|
Does god have a favorite in the Super Bowl?
Even many religious people may find this notion troubling, and see
this simplistic belief as a trivializing of their faith. But then what good
is prayer? If “God answers prayer” as the Bible says, shouldn’t we
pray for those important things in life? Perhaps the case of a farmer
praying for rain so that he may sell his crops and avoid foreclosure is
no more trivial nor significant than the coach who needs a winning
season to keep his job, or the player who needs that winning e.r.a. so
he can move on to the majors.
Don’t laugh ... this is all serious stuff. One coach lamented the
ruling by the Fifth Circuit, saying that: “In Texas, prayer and football
go together.” He may be right, and those who cavalierly dismiss or
agree with his statement may benefit from a little lesson in human
history.
In his book “Billions & Billions, Thoughts on Life and Death and the
Brink of the Millennium,” (Random House, N.Y. 1997), the late
astronomer Carl Sagan provided readers with insights into the
connection between hunting, athletic games and a sensibility of the
spiritual world. Others have noted this nexus as well, including
psychologist William James. Quoted by Sagan, James noted: “The
hunting and the fighting instinct combine in many manifestations... It
is just because human bloodthirstiness is such a primitive part of us
that is so hard to eradicate, especially where a fight or a hunt is
promised as part of the fun.” 1
Sagan presents us with the thesis that modern day competitive
sports “are symbolic conflicts, thinly disguised” and may be the
contemporary successors to earlier hunting rituals. By ancient
standards, even the antics of the WWF (if you believe them to be real,
and not scripted) or the most valiantly contested Super Bowl pale
when compared to the brutality of ancient games. In Meso America,
for instance, the Mayans and the Aztecs often used a “ball game” to
resolve political differences with other tribal groups. The stakes were
high; the loosing team was often killed or enslaved. Today’s $5 million
signing bonuses, while extravagant, represent a degree of human
progress. Indeed, a loss on the game field was sometimes considered
as significant as a military defeat. Gods were worshipped and
appeased so that the hunt, the game, the outcome of battle would all
be successful.
Our modern teams are not that different in other ways, either, from
their earlier counterparts. We have the Chicago Bears and the Detroit
Tigers; the !Kung of the Kalahari Desert of Botswana had jackals,
wildcats and scorpions as their “totems.” They also had “owners,”
which today is reserved only for management, not players, and other
names which cities or schools may have trouble rooting for. Sagan
lists totems like Lice, Bitter Melons, Penises, Short Feet, Big Talkers
(perhaps apropos for a Washington, D.C. franchise?) and Diarrheas.
From a historical standpoint, though, the evidence is compelling; our
modern day athletic contests are rooted, in part, in ancient rituals and
symbols having to do with hunting, the natural world, and the
propitiation of supernatural forces.
“Dear Lord, help us win tonight...”
Oblivious to this, though, defenders of prayer at football games fall
back on an old chestnut; that invocations are a form of free expression
guaranteed under the constitution. Last week, a U.S. District Judge
issued a temporary restraining order on the Circuit Court ruling and
permitted a pre-game prayer. Cheers erupted in the high school
stadium as a 17-year old student, led by her principal, walked into an
announcer’s booth and asked for a god’s blessing on the game. “Since
a very good judge that was using a lot of wisdom this afternoon ruled
that I have freedom of speech tonight, I’m going to take it,” she told
the pious fans.
There are an estimated 350,000 churches, mosques, temples and
other “houses of worship” in the United States according to the
Handbook of American Religious Denominations. That figure does not
include all sectarian groups, of course, or numerous “weekend”
denominations which rent auditoriums or public halls for their services.
Texas has an abundance of these “houses of worship” where, as
elsewhere, the faithful may go to pray, genuflect, confess, sing, chant,
burn incense, light candles, shout or do anything else they deem
necessary to worship the deity of their choice. Those so inclined may
also pray in the privacy of their own homes or, as advised in
St. Matthew, in the closet. 2
But does this public praying have anything to do with civil liberties
and free speech? By supporting any form of organized prayer as an
expression of free speech, school authorities may find themselves
besieged by Muslims who wish to conduct a pre-game invocation, or
perhaps local Wiccans intent on calling upon elemental forces. What if
a member of the Church of Satan requests “free speech” at the
stadium microphone? What then? Would those vocally defending
prayer at football games be so vehement in their commitment to civil
liberties if the prayer was substantially different from that expressed in
the doctrines of their own faith?

The First Amendment wasn’t meant for ideas
that the majority already agreed with; it was designed to cover the
unpopular stuff, the sort of statements that outrage, provoke and
often offend. |
As elsewhere, when public officials step forth to defend the First
Amendment and the principle of free expression, all should be wary.
Many of the religious and political groups supporting school prayer
under the ruse of “free expression” are highly selective when it comes
to defending the First Amendment -- especially in Texas, and in our
nation’s schools. Indeed, since the April 20th shootings at Columbine
High School in Littleton, Colorado, schools across the country are
beginning to resemble prisons and armed camps instead of centers of
learning. Nadine Strossen of the American Civil Liberties Union
recently warned, “We’re seeing the equivalent of Fortress America, and
students’ privacy rights and freedom of speech are under attack from
within.” Libertarians cite the proliferation of metal detectors, random
locker searches, demands for blood and urine drug-testing, ID cards,
ubiquitous security cameras, dress codes, speech codes and even
requirements like transparent backpacks as evidence of this dangerous
trend. The excuse, of course, is “safety,” but it is doubtful (although
not beyond the realm of possibility) that adults would never tolerate
such scrutiny and control of their own behavior at, say, a shopping
mall. Would you pee into a cup as a requirement for shopping at J.C.
Penny? How about a body search or a dress code in exchange for
attending a professional athletic contest?
In Texas, school authorities and politicians are citing “freedom of
speech” as a rationale for coercive, public prayer but seem to neglect
this part of the Bill of Rights when anything else is involved.
A group of students in Allen, Texas, for instance, were dismissed
from school when exercising their freedom of expression last spring,
when they wore black armbands in silent protest against rules
established after the Littleton shooting. Kids wearing black or other
forms of unorthodox garb were summoned to the principal’s office. No
one grabbed a stadium microphone to protest this outrage...
And students weren’t encouraged to rally behind the First
Amendment when a group of Texas beef barons tried to muzzle Oprah
Winfrey back in 1998. They slapped an $11 million lawsuit on the talk
show host who made a disparaging remark about eating beef. A
federal jury in Amarillo had the good sense to reject the lawsuit, which
is now under appeal.
And what about some kid in New Braunfels, Texas who decided to
wear a T-shirt featuring shock rocker Marilyn Manson? The
18-year-old was arrested in a grocery store for ostensibly breaking the
city’s obscenity display ordinance. In fairness, Texas isn’t the only
state with a T-shirt SWAT team; similar incidents have taken place in
Florida, Tennessee, North Carolina and elsewhere where shirts
depicting unpopular themes or rock groups like Wu-Tang Clan, Korn,
Nine Inch Nails or Cradle of Filth are taboo. So much for free
expression...
Texas doesn’t stack up well, either, when it comes to tolerance of
books. During the 1997-98 school year, more than 50 books were
pulled from school libraries. Jay Jacobson of the state ACLU declared,
“What is obvious is that censorship is alive and well in Texas. We do
not seem to believe that children have brains...” The books included
everything from “Lord of the Flies” and “Chocolate Wars” to “The
World’s Most Powerful Rifles and Handguns.”
And there was the case where craven self interest and greed
prevailed over the First Amendment, as a bunch of lawyers decided to
ban self-help legal books from Nolo press. In 1998, a group of
attorneys requested a ban on “You and Your Will: A Do-It-Yourself
Manual,” along with other publications such as “How to Avoid Probate.”
Presumably, free speech does not include empowering private citizens
with legal knowledge if it deprives the legal eagles of a $250 per hour
fee.
There are plenty of other wholesale violations of civil liberties and
free expressions that the Lone Star State, and school prayer boosters,
might want to do something about before they put on the mantle of
civil libertarianism. Last year in Austin, a judge issued the state’s first
court order preventing alleged gang members from engaging in such
conduct as using pay phones in certain neighborhoods, or even being
seen together. Over in Dallas, a form of “police socialism” is practiced;
the Chief of Police has the legal power to shut down dance halls and
bars which are not managed “in a peaceful and law abiding manner...”
It’s probably unfair to single out Texas for these sorts of travesties;
after all, similar laws now exist throughout the country. The
government at every level -- federal, state and local - wields
considerable authority over our lives and personal behavior, and the
protections of the Bill of Rights are being reduced to legal
encumbrances, inconveniences and obstacles to be circumvented by
crafty law enforcement zealots, prosecutors and others.
But back to the game...
I seriously doubt that school officials, church groups, political leaders
and much of the news media in Texas that currently supports prayer at
high school athletic events as an expression of “free speech” would
feel the same way if students were speaking out on other issues.
What if, instead of appealing to Jesus, they were protesting a war,
demanding an end to the death penalty (another Texas institution...),
calling for an increase in the minimum wage, or some other socially
significant event? School prayer is a “safe,” bogus issue; it doesn’t
threaten political or financial elites; it’s even trendy and, in Texas
anyway, “politically correct.” The high school principal that gladly
escorted that student up to the microphone to lead the crowd in prayer
may not be so inclined if, for instance, students were speaking out
over the right to distribute their own publications on campus, or wear
clothing which some might find “inappropriate.”
What if, instead of reading from a Bible, some 17 year old got on the
mike and asked, Tell us about the cocaine, George!?
Free speech in Texas, and mostly everywhere else, is unfortunately
a privilege and a matter of interpretation. We cite the principle in
promoting our own ideas, not the other fellow’s. Those opinions are
subversive, disruptive, inappropriate and foul. “Free speech” covers
those thoughts and expressions which are safe, orthodox and
comfortable; it’s the feel-good freedom Norman Rockwell portrayed in
one of his paintings, where any disagreement is usually insubstantial
and trivial.
Genuine free expression is something else. It’s not a majority
prayer or trite opinion. The First Amendment wasn’t meant for ideas
that the majority already agreed with; it was designed to cover the
unpopular stuff, the sort of statements that outrage, provoke and
often offend.
Prayer at public school events, whether a daily classroom session or a
football game, may not have anything to do with real free speech. The
groups supporting pre-game religious invocations, like Pat Robertson’s
American Center for Law and Justice or Campus Crusade haven’t
exactly been on the front lines of the civil liberties battles over other
issues involving student rights, have they? The principal who speaks
out on behalf of public religiosity prior to kick-off may be more than
willing to rip up a T-shirt he doesn’t approve of, or confiscate political
materials, or pull some kid into his office just for having green-dyed
hair. You can shave your head and put on a football helmet, but you
may not be able to wear baggy pants and pierce your nose.
Go figure. In Texas, prayer is permissible, especially when
authorities approve. Express yourself in other ways, though, and you
may indeed be challenging Fortress America.
NOTES:
1 PSYCHOLOGY XXIV (1890), William James quoted in Sagan.
![[back]](../../backarrow.gif)
2 “And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray
standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of
men... But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy
door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall
reward thee openly,” (Matthew 6: 5-6)
![[back]](../../backarrow.gif)
Copyright
© 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 by American Atheists.
|