I loved the hypocrisy around the holidays when they put their religious views (atheism) up on the large, pointy governement building while complaining that the all government property should be devoid of such things. There is a difference between the government saying “There is no God” and the government saying “I don’t know and don’t care, you deal with it.” The Freedom From Reason.. err, Religion Foundation is the latter, in case you were wondering.

user-pic

“This is about one local group�s absolute need to force their view upon the populous.” “FFRF is built on fear.” “FFRF is an institution fueled by its own intolerance.”

I ‘love’ the crazy, unsubstantiated accusations thrown around in this article. They are truly hillarious. Who are the ones preaching on State Street that everyone should convert, and follow their religious beliefs or they will spend eternity in hell? I’m pretty sure it isn’t athiests, agnostics, or the FFRF.

“For Christ�s sake, there are worse ways to spend time than praying, and I�ll give you one: filing lawsuits.”

This is another great one. To make a drastic comparison: which is the better route? Praying that segregation will end, or filing a lawsuit against the Board of Education?

user-pic

2:10, maybe that’s why 1:30 said phrase and not idea

user-pic

2:10,

Do you really not see the gigantically substantive difference between the 1st amendment and the “separation of Church and State?” The 1st amendment says that no laws shall be created that will give our nation a national religion. As in the way that Saudi Arabia is officially an Islamic nation, the first amendment says that we will simply never officially be a Christian nation. The Constitution says NOTHING about separating out religion from our politics or our state, nor does it say anything about creating laws based on religion, nor does it say anything about leading based on religion.

I am most certainly for the complete separation of Church and State but its completely incorrect to think that that concept is in the constitution.

user-pic

Hey, 1:30 am — the Treaty of Tripoli. Look it up!

user-pic

Anyone else thought about the FFFFRF? “Freedom from Freedom from Relgion Foundation?” It’ll come, give it time.

user-pic

“Good article but a quick note at the end…Allah, in Islam, is God, the same one that Christians and Jews believe in. It’s redundant to say “Americans want to let God in, along with Allah.”

Sorry - this is untrue. Islam worships a god who balances the good and evil men do and their atonement. Christians do not.

user-pic

2:10 - “1:30, are you kidding? “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”? It’s the FIRST AMENDMENT. Just because some talking point catchphrase isn’t there doesn’t mean the actual idea isn’t.”

You might want to think this through a bit more carefully - note that religion played a big part in the live of the founding fathers. They even mention God in the Declaration of Independance. Jefferson’s “wall simply meant that government could not interfere in religious matters, it was never intended to make our government a government of the atheist, by the atheist, and for the atheist.

user-pic

Hey 9:00 PM -

I assume you refer to art. 11, “As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion …”

Whether true or not, it makes no difference in a constitutional discussion. You may be unaware of this, but the constitution trumps treaties.

Finally, while it’s possible to say what Art. 11 says, that doesn’t mean the Christian principles and morality weren’t in play at our nations founding. Indeed, if you do a bit more reading of documents from the period, you may change your mind about that.

user-pic

While I disagree with the FFRF filing a lawsuit, I laugh at how you vilify the big scary atheists.

“This is about one local group�s absolute need to force their view upon the populous.” I’m sorry, but that’s what religion does. If you want to complain about groups “forcing their views” upon others, look no further than Christianity and Islam. Jews and Hindus do a good job of keeping their religion to themselves and among fellow believers - as it should be. Christians, however, tend to cry whenever somebody doesn’t let Jesus sit on the capitol lawn at Christmas or when the gays try to get married. Many Muslims get pissed when somebody draws a political cartoon about Muhammad. England is getting closer and closer to Sharia law because of all the outrage from Muslims whenever something doesn’t go their way.

“America does not want to shut God out.”

One of the fundamental principals of a true democracy is guarding against the tyranny of the majority. Just because most Americans are religious, that does not mean religion should seep into the public sector. MATC is a public school, so like it or not, they cannot favor any religion. Students can skip class for worship if they so choose - their professor would certainly excuse their absence. Even though God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence and the Founding Fathers were religious, that doesn’t mean America is a Christian nation. The Founding Fathers took special care to ensure that religion stayed well outside of the public sector.

“FFRF is built on fear. Like Marx, they believe religion is the opiate of the masses, and they will sue whoever it takes to ensure God is not seen in any public place nor spoken of by anyone who gets their paycheck from the state.”

You know what? They’re right. While a public employee is doing his job, God should not be an issue. (Please don’t drag stuff like morals into this - while the golden rule may be in the Bible, that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily religious. Being kind to others should be something people do anyways, not because they’re afraid of hell.) I am not paying congressmen to make special concessions to their favorite religions.

When it comes to government, “freedom of religion” and “freedom from religion” are the same thing. If God is in the laws, it’s encroaching on my freedom to not practice any religion. I don’t want God to be given a special place in our lawbooks, just like you don’t want the city of Madison to erect a giant statue of Satan inside all high schools.

“For Christ�s sake, there are worse ways to spend time than praying, and I�ll give you one: filing lawsuits.”

I’ll make a deal with you - if school is canceled so Christians can celebrate Jesus getting executed, it should also be canceled on May 1st so I can offer a pi�ata sacrifice (Madison didn’t approve of me butchering a live goat) to my false heathen gods and dance around a maypole.

user-pic

Without watchdog organizations like FFRF, religion (exclusively christian of course) would be creeping into every aspect of government. Fear-mongers, like the author think that organizations like FFRF want to eliminate religion entirely, but that is incorrect. Their main focus is keeping the promise of the Constitution and the founding fathers alive by not allowing the christian majority to force their narrow minded version of morality, among other things, on the rest of the tax paying populace by government officials and programs. For a true democracy to survive, religious tyranny should never be given a foothold.

user-pic

People migrated to this area for many reasons. Some came for riches, while others came to escape the religious persecution and bigotry they found in their homeland. Some of those people were known as our “founding fathers.” There are many instances where some of our more persuasive fathers, like Patrick Henry, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and even George Washington, spoke against the co-mingling of church and state. How could they not, considering they fought a war to gain the freedom that England did not offer. As suggested previously, feel free to peruse documents from that era. What it boils down to is this: freedom of religion cannot exsist without freedom from religion. Our founding fathers knew this. When people attend goverment functions and hear a plea for salvation to some guy named god, jesus, allah, or bhudda (capitalization removed for emphasis), it is the same as a religious endorsement. This endorsement is what is unconstitutional.

user-pic

April 15, 9:39

“Whether true or not, it makes no difference in a constitutional discussion. You may be unaware of this, but the constitution trumps treaties.”

Except that under the constitution, treaties become the law of the land.

user-pic

I believe that the christians are getting scared. There are more people who do not believe in god than what you might think. Horray for the FFRF. More power to them. By the way, more people have been killed in the name of religion than any other cause. And, organized religion are the biggest discriminators than anyone. Remember, Hitler was a Christian.

user-pic

“You can argue all day over whether God is real, but I�m confident if he�s up there, he�s not trying to screw anybody over.”

Please allow me to refer you to the book of Job. Actually, an objective reading of the entire old testament makes God look like a sociopathic prankster.

“Never in school were we taught the Bill of Rights offered Americans freedom from religion; instead, we are ensured freedom of religion.”

Sean I’m sorry you went to a bad school. I don’t have freedom from religion? Engel v. Vitale. Wallace v. Jaffree. Lee v. Waisman. Upshot of these cases: B.O.R. does in fact guarantee freedom from religion. Please understand that when you say “The Consitution says this and not that,” you are inviting me to consider Supreme Court jurisprudence, which roundly rejects your claims. Look particularly at Black’s opinion in Engel.

I am not a affiliated with FFRF, but I appreciate that they try to stand up for athe oppressed minority of us who don’t accept the tyranny of organized religion.

“Although we�ve done a poor job showing it the last 230 years, America is, at its foundation, a country of tolerance.”

Says the Anglo-Saxon white male. America has certainly improved its tolerance of viewpoints, but I could trace a track record of history that shows quite the opposite.

user-pic

government buildings shouldnt support ,or have any religion on them .That is what churches are for.I was born in the state of ark, they had a blue law that you couldnt buy candles ,light bulbs , fuses on sunday . The blue law was supported by the roman catholic church,and the government enforced this stupid law, in texas we have a blue law , you cant buy beer before 12 oclock on suday , thats pushing your religion on people . im almost 50 years old and i dont want ,or need any religion to tell me how ,and when i can spend my money.

Donate