 |
Demonization, Stereotyping, Restriction
I want to say to the elite of this country - the elite news media, the liberal academic elite, the liberal political elite: I accuse you in Littleton, and I accuse you in Kosovo of being afraid to talk about the mess you have made, and being afraid to take responsibility for things you have done, and instead foisting upon the rest of us pathetic banalities because you don't have the courage to look at the world you have created.
-- Newton Gingrich
Former Speaker, US House of Representatives
Within hours of the shooting, media reporting of the events centered on the Littleton shootings reached the saturation point. The major networks suspended regular programming, and news media such as CNN and MSNBC began full-time coverage. The hunt to find a “meaning” or “message” in the events of that Tuesday created a ready-made platform for any political, religious or civic leader. Aside from the basics of the crime - How many were involved? What weapons were used? Was the school booby-trapped? - media and law enforcement began frantically to focus on the associates of the two gunmen, Harris and Klebold, unearthing an informal group of students known as the Trench Coat Mafia. Early reports suggested that this group was part of a larger “Goth” [2] subculture, inviting further claims concerning interest in vampires, death, the music of rocker Marilyn Manson, [3] nazism, and Satanism. Another sensationalist angle quickly emerged when it was learned that Eric Harris had maintained a Web site on the Internet which included drawings, rants and threats against other students at Columbine. The latter served to reinforce perceptions that the internet is a “toxic zone” dominated by child pornographers, bomb-building maniacs, and hate groups. [4]
Despite intense media scrutiny, though, it became evident that the gunmen - Klebold and Harris - acted mostly on their own, and that the Trench Coat Mafia was less of a formal organization and more of an affinity group of youngsters. The lack of a cohesive group “behind” the slayings - a hate group or network of cultists - meant that the reasons for the tragedy were more diffuse and difficult to apprehend readily. Media accounts and commentators greeted the fact that both gunmen came from “good” middle-class homes almost with an air of frustrated resignation. This did not stop religious-right groups and politicians, though, from quickly advancing their own solutions to what they painted as a widespread and systemic problem in American culture.
In his 21 April broadcast of the 700 Club program, for instance, Rev. Pat Robertson blamed the Littleton tragedy on the fact that “suddenly the worship of God became unconstitutional,” following the Supreme Court decisions striking down mandatory prayer and Bible verse recitation in the public schools. He dubbed the rulings “the principle reason” behind a wave of youth violence.
Other religious-right luminaries moved quickly to capitalize on the reaction to the Columbine shootings, using the incident as a near-apocalyptic metaphor. [5] William Bennett, who in the past had warned of a generation of crack-addicted babies turning into a street army of psychopaths, suggested that the killers would have been detained by school authorities for counseling if they had been walking in the halls of Columbine High School - but not, supposedly, for quoting Nazi phrases. James Dobson of Focus on the Family suggested that the gunplay was the result of “today’s media-saturated ‘culture of death’” - textual coding which also includes practices such as euthanasia and abortion. And Beverly LaHaye of Concerned Women for America predicted that such violence would continue, “without God and without the Bible in these kids' lives.”
“Where is God in their schools,” asked La Haye, adding: “Instead of schools instilling in our children the importance of God in their lives, they are taught tolerance of anything and everything around them...”
At Cross Purposes
The Columbine tragedy prompted a series of rituals and symbolic activities which have, by now, become “standard operating procedure” in any number of social calamities, from reports of abducted children to the death of a prominent person. This includes the establishment of impromptu “memorials” - a wall or setting near the physical location - a proliferation of ribbons to be publicly displayed by the larger community as a sign of “unity” and bonding, religious memorial services, statements by political and community elites, and other public testimonials. [6]
Indeed, no sooner had the geography of Columbine High School been claimed by a small army of police and investigators than a different sort of battle erupted over control of the symbolic and religious metaphors linked to the shooting. One conflict involved an impromptu memorial on a hilltop in Clement Park, next to the school, where Illinois carpenter Greg Zanis planted a series of fifteen crosses. Thirteen of these were for the twelve students and a slain teacher, and two commemorated the memories of the gunmen, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris. The father of one of the victims, though, outraged, destroyed those two crosses and met with Zanis to explain his actions. [7] Zanis later praised the parent as “the bravest dad ... to go and yank those (crosses) out of there,” adding that he would never erect another cross to a presumed murderer “unless I know he's accepted the Lord.” Taking issue with Zanis’ initial attitude of forgiveness, a Littleton resident erected a competing exhibit with only 13 crosses nearby.
The Denver Post noted, “Zanis’ crosses have become the focus of a debate over faith and forgiveness in the wake of the nation’s deadliest school shooting. Angry confrontations erupted among park visitors as some people wrote messages of hate on the killers’ white crosses while others, urging forgiveness, tried to stop them and insisted the two young men were also victims...” [8]
Issues involving control of the religious dimensions in the Columbine saga also erupted over an enormous memorial service organized by the State of Colorado on April 25, just five days after the shooting. An estimated 70,000 persons attended - an astonishing figure considering that the high school had only about 2,000 students and staff - and received nationwide live coverage on CNN. [9] It also was the lead story on the evening news for the three major commercial networks. The content of the service quickly fueled charges that the memorial event, and indeed the whole Columbine story, was being exploited for sectarian ends. Only two newspapers, though -- the Washington Times and the Denver Post - gave any substantial coverage to the split forming within religious ranks. The Post noted, “Evangelical tone of memorial spurs backlash,” adding “Sunday event offended some.” [10]
Rev. Patrick Demmer of the Greater Denver Metro Ministerial Alliance branded the memorial as “pretty vanilla,” noting that “No people of color spoke or sang.” Rev. Marxhausen, head of a Lutheran church in Littleton, complained that he left the service feeling “hit over the head with Jesus” due to the strident evangelical tone of the gathering. And Rabbi Stephen Foster said that the event “turned into an evangelical prayer service,” and complained that many of the sermons and addresses included statements “that were exclusively directed to not just Christians, but fundamentalist Christians.”
The event included a sermon by Rev. Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, and appearances by Christian pop music stars Amy Grant [11], Michael W. Smith, and Phil Driscoll. Graham was criticized by the President of the Interfaith Alliance of Colorado, Rev. Michael Carrier, who told the Denver Post, “I felt like he was trying to terrorize us into heaven instead of loving us into heaven.” he added, “If you have a state memorial service and Franklin Graham says you have to accept Jesus, you’re asking to offend people.”
Indeed, Graham told the crowd, “It is time for this nation to recognize that when we emptied the public schools of the moral teaching and standards of holy God, they are indeed very dangerous places...”
The service also became a platform for a song now inextricably linked to the Columbine slaying. Two students from the school recited “Columbine, Friend of Mine,” described by the Washington Times as “a song with a Christian spiritual message they wrote with help from their pastor.”
Others participating in the state-organized service included Roman Catholic Archbishop Charles Chaput and Vice President Al Gore. USA TODAY noted, “Just before the benediction, four Air Force jets roared overhead, soaring aloft in the ‘missing man’ formation.” As we shall see, Gore used his appearance at the Columbine service as just the first step in a political effort to tie his campaign to religious-right values and “take back God” for the Democratic Party in time for the year-2000 elections.
The memorial service, though, was not the only vehicle for delivering the message that Columbine reflected a profound moral malaise within America. Pat Robertson’s 700 Club became a forum in driving home the message that the actions of two students were endemic of a culture which had “kicked God out of school,” embraced murder in the form of abortion, and permitted civil liberties to run amok by allowing the spread of gambling, drugs, pornography and other “toxic pollutants.” Appearing on the 700 Club, Rev. Bruce Porter of the Celebration Christian Fellowship in Littleton urged teens to “take up the blood-stained torch” of the murdered students. Ignoring the constitutional separation of church and state, he added “Prayer in schools was official reestablished on April 20,1999, because it was accompanied by bombs and shootings. It is always the blood of martyrs that acts as rocket fuel for the church.” Robertson responded by announcing the donation of more than 1,000 copies of a new Bible edition for distribution to homes in Littleton. “Young people feel alienated,” declared the avuncular televangelist. “Send messages from your heart to preach the good news to them.”
Christian Broadcasting Network coverage of Columbine also threw a wide net when identifying the evils allegedly lurking behind the shootings. CBN reporter Michael Patrick declared, “The violent storm that tore through the lives of this Middle American suburb was spawned by a failing post-Christian nation unwittingly turned against its own young.” Patrick quoted Pope John Paul II in excoriating the “culture of death,” and dramatically added: “Drip by drip, our children are slowly poisoned by toxic images in the media and entertainment ... A teenage gang copycats a violent movie, while the film’s producers hide behind the First Amendment and blame free-market appetites.” Patrick also quoted Wall Street Journal columnist and author Peggy Noonan who suggested that media are so saturated with unwholesome images, “There is no channel to change to.”
“From shock jocks on radio to comedy witchcraft, much of our entertainment winks and snickers along with evil and sneers at what is good,” declared Patrick. [12] Tapping into the theme of “rebellious youth,” Patrick added that in many public schools, “God is less popular or welcome than the so-called ‘Goths’.”
More mainstream commentators also joined in the bombast. Betsy Hart, a contributor to CNN and the Fox News Channel, blasted legal attempts “to ban religion-specific prayer and other similar references and activities from the public school classrooms.” She also praised the move by school officials to attend the Sunday state memorial service in Littleton, “what might ordinarily be perceived by civil libertarians as a violation of the separation of church and state.”
But all of this paled in comparison to what was to follow. Littleton had produced victims and sorrow, but for some, it provided something more valuable - a martyr.
The Martyrdom of
Cassie Bernall &
The Myth Of Christian Victimization
Two themes emerged within the first days of the Columbine tragedy. They were the heroic accounts about one of the victims, Cassie Bernall, and the claim that the gunmen specifically “targeted Christians,” thus raising the prospect of a planned “religious hate” crime, possibly by an anti-Christian group. The latter belief - still credulously accepted to a large degree - was eerily reminiscent of the early accounts of the shooting in Paducah, Kentucky, when a student there opened fire on a Christian prayer group in the lobby of the high school, and was quickly branded an Atheist by some media. It was later revealed that the gunman, Michael Carneal, was, in fact, from a religious home and had a history of personal problems.
In the weeks following the shooting, seventeen-year-old Cassie Bernall became the focus of articles, Web sites, and sermons due to the fact that she was an evangelical Christian frequently seen carrying a Bible and wearing a "What Would Jesus Do?" bracelet. [13]
Bernall was in the library at Columbine High when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold entered after an initial round of seemingly random shooting in the school cafeteria. One of the gunmen supposedly approached Bernall and asked "Do you believe in God?" She was then shot, ostensibly after answering in the affirmative.
This story came from other students presumably in the library at the time in the midst of an emotionally tumultuous event. News accounts from major media did not identify the source of such claims or say whether students recounting this story were doing so on the basis of first-hand information or as the result of hearing it from others. While there was considerable interest in probing into the motivation of Klebold and Harris, there did not appear to be a comparable desire to examine the precise events that took place in the library [14], or question the memory of eyewitnesses. The confrontation between one of the gunmen and Bernall may have taken place substantially in this way, or it could be an embellished account eagerly believed by news media and the public. With little or no evidence, though, the Bernall story spread quickly and became an integral feature of the Littleton drama.
“Out of the brutality and violence that erupted two weeks ago in Littleton, Colo., Christian evangelists have rapidly fashioned a symbol,” noted the San Francisco Chronicle. [15] Rev. Robert Schuller of the Crystal Cathedral in California declared, “I hope the world will recognize that she (Bernall) has been a martyr in the highest and noblest sense of that word.” Schuller added that Bernall “knowingly stood up for her faith and was prepared to pay the price - which was her life.”
Reporter Larry Stammer cautioned, though, “Whether Bernall was, in fact, killed specifically because of her faith will probably never be known for sure.” He noted that initial account came “from one of the survivors” who at first claimed that Bernall was shot after responding to a gunman’s question. “Later accounts, repeated in some media reports, had the killer responding ‘there is no God’ before pulling the trigger,” noted Stammer.
The story became further embellished as it was transmitted through the network of Christian publications and groups. Stammer noted that accounts being circulated became “more detailed,” and served as moral remonstrances for youngsters. One thirteen-year old junior student said that the Bernall story “made me think if that were to happen to me ... I would just pray that God would give me the strength to say, ‘Yes, I do believe in God’ and hopefully share with that person. And if it meant death, then it meant death ...” [16]
The growing story of Cassie Bernall was rendered all the more compelling because she matched the paradigm of a “bad girl turned good.” [17] An official statement issued by the Bernall family shortly after the Columbine shooting described Cassie: “Her life was rightly centered around our Lord Jesus. It was for her strong faith in God and His promise of eternal life that she made her stand.”
But it was not always so. “Like most teen-age girls,” noted Associated Press, “Ms. Bernall fretted about boys, her weight and being popular. A few years ago, the blue-eyed blonde fell in with the wrong crowd. She dabbled in witchcraft and was fascinated with suicide.” The parents then placed her in what CNN described as a “strict program” at the West Bowles Community Church, an Evangelical group. She was described as volatile, unruly and rebellious. “Under protest, Ms. Bernall joined the church’s youth group, where her anger gradually subsided. About two years ago, she returned from a retreat as a converted Christian...”
Funerals and memorial services for the victims also provided an opportunity for religious leaders to mention Bernall’s “martyrdom” and other heroic deeds, thus setting the stage for the wider claim of “Christians as victims” in the Columbine shootings. Across the country, Christian radio stations and publications echoed the headlines in the Minnesota Christian Chronicle: “Gunmen targeted Christians.” [18] As the “martyrs of Columbine” were being eulogized, though, Klebold, Harris, and his still-living associates in the Trench Coat Mafia were subjected to demonization. One South Denver preacher from a church near Columbine high opined that the gunmen acted because schools had been turned into “moral-free zones.” A student said that the Trench Coat Mafia was “into anarchy,” white supremacism, and “Nostradamus stuff and doomsday.” [19] Another suggested that members of the Trench Coat group were bisexual. “Boys would hold hands in the hall sometimes...” [20] All of these themes touched upon culture war issues, as did the thoughts expressed by Bishop Marshall Meadors of the United Methodist Church that youngsters were “declaring war on society.”
The Political Aftermath
Despite the fact that schools remain relatively safe environments for youngsters, and that rates of school-based violence have actually been in decline, the Littleton shooting precipitated a range of legislative and punitive remedies. A number of emotionally-charged culture wars were blended, at times creating the impression that the nation was on the brink of social collapse. The conservative publication Human Events, for instance, said that the Columbine shootings was “the latest example of what will become increasingly routine so long as our society expels God from the schools while allowing the raw sewage of Satanic rock and death-dealing video games to flood the shopping malls and internet.” [21]
One reaction has involved strengthened security measures in schools throughout the country, creating an environment which critics say mimics a prison rather than an educational institution. The New York Times noted, “In many schools, lockers are being removed, cameras are being installed as hallway monitors, and students will have to swipe a computerized ID card just to get in the door.” [22] One student activist from Lewisville, NC, observed, “There is definitely, post-Columbine, a real push on getting youth away from high-risk activities as these politicians see it. I see a lot of angry kids who are saying, ‘They think they’re gonna make us any better by taking away our rights?’ It’s just making us angrier. It’s not helping anyone.” [23] The measures were rationalized as preventive, but many were punitive, and had nothing directly to do with shootings in high schools. Curfew legislation proliferated across the country (fostering “growing talk” of a “National Break The Curfew Day” when youngsters would pour into the streets to signal opposition to the regulations), and drug-testing proposals “have been popping up like mushrooms after a spring rain,” according to civil liberties attorneys. [24] Littleton became a raison d’être for other legislation, including outlawing tattoos and barring the sale of exotic hair dyes to minors. [25]
All of this [26] belied the real picture about school violence. Some media reports noted the finding of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which indicated that “violent acts by American high school students declined between 1991 and 1997.” [27] The study found a “significant” drop in the number of students reporting fights or carrying weapons (a decline from 26.1% to 18.3%).
Amidst a climate where schools began ordering students to use clear or mesh backpacks, and submit to constitutionally suspect weapons searches [28], one study showed a 25% drop in the number of students injured in fights between 1991 and 1997. The US Department of Education reported that expulsions from schools for carrying guns dropped by one-third during the 1997-98 school year. One story noted: “Statistically, young people are still more likely to be struck by lightning - or killed by their own parents - than gunned down by fellow classmates.” [29]
By far, the most poignant fallout from the Columbine shootings, though, was evidenced in the tone of the nascent year-2000 election campaign, and the reaction on Capitol Hill. A number of legislation items were passed by the US House of Representatives; and during debate, supporters of these measures often cited the events at Columbine High as a compelling rationale for their constitutionally-suspect proposals.
Among these was a version of the Ten Commandments Defense Act which authorized the individual states to display copies of the Decalogue in school classrooms and other public venues. [30] Sponsored by Rep. Robert Aderholt of Alabama, the measure was an amendment to a juvenile justice bill. In debate, Aderholt justified his proposal by saying that the United States “was founded upon Judeo-Christian principles.” Another supporter of the measure, Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) suggested that had the Ten Commandments been displayed on the grounds of Columbine high, the tragedy of April 20, 1999 might not have occurred. During debate, a number of representatives cited the events at Littleton, and advanced claims of growing violence on high school campuses and in society in general.
Following passage of the Ten Commandments measure, other proposals in the House seemed to capitalize on the momentum of Aderholt’s 248-180 floor victory. They included H. AMDT. 201. Introduced as the Souder Amendment, which would “allow governmental entities that make grants to nongovernmental entities to also make grants or enter into contracts with religious organizations,” it was introduced by Rep. Mark Souder (R-Ind.). The measure “Expands the principle of nondiscrimination against faith-based organizations that desire to compete to provide services consistent with the goals of juvenile justice programs.” It also “Prohibits the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) from producing literature, curriculums, etc. which ‘undermines or denigrates’ the religious beliefs of any juvenile or adult in programs authorized in this bill.” [31] It passed the House 346-83.
The legislative agenda reflected a cascading wave of claims and statements by religious-right leaders and political figures that in order to correct a society dangerously adrift, government had to do more to facilitate the work of faith-based groups and institutions, or discourage efforts to rein in such constitutional violations. Congressman Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) offered an amendment which “disallows attorney fees in any action claiming that a public school or its agent violates the constitutional prohibition against the establishment of religion by permitting, facilitating, or accommodating a student’s religious expression.” The DeMint amendment specifically targeted establishment clause cases, and consequently minimized the risk for schools or other governmental units which decided to flaunt guidelines on religious proselytizing. It cleared the House of representatives 238-189.
Another measure, known as the Fletcher Amendment and introduced by Kentucky 6th District republican Ernie Fletcher, passed the House 422-1. It would authorize “block grant funding to establishing partnerships between State and local agencies for character education programs that incorporate elements of good character including honesty, citizenship, courage, justice, respect, personal responsibility and trustworthiness.”
God and Country:
Politicians Embrace the “Columbine Spirit”
The final and perhaps most significant consequence from the Columbine shootings is the effect on political discourse, particularly regarding the year-2000 election campaigns. The quickest to react were religious-right groups and figures, including Pat Robertson, James Dobson (Focus on the Family), William Bennett and others. A secondary wave came from political leaders such as Rep. Robert Aderholt, Rep. Bob Barr, and Rep. Tom DeLay who blamed the Littleton shootings on everything from the teaching of evolution to day care, rising divorce rates and the lack of religiosity in secular culture. [32]
Former Vice President Dan Quayle suggested that the shootings would fuel demands to return prayer to public schools. Pat Buchanan declared, “At Littleton, America got a glimpse of the last stop on that train to hell she boarded decades ago when she declared that God is dead, and that each of us is his or her own god who can make up the rules as we go along.” Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition moved quickly to capitalize on the cultural fall-out from Littleton, dispatching a volley of fundraising letters to promote the “Countdown to Victory 2000 Campaign.” Materials focused on “the 35-year assault liberals have waged against moral norms and religious faith.”
Another reaction to the Littleton crisis came from the campaign of Vice President Al Gore. Gore had appeared at the state-sponsored memorial service to the Columbine victims; but polls continued to show him trailing Texas Gov. George Bush as the voters’ choice for the presidency in the 2000 race. Analysts suggested a number of causative factors, including his close association with a morally-suspect President, Bill Clinton. The result was a drastic shift in the focus of Gore’s campaign, and an effort by the White House to prop up the semblance of a “family friendly” agenda already established by proposals such as the V-chip, uniforms for school children, and other measures. On May 26, in a speech to an audience at a Salvation Army drug rehabilitation center [33] in Atlanta, Mr. Gore declared that if elected president, “the voices of faith-based organizations will be integral to the policies set forth in my administration.” He added that: “A politics of community can be strengthened when we are not afraid to make connections between spirituality and politics.”
Gore then called for a “New Partnership” between religious groups and the government in trying to solve a variety of social ills, lambasting those who “have said for too long that religious values should play no role in addressing public needs.” Adding that “belief in god” was a vital component of the Salvation Army’s rehabilitation scheme, Gore added that a welfare client “is not a number but a child of God.”
Gore’s panegyric to religiosity might be seen as so much campaign rhetoric and fluff for his audience, but it marked a profound shift in the strategy for winning the White House and any future social agenda. Elain Kamarch, a senior policy advisor inside the Gore campaign, told the Boston Globe that “The Democratic Party is going to take back God this time,” in anticipation of the year 2000 presidential fight. Even prior to his Atlanta campaign sermon, Gore had taken on the mantle of a teacher and avuncular disciplinarian to the nation. At a graduation ceremony for the University of New Hampshire, Gore “launched a new phase of his presidential campaign” by invoking “an Old Testament story in a call for young people to master the temptation of evil and sin,” noted the paper.
Political analyst John Green of the University of Akron told the Globe that Gore’s emphasis on religion was unusual for a Democrat. He added that the party “has developed a large, secular constituency of non-religious people who don’t react particularly well to religious language,” and cited issues such as abortion, gay rights and prayer in public schools. “With the shootings at Columbine and the disgust over President Clinton’s sexual escapades,” noted the paper, “Green said there is a vast hunger for spirituality, meaning and morality in everyday life.” [34]
Attempting to seize the initiative on the issue of public funding of religion as an answer to the nation’s moral ills, GOP front-runner George Bush unveiled a similar scheme in late July. Speaking to a church gathering in Indianapolis, Bush called for the establishment of a government “Office of Faith-Based Action” to assist religious groups in the quest for federal welfare grants. Media reports described the agency as a “clearinghouse for information on effective religious organizations and assisting them in their dealings with the federal government.” Associated Press noted that the program “would be used to encourage Americans to give more to charity and increase the role of faith-based organizations in the fight to reduce poverty, welfare rolls, crime and other social problems.” [35] Bush’s visit to Indianapolis was hosted by Mayor Stephen Goldsmith and the “Front Porch Alliance,” a project linking municipal agencies, neighborhood groups, and local churches.
An official with the Gore campaign declared, “We’re glad to see George Bush following Al Gore’s lead to work with faith-based organizations.”
Columbine:
“Taking America Back...”
The net effect of the Columbine tragedy is a profound, emotional reaction and shift in how Americans perceive their culture. An MSNBC poll taken shortly after the shooting revealed that Americans considered schools and other institutions more risky and violent than they, in fact, were. Despite declining rates of violence, and the fact that predicted epidemics of juvenile crime and psychopathic behavior on a mass scale have not materialized as some predicted [36], Americans still considered their nation to be a violent and risky place in need of stern moral reform. Religious-right leaders and politicians have taken their cue from this popular mood. In his June newsletter to supporters, Jerry Falwell called for an effort to “take back America’s children” from “the Hollywood television, music and video kingpins, perverts and liberal extremists who are destroying the lives of our children and ruining America’s future.”
While most Americans would not vote for Falwell, the subtext of his message increasingly resonates in the year-2000 election campaigns. Republican candidates compete with each other on who stakes out the most “religiously correct” (RC) territory on culture-war issues such as abortion, censorship of the Internet and mass media, school vouchers (a way to revitalize sectarian schools) or gay rights. The separation of church and state is rarely mentioned in such discourse, or awkwardly referred to as an inconvenience to be circumvented. Even Vice President Gore declared that while “I believe strongly in the separation of church state,” “freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion.” [37]
The April 20 shootings at Columbine may well have consequences into the year-2000 elections and beyond. The Littleton tragedy is already elevated to the status of a modern-day lesson in heroics and morality. Somewhere in the creation of martyrs and political agendas, though, we may have lost sight of the fact that real lives were involved and that life itself, while risky at times and subject to the whims of fate, can only be improved by people, not prayers.
![[top]](../../uparrow.gif)
NOTES AND REFERENCES
[1] The most prescient statement, perhaps, pertinent to the reaction from Littleton came from street gang leader-turned-evangelist Nicky Cruz. In 1988, Cruz warned the audience at Pat Robertson’s 700 Club, “If we don’t do something, our kids are going to kill us.” Not since the hysteria over Charles Manson had the prospect of predatory youngsters turning against their elders reached such a crescendo of hyperbole.
![[back]](../../backarrow.gif)
[2] The “Goth” movement is really more of a fashion style which grew out of the London club scene in the 1980s and percolated to America. Consisting mostly of teens, the Goths sport black clothing and hair, jewelry, and sometimes white face make-up.
[3] Manson’s blend of outrageous stage theatrics and allusions to Satanism has resulted in the band being picketed by evangelical groups throughout the country. The group canceled several appearances after Columbine. Manson’s genre of music, though, is not the same as Goth.
[4] Despite other limitations in the book, Barry Glassner’s provocative work The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid Of The Wrong Thing (Perseus, NY, 1999) includes an insightful chapter on the cultural mythology of “youth at risk.” He cites apocryphal - and inaccurate - claims in media of children being unwittingly lured to sexual encounters with predators via computer, as well as flawed reports and news stories which exaggerate the presence of “pornographic” material on the internet.
[5] Right Wing Watch On-line, People for the American Way, “The Right’s Response to Littleton,” July 21, 1999
[6] Flowers, letters, poems and - when children are involved - teddy bears and dolls become the bricks-and-mortar of these symbolic constructions. Quoted in The Pyrotechnic Insanitarium by Mark Dery (Grove Press, NY 1999), artist Mike Kelley notes, “To parents, the doll represents a perfect picture of the child - it’s clean, it’s cuddly, it’s sexless, but as soon as the object is worn at all, it’s dysfunctional. It begins to take on the characteristic of the child itself...” It should be noted that in the case of the Columbine shootings, these evocative symbolic reminders of childhood became part of an alternative fantasy world for public worship and catharsis, ignoring the fact that the student victims were adolescents -living in a period of tumultuous sexuality, conflict, generational rebellion and distancing - the very opposite of the “innocence” of pre-pubescent childhood.
[7] See “Carpenter Returns To Park With 13 Memorial Crosses” by Karen Abbott, (Denver) Rocky Mountain News, May 6,1999.
[8] Ibid. The report notes that Zanis erected memorial crosses after the murder of his father-in-law in January, 1996 and estimated that he had built nearly 200 crosses in nine states.
[9] AANEWS for April 30, 1999.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Grant has recently been ostracized by some evangelicals due to her recent divorce and charges that she is sacrificing the religious content of her music in favor of secular, mainstream themes.
[12] In the weeks following the Columbine shooting, the witchcraft theme - although unrelated to any of the activities of Klebold and Harris - spilled over into the cultural mainstream as television stations debated whether or not to air a “violent” episode of the popular Buffy The Vampire Slayer series. Fans of the program charged that at least one episode was being censored. A similar over-reaction occurred when the Denver NBC affiliate announced that it would not air the made-for-TV movie Atomic Train, saying that the film was “inappropriate” in the wake of the Littleton tragedy.
[13] Along with Bible-study clubs and events such as “See You At the Pole,” which consists of a gathering around a high school flag pole in order to pray and recite Bible verses, religious youngsters are being encouraged to wear WWJD (“What Would Jesus Do?”) bracelets and other accessories. The phrase comes from the book In His Step by Charles Monroe Sheldon (1857-1946), a morality tale of a prosperous, somewhat smug congregation and its pastor. During a Sunday service, minister and worshippers are shocked by the appearance of a shabbily dressed man who berates them for supposedly not following the lessons of Jesus Christ and helping others. The man dies, and the parishioners then vow to take no action without first asking themselves, “What would Jesus do?”
Although Sheldon’s novel came at a time when the so-called “Social Gospel” of theologians like Walter Rauschenbush and Washington Gladden was being enunciated - an effort to apply “Christian Principles” to social problems - WWJD passed into history, only to be found again in the midst of the “Jesus Freak” revival of the early 1970s. In recent years, millions of the bracelets have been produced along with a thriving line of Christian accessory items, prompting some to remark that this has become the pop-culture Christian equivalent of the Beanie Babies or Teletubbies.
[14] The fact that the shooters moved from the cafeteria to the library has raised questions about exactly whom they may have been targeting. At one point, Klebold and Harris were supposedly searching out athletes. How would they have known exactly where certain students might be? Some were shot, others were not - almost a random pattern by two killers dazed and confused in the midst of the events they themselves had unleashed.
[15] San Francisco Chronicle, May 11, 1999, “Christians find a modern day martyr in the Columbine High Massacre - Victim, 17, told killers she believed in God before she was shot” by Larry B. Stammer, Los Angeles Times.
[16] The notion of elevating a seventeen-year-old high school student, victim of a tragic shooting, to the status of a martyr has disturbed even a number of religious observers. Randall Balmer, an evangelical scholar and author of the book and television series Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory, warned of the “danger of sensationalizing this for propagandistic purposes.” He noted that martyrdom is considered a “voluntary death,” which does not match the circumstances of Bernall’s killing. And Frederick W. Weidmann of Union Theological Seminary in New York warned that Christian groups should “not whip people up into thinking one ought to seek out a martyr’s death as the most authentic expression of Christianity.” Ibid.
[17] American Atheists Flashline posting, 5/18/98, “Sending the wrong message to youth? The ‘martyrdom’ of Cassie Bernall.”
[18] Minnesota Christian Chronicle, 4/28/99, “Colorado shooting claims 15 lives; Gunmen targeted Christians,” by Joann Bruso.
[19] Washington Post and Minnesota Christian Chronicle, 4/28/99
[20] Ibid.
[21] See “Right Wing Watch On-line,” PFAWF, July 21, 1999
[22] New York Times, “Strengthened Security Measures Await Returning Students,” 8/13/99
[23] San Francisco Chronicle, “Columbine slayings lead to knee-jerk state legislation...” article by Melissa Healy (Los Angeles Times), July 10, 1999
[24] Ibid.
[25] In Kentucky, Surrey County officials said that they would suspend students with “unusual or unique colored hair until such time as the student’s hair color is accepted as normal by the school board.”
[26] Another consequence of Columbine seems to be the trend of schools punishing students for off-campus conduct, even before they are given due process in a court of law. See Washington Post, “More schools punishing off-campus conduct,” by Patricia Davis, August 15, 1999.
[27] CNN, 8/7/99
[28] One can only wonder if adults would be willing to submit to such indignities going into a shopping mall, athletic contest, or - heaven forbid! - a church.
[29] Birmingham Post Herald, “Campus crime numbers down in spite of publicized shootings,” by Darin Powell, 8/22/99
[30] In Stone v Graham (1980), the US Supreme Court struck down a Kentucky state law which called for the display of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms. The courts generally proscribe the display of the Decalogue unless it is included as part of a “historical” display and its religious significance diluted by other artifacts.
[31] See American Atheist Web-site flashline posting of June 18, 1999, “In wake of commandments decree, other amendments threaten separation of church and state.”
[32] Ibid., “Right-wing watch on-line.”
[33] AANEWS, op. cit.
[34] American Atheist flashline posting, “Gore threatens the wall, calls for ‘new partnership’ between government and churches, other religious groups,” May 26, 1999.
[35] American Atheist Web site, flashline posting: “Bush calls for charity tax credits, federal office to promote faith-based programs,” July 23, 1999.
[36] Glassner, op. cit.
[37] American Atheist flashline, May 26, 1999.
As the official probe into the 20 April 1999 shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado wound down, it cast doubts on some of the earlier reports about the incident which left fourteen students and a teacher dead. The two gunmen involved in the slayings who were also Columbine students, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, committed suicide after their rampage. In particular, it cast doubt on the case of Cassie Bernall, the seventeen-year old student who reportedly was confronted by Klebold and was asked “Do you believe in God?” At least one witness claimed that the encounter took place, and that Bernall replied “Yes,” and was then shot.
Within a week of her death, Christian mythomania had elaborated the simple five-word question and one-word answer into a lengthy dialogue of witnessing, argument, and admonition. Had Cassie in fact delivered the sermons put into her mouth by the legend-makers, there would have been insufficient time for the massacre!
Since the incident, Bernall has been described as a modern day martyr for her Christian faith. In September of 1999, her parents published a book about their daughter’s life and death titled: She Said Yes: The Unlikely Martyrdom of Cassie Bernall.
Early coverage of the Columbine shooting by AANEWS, though, raised questions as to whether this incident ever took place. The initial news reports were sketchy, and there was no confirmation that any of the witnesses to the alleged encounter were actually present in the school library where the shooting occurred, or could have clearly seen or heard the events they so dramatically described. There were serious questions about whether the media should have printed the story of Bernall’s death based on little or no evidence.
On 24 September, the Rocky Mountain News of Denver noted: “Columbine shooting victim may not have been asked whether she believed in God.” Writers Dan Luzadder and Katie Kerwin McCrimmon reported that weeks after she died, investigators informed Bernall’s parents that the “now-famous” encounter between their daughter and Klebold may not have occurred. The girl’s mother, Misty Klebold, still proceeded with publication of the book which was printed and distributed by Plough Publishing House, a religious press in Farmington, Pennsylvania. Nearly 300,000 copies have been distributed to bookstores, and Associated Press notes that reorders are now coming in.
The Rocky Mountain News story notes that despite early claims by some students that the conversation between Klebold and Bernall occurred, “It was discrepancies in student accounts that led police to question the Bernall testimonial.” A freshman declared that Bernall had affirmed her belief in god, “Plain and simple.” Another student, though, identified as sixteen-year-old Emily Wyant, “tells a different story” and was reportedly crouched underneath a table two feet from Bernall when Dylan Klebold opened fire. “They were the only two students studying together at the table in the back of the library” when the shooting occurred, notes the News. “She (Bernall) was saying, ‘Dear God. Dear God. Why is this happening? I just want to go home,’” Emily said.
Sources report that more than fifty students were present in the library at the time of the gun play. Interviews with witnesses, though, produced mixed results. Police were able to obtain “detailed minute aspects of the case, including who said what to whom in the school library, and elsewhere, during the rampage.” But at least one potential source of the Bernall encounter with Klebold came from a student who “did not actually see the individuals involved.” When asked by investigators later to point out where Klebold and Harris were at that time of the shootings, he pointed to a table where a different student victim identified as Valeen Schnurr, and not Cassie Bernall, had been hiding.
A variant of the Bernall martyrdom account, though, is being advanced by Schnurr’s mother, according to the News. She reportedly says that her daughter was lying on the library floor with more than fifteen bullet wounds “praying out loud, when a gunman approached her and asked if she believed in God, and she responded, ‘Yes, I believe in God.’” Schnurr was spared and managed to survive.
In reporting the new doubts about the Bernall slaying, Reuters news service quoted police spokesman Steve Davis who noted: “There just seems to be a real question whether the dialogue (between Bernall and Klebold) took place.” He added that “The Bernalls were made aware there seemed to be some doubt.”
Equally provocative but less certain is the story which appeared Wednesday night, September 22, on the Salon Magazine Web site which was billed as an exclusive “First Glimpse into Eric Harris’ Diary.” According to the Salon article, Harris and Klebold “were never part of the Trench Coat Mafia,” the affinity group identified by the media that was allegedly known throughout Columbine for unorthodox behavior and appearance. “They didn’t target jocks, minorities or Christians,” adds the Salon story. “As investigators get closer to producing an official report about the Columbine High School massacres, it is already clear that much of what was reported last spring about the motives and methods of killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold was untrue...”
“The biggest myth” about Columbine, says Salon, had to do with who the two gunmen were targeting. “Jocks, African-Americans and Christians have been widely described as their chief targets. Not a scrap of evidence supports that conclusion...” Investigator Kate Battan reportedly found that the earlier claims that student athletes were targeted by Klebold and Harris was based on the story that the gunmen demanded “All jocks stand up!” upon entering the library. “But it never happened, multiple sources confirmed...” |
|
n Tuesday, 20 April 1999, two teenagers walked into Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, and began a shooting spree that eventually claimed fifteen lives. The gunmen - Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17 - became actors in a mushrooming national debate over religion, values, and the status of leading cultural institutions. Six months later, the Littleton tragedy is still with us, and the event is sure to be a defining theme in the coming year-2000 elections.
