Freedom of Religion?????
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
evince
Truthmatters
ATHEISTS FILE CIVIL RIGHTS SUIT IN "OKLAHOMA OUTRAGE" - SMALKOWSKI PRAYER BULLYING CASE
Web Posted: August 12, 2006
merican Atheists filed suit in federal court Friday in a case involving charges of "prayer bullying" and conspiracy to violate the civil rights of an Atheist family.
In November, 2004, Nicole Smalkowski -- a student at Hardesty Oklahoma High School and member of the female basketball squad -- was ordered by her coach to participate in a game-time recitation of the "Lord's Prayer." Ms. Smalkowski, an Atheist, refused and was then banished to the locker room. Days later, following a meeting of school officials, she was punished by being removed from the team.
The suit charges that Nicole and the rest of her family were then made the victims of false accusations and "subjected to public humiliation and distress." Her father, Chester Smalkowski, tried to meet with the School Principal who "struck Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski repeatedly without warning or provocation." Incredibly, a warrant was filed against Mr. Smalkowski who was arrested and scheduled for trial. Officials with the District Attorney's Office in Texas County, Oklahoma then offered a deal where charges would be dropped if the Smalkowski family agreed to leave the jurisdiction.
He refused the buckle under to the intimidation.
Represented by attorneys Tom Gungoll and American Atheists National Legal Director Edwin Kagin, Smalkowski endured a five-day trial that included a grilling of the school district superintendent. Mr. Kagin patiently explained to the jurors what Atheism was. Many of the prospective jurors opined that they could not believe the word of an Atheist over that of a god-fearing Christian, and were struck for cause. Some, including the wives of two local ministers, admitted that they were incapable of being fair to an Atheist in such a situation.
Attorney Tim Gungoll told the jury panel that he was a Roman Catholic, but that the facts of the case -- not the religion of any of the parties -- were of primary importance.
Web Posted: August 12, 2006
merican Atheists filed suit in federal court Friday in a case involving charges of "prayer bullying" and conspiracy to violate the civil rights of an Atheist family.
In November, 2004, Nicole Smalkowski -- a student at Hardesty Oklahoma High School and member of the female basketball squad -- was ordered by her coach to participate in a game-time recitation of the "Lord's Prayer." Ms. Smalkowski, an Atheist, refused and was then banished to the locker room. Days later, following a meeting of school officials, she was punished by being removed from the team.
The suit charges that Nicole and the rest of her family were then made the victims of false accusations and "subjected to public humiliation and distress." Her father, Chester Smalkowski, tried to meet with the School Principal who "struck Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski repeatedly without warning or provocation." Incredibly, a warrant was filed against Mr. Smalkowski who was arrested and scheduled for trial. Officials with the District Attorney's Office in Texas County, Oklahoma then offered a deal where charges would be dropped if the Smalkowski family agreed to leave the jurisdiction.
He refused the buckle under to the intimidation.
Represented by attorneys Tom Gungoll and American Atheists National Legal Director Edwin Kagin, Smalkowski endured a five-day trial that included a grilling of the school district superintendent. Mr. Kagin patiently explained to the jurors what Atheism was. Many of the prospective jurors opined that they could not believe the word of an Atheist over that of a god-fearing Christian, and were struck for cause. Some, including the wives of two local ministers, admitted that they were incapable of being fair to an Atheist in such a situation.
Attorney Tim Gungoll told the jury panel that he was a Roman Catholic, but that the facts of the case -- not the religion of any of the parties -- were of primary importance.
evince
Truthmatters
Chester Smalkowski was acquitted unanimously.
The federal suit, filed Friday in US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma names a battery of defendants including school officials, the Texas County Sheriff's Department, County officers and the Town of Hardesty, Oklahoma. It charges that the family's constitutional rights were violated under, but not limited to, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. It also charges that school officials "unlawfully and unconstitutionally met in conspiracy to violate (the) Plaintiff's constitutional rights."
In addition, it is charged that members of the District Attorney's staff "conspired ... to punish Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski for his religious views by prosecuting a criminal case against him" that they knew "to be grounded on false statements and perjury."
The suit notes that a year after the first incident involving Ms. Smalkowski, she once again tried to participate in the girl's basketball team. Again, Coach Ernest Cook "attempted to force Plaintiff N.S. to recite the "Lord's Prayer." Ms Smalkowski instead "chose to recite the Pledge of Allegiance." This time, the suit charges, Nicole Smalkowski was punished by school officials who falsely accused her of "threatening another student." She was suspended "without a Due Process hearing or notice, as is required by Oklahoma Statutes." Eventually, she was suspended and denied her statutory right to a hearing.
A school board member and her husband, a Texas County Deputy Sheriff are identified and charged in the lawsuit as conspirators who "attempted to hire, coerce, or otherwise convince, for payment of money or other consideration on school property, one Jerry Kelly to inflict personal harm on Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski in retaliation for his religious opinions and in further retaliation for Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski's attempt to defend his daughter and family against the false and malicious allegations..."
Another charge focuses on a Deputy Sheriff who ostensibly ordered the submission of falsified policy reports and attempting under false pretext to have Mr. Smalkowski re-arrested. Other allegations listed include:
The federal suit, filed Friday in US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma names a battery of defendants including school officials, the Texas County Sheriff's Department, County officers and the Town of Hardesty, Oklahoma. It charges that the family's constitutional rights were violated under, but not limited to, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. It also charges that school officials "unlawfully and unconstitutionally met in conspiracy to violate (the) Plaintiff's constitutional rights."
In addition, it is charged that members of the District Attorney's staff "conspired ... to punish Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski for his religious views by prosecuting a criminal case against him" that they knew "to be grounded on false statements and perjury."
The suit notes that a year after the first incident involving Ms. Smalkowski, she once again tried to participate in the girl's basketball team. Again, Coach Ernest Cook "attempted to force Plaintiff N.S. to recite the "Lord's Prayer." Ms Smalkowski instead "chose to recite the Pledge of Allegiance." This time, the suit charges, Nicole Smalkowski was punished by school officials who falsely accused her of "threatening another student." She was suspended "without a Due Process hearing or notice, as is required by Oklahoma Statutes." Eventually, she was suspended and denied her statutory right to a hearing.
A school board member and her husband, a Texas County Deputy Sheriff are identified and charged in the lawsuit as conspirators who "attempted to hire, coerce, or otherwise convince, for payment of money or other consideration on school property, one Jerry Kelly to inflict personal harm on Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski in retaliation for his religious opinions and in further retaliation for Plaintiff Chester Smalkowski's attempt to defend his daughter and family against the false and malicious allegations..."
Another charge focuses on a Deputy Sheriff who ostensibly ordered the submission of falsified policy reports and attempting under false pretext to have Mr. Smalkowski re-arrested. Other allegations listed include:
klaatu
Fusionist
Immy where would you get that impression?
OrnotBitwise
Watermelon
A large part of any meaningful Freedom of Religion is clearly a freedom from religion. Freedom from participation in anyone else's religion. Freedom from intimidation if you happen to partake of a minority religion.
Granted, such freedom does not extend to freedom from having to hear my idiot neighbor's infantile prayer meetings on weekends. More's the pity. They make me wish for a hand-grenade at times but such is life.
klaatu
Fusionist
explain ....
OrnotBitwise
Watermelon
My wife wants to have a group of monks out to cleanse the house. Unrelated reasons: the neighbors don't bother her at all. That should be interesting though! I can't wait to see what the reaction to the chanting will be.Just hold some of your own. In the middle of theirs, just start having over the group of sports fans that is loudest...
evince
Truthmatters
evince
Truthmatters
My wife wants to have a group of monks out to cleanse the house. Unrelated reasons: the neighbors don't bother her at all. That should be interesting though! I can't wait to see what the reaction to the chanting will be.
Good thing you dont live in OK
Immanuel
Junior Member
No, I am not, but you clearly are. Just how many thousands of rants have you posted against people with Christian beliefs?
Immie
Immanuel
Junior Member
Really how about this one that we are reading and the duplicate over on fullpolitics.com?
http://www.fullpolitics.com/viewthread.php?tid=20978
Immie
OrnotBitwise
Watermelon
They don't allow me in OK. All of the border inspection stations have my picture and they force me to drive clear around the state.
Immanuel
Junior Member
Ornot,
I agree with you. The Separation of Church and State goes both ways. We should have the right to choose the religion of our choice even if that choice is no religion. However, far too often, I see us trying to force that choice upon others.
I know for a fact that Christians attempt to force their beliefs upon others. This story is only one example of such things. If this story is true (and it appears to me that it is) then it is reprehensible that this family would have been treated in this manner. I won't even go into the attitudes of people like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell.
However, athiest are not exempt from some of the guilt in this argument. They attempt to force others to remain behind closed doors in their religious expression. Michael Neudau is one such example. He believes his rights trump the rights of every other American including his ex-wife and daughter.
The Separation of Church and State protects my right to worship God and your right to ignore him. The Separation of Church and State is a protection FOR me. It prevents (as long as it stands) the government from forcing me to worship a God that I don't chose to worship. Say the Mormon God or the Jehovah's Witness God.
As for my comment to Desh about her only believing in Freedom from Religion, I was just picking on her. I have not done that in a while and felt she needed it. She's welcome to believe that we Christians are the devil's spawn and I will continue to believe that you Athiest are the devil himself.
Immie
I agree with you. The Separation of Church and State goes both ways. We should have the right to choose the religion of our choice even if that choice is no religion. However, far too often, I see us trying to force that choice upon others.
I know for a fact that Christians attempt to force their beliefs upon others. This story is only one example of such things. If this story is true (and it appears to me that it is) then it is reprehensible that this family would have been treated in this manner. I won't even go into the attitudes of people like Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell.
However, athiest are not exempt from some of the guilt in this argument. They attempt to force others to remain behind closed doors in their religious expression. Michael Neudau is one such example. He believes his rights trump the rights of every other American including his ex-wife and daughter.
The Separation of Church and State protects my right to worship God and your right to ignore him. The Separation of Church and State is a protection FOR me. It prevents (as long as it stands) the government from forcing me to worship a God that I don't chose to worship. Say the Mormon God or the Jehovah's Witness God.
As for my comment to Desh about her only believing in Freedom from Religion, I was just picking on her. I have not done that in a while and felt she needed it. She's welcome to believe that we Christians are the devil's spawn and I will continue to believe that you Athiest are the devil himself.
Immie
evince
Truthmatters
How is this a rant against people swith christain beliefs?
Are you sujesting all christians would do this?
I know for a fact the Vast majority of Christains would be appauled at this story.