A Rhode Island teenager who battled her high school over the display of a prayer banner has received a $40,000-plus scholarship from those who supported her efforts.
Jessica Ahlquist, 16, won a court battle in January to have the prayer sign removed from Cranston High School West, a decision that outraged many in her school and community.
The battle began in July 2010 when Ahlquist informed the local chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union about a mural addressed to "Our Heavenly Father" that was displayed in the auditorium of her school. Ahlquist claimed in her lawsuit, filed through the American Civil Liberties Union, that the banner made her feel "ostracized and out of place."
The mural has been in the school since 1963, and a school committee said it was "historical" and "artistic."
The matter went before U.S. District Judge Ronald Lagueux who ruled Jan. 12 that "no amount of debate can make the school prayer anything other than a prayer."
The school said it would not appeal the federal court's decision.
Since the judgment was handed down, atheists and other supporters across the country have donated $42,000 to a scholarship fund for Ahlquist in order to show their support for her fight, according to Hemant Mehta, a blogger at the Friendly Atheist, who founded the scholarship fund.
"So many atheists around the country are amazed by what she did. It's not easy to take a stand on a decision that's so unpopular," said Mehta, 28, who is a high school teacher in Illinois.
Mehta said that he had been following Ahlquist's court case closely and saw her getting criticized and put down for her stance on the prayer banner. He wanted her to know she had support, and so he contacted the American Humanists Association and asked them to help set up a trust fund for Ahlquist. He then began collecting money on his website.
"Freedom From Religion [an atheist group] wanted to send flowers to her, and none of the florists in Rhode Island would even deliver flowers to her," Mehta said. "A state representative called her evil in an interview. Every time stories come up about how people are treating this 16-year-old girl, my heart just goes out to her and I want to help her in some way."
Mehta referred to a radio interview in January in which state representative Peter Palumbo called Ahlquist an "evil little thing."
"This didn't happen in the Bible Belt," Mehta said. "This happened in Rhode Island. A Rhode Island state representative called her evil, when in my perspective she's just defending the Constitution."
Ahlquist did not respond to requests for comment today, but Mehta said he believed the high school junior was aware of the scholarship fund, which could be used for tuition, room and board or books.
55 comments:
I do not want anyone to feel ostracized especially at school where a person is forced to attend every day of the work week. I can see how the display of the prayer offended Ahlquist but what about the students who look forward to reading the prayer at school. Some students may get very happy having the knowledge that the prayer is inside their school. It is nice that Ahlquist was able to have the support from others but I do not like that the opinions of others was not considered on the same level in the ruling to remove the prayer.
This article has got to be one of the most ironic articles I have ever read. Christians are sending death threats and wishes to a teenage girl. No matter her age, the fact that they are wishing such a terrible thing on a person only proves how non-christian they are.
I don't understand why average Christians are so offended by a prayer getting taken down at a school. The prayer can still be said in the thoughts of the children who want to pray with that specific prayer, and the students who are not Christian are not forced to see a specific prayer everyday when they walk into school. This was the right thing to do, and the fact that people are reacting so negatively to it just proves how closed minded they are.
Ahlquist is within her constitutional rights but I think both sides have taken it too far. It is wrong for the congressman to be so rude in his words, and it seems as if atheists have taken to harsh of a stand on such a simple banner.
The debate over religion has been going on for decades and it's difficult to decide when a law or banner such as the one presented in this article is constitutional. It is also a topic that people feel strongly about and because of this is why it is getting so much strong sentiments. But I do think it is strange that such a controversy would happen in Rhode Island. I would think the religious people would not have such a large backing as they are not in the bible belt
Religion in the United States has always been a huge debate. If we decide to keep religion in the schools, we need to give Atheists and all religions room to practice freely. If we decide to keep religion out of the schools, we need to get rid of ALL forms of religious practice. I personally wouldn't be bothered by a mural or any other form of worship, as long as I wasn't forced to worship it myself. Live and let live, y'all.
Ahlquist was in her Constitutional right to request that the banner be taken down. The establishment clause of the First Amendment states that government run entities, including public schools, cannot endorse the creation of a religion or religious groups. The Rhode Island state representative that called her evil obviously is letting her religious feelings blind her from what is Constitutional Law. Being Christian, I personally am sad that such a banner was taken down, but I can see how people who do not follow my religion would feel “ostracized and out of place.” Ahlquist did not feel comfortable going to a school that was openly supporting a religion that she did not follow, and got it removed, which she had the legal right to do. Calling her “evil” is wrong, hateful, and makes Christians seem like spiteful people who do not like it when we don’t get our way. Instead of getting angry at her, the representative should have agreed that the banner did not belong at the school and leave it at that. Voicing an opinion is fine, but attacking someone who does not believe the same thing that you do is wrong.
Ahlquist was in her Constitutional right to request that the banner be taken down. The establishment clause of the First Amendment states that government run entities, including public schools, cannot endorse the creation of a religion or religious groups. The Rhode Island state representative that called her evil obviously is letting her religious feelings blind her from what is Constitutional Law. Being Christian, I personally am sad that such a banner was taken down, but I can see how people who do not follow my religion would feel “ostracized and out of place.” Ahlquist did not feel comfortable going to a school that was openly supporting a religion that she did not follow, and got it removed, which she had the legal right to do. Calling her “evil” is wrong, hateful, and makes Christians seem like spiteful people who do not like it when we don’t get our way. Instead of getting angry at her, the representative should have agreed that the banner did not belong at the school and leave it at that. Voicing an opinion is fine, but attacking someone who does not believe the same thing that you do is wrong.
Just like what we've discussed in our government class pretty much all week, Ahlquist was in the right with bringing to light the fact that her school's prayer banner made her feel ostracized. The schools may feel the need to deem the banner a part of it's history how ever, that can't stand up to the fact that it violates the establishment clause. Also with how many people became outraged and angered with her exercising our very own constitutional laws baffles me. Especially, when it seems that Christians are the main ones being the perpetrators of such cruel acts towards Jessica, it's very hypocritical of what Christians stand for if you ask me. Nobody should react in such a negative way in a situation like this when anyone tries to live out the laws that our nation has set forth.
The banner that upset the Rhode Island teenager, Jessica Ahlquist, was addressed to "Our Heavenly Father" and was obviously religious. The establishment clause prohibits the establishment of a national religion as well as a preference of one religion over another. According to this, the banner violated the constitution because it demonstrated preference to Christianity. In a more perfect world though, Ahlquist would have not let the banner make her feel ostracized because she would have realized that the banner, as well as the teachers, administration and classmates, were not making her associate herself with the words on the banner in any way.
It was unfair to have that prayer displayed in the first place. Having a prayer displayed like that makes it almost a requirement to pray in school. Requiring prayer in school can be offensive. I'm a christian myself however, I have regard for other people and their beliefs. I think they have just as much of a right to have their prayers or beliefs displayed in school as any Christian. But, if that happened Christians would have the biggest fit. It took courage for this girl to stand up and do what she did. I commend her for it. I also think it's really cool how a scholarship was set up for her.
There's no doubt about it that Jessica had full right to bring this to court, due to its violation of the Contitution. I saw an interview with this girl a couple days ago, and she explained all the "hate-mail" she's receiving from multiple Christians saying she should "go to Hell.." and death threats. If you ask me, it's kind of hilarious, because we have Christians chastising this girl for not being religious, while saying she should burn in Hell, and all this other junk. Ironic right?
In regards to the girl, however, she most definitely had full right to the removal of the banner.
The treatment of this girl is deplorable. Dispite disagreements, it should be assumed that adults, especially members of the government, should respect the courage it takes to stand up for ones rights, as well as legal implications of the situation. The girl was well within her rights to challenge the banner, and the ruling she received should be honored without spiteful personal attack.
I don't see this as a big problem. It is just words, why do people get mad over words. When I disagree with a sign, I just leave it alone and I know that it is just someone belief. I know that everybody can choose there religion in the U.S. and i also think they should fight for what they believe in but only for a big problem. I think people should back off this 16 years old girl because she is only 16 and she is doing what she thinks is right. I think it is good that she is fighting for what she believes in because not many people do that. I also think not good because she is fighting for a little problem.
A lot of the cases we re-enacted this week revolved around the right to pray in school. According to the Establishment Clause, this prayer, which is obviously affiliated with Christianity, is unconstitutional.
Religion is always a issue with people in school, people can believe in whatever they want to believe in we as american have the right to practice whatever religion we want. I don't think it was right to take down the banner because it was historic to the school and belonged to them, I don't think she had the right to take it down because it made her feel uncomfortable, there are things in our life that makes us uncomfortable all the time and we have to learn to just deal with and get on with our lives.
Although it does not say whether the prayer was optional, I think the banner is unconstitutional because it is a public display of how a public school supports a certain religion. This differs from the Wallace v. Jaffree case because the banner blatantly supports a single religion and does not offer an alternative for people of other religions. Because it is a public school, the banner should be unconstitutional because of the Establishment clause, and Ahlquist acted within her constitutional rights to have the banner removed.
Personally I think what this young girl did was extremely brave because this particular banner has been in the school since 1963 and she stood up for her rights and had it removed. She felt out of place and she did what she thought was right. Its he constitutional right to make this kind of protest. Me personally as a person who doesn't buy into the whole religion thing, I see this young girl as a huge inspiration to other who also feel out of place when religion is thrust into our faces.
I don't exactly understand how this mural could violate anyones freedom of (or from, in this case) religion. So what if it makes you feel uncomfortable? No one is forcing you to take any part in Christianity whatsoever. You don't even have to look at it! It's just so ridiculous that schools have to pretend that religions don't exist just to avoid legal issues. As long as you aren't forced to take part in religion, I see no problem. Sorry if you feel ostracized, but the constitution doesn't guarantee everyone the right to feel comfortable. Every time cases like this that have been brought to the supreme court are brought up, people seem to forget that the real issue has everything to do with the constitution and nothing else. Just because something is a dumb idea doesn't mean it shouldn't be legal. For example: flag burning? Stupid, but constitutional.
I think Ahlquist is wrong in taking this issue too far. She does have a right to freedom of religion, or the lack thereof, as well as the right to have freedom of speech, but so does those who created and posted the banner, as well as the people who agreed with what was written on it. The banner does not specify a religion, therefore it shows the tolerance and acceptance of all religions, which also leads to the tolerance of all beliefs. Ahlquist should become more tolerant of other religions and beliefs if she wants the same consideration for her beliefs. If Ahlquist were to post a banner containing her ideas and beliefs, and were to expect it to be tolerated and accepted, then she must do the same. Yes, Ahlquist has a right to free speech and religion, but so do those who accept and tolerate the banner.
I think Ahlquist is wrong in taking this issue too far. She does have a right to freedom of religion, or the lack thereof, as well as the right to have freedom of speech, but so does those who created and posted the banner, as well as the people who agreed with what was written on it. The banner does not specify a religion, therefore it shows the tolerance and acceptance of all religions, which also leads to the tolerance of all beliefs. Ahlquist should become more tolerant of other religions and beliefs if she wants the same consideration for her beliefs. If Ahlquist were to post a banner containing her ideas and beliefs, and were to expect it to be tolerated and accepted, then she must do the same. Yes, Ahlquist has a right to free speech and religion, but so do those who accept and tolerate the banner.
I think it's completely right that Jessica Ahlquist won the court battle of having the prayer sign removed from her high school. In the first amendment, the establishment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. The prayer on the wall shows that the school is endorsing a religion and this is a direct violation of the Constitution. As the article said, there is no way to say that the prayer is anything other than a prayer. Ahlquist was right for defending her constitutional rights and it's a shame that others (especially the state representative) are attacking her for her actions. She completely deserves the scholarships for defending her basic rights.
Jessica Ahlquist was a very brave person, not everyone would have battle for there believes. Specially if their was other people calling you "evil little thing" and just putting you down for fighting for you're believes. I am very happy that Jessica won the case!!!! I would feel out of place to if my school had a banner of a prayer of a different religion that mine. How would you feel if you're school was influencing another religioun on you, you wouldn't like it, you're parents wouldn't like it and you're religious friends wouldn't like it ether!!!! Everyone has the right to believe what they want and practice any religion they please, It's called 'Freedom of Religion". According to the first amendment "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" there for the school should be banded from having the banner.
Ahlquist was within her rights to request that the banner be taken down. However, I personally don't think that the banner should've been such a big deal. If you don't like it, don't read it. I do feel bad for her though. I don't think that just because she has different beliefs that she should be called names. Both sides of this religious battle need to stop seeing things in black and white and realize that there is a grey area, which in this case is the law.
I don't blame her for what she did I know through my perpspective we have to look at things her way to she felt that this prayer set her apart from everyone else. Just like I'm sure I would feel if there was a Islam or any other kind of prayer on my school. She has rights just like everyone else and even though it's not the mainstream view she is entitled to her own view. And for people to treat her this way is wrong. But it puzzles me she should have known there would be some kind of up cry by Persueing her case. I bet she feels even more set apart then she did when the prayer was hanging in her school.
I don't blame her for what she did I know through my perpspective we have to look at things her way to she felt that this prayer set her apart from everyone else. Just like I'm sure I would feel if there was a Islam or any other kind of prayer on my school. She has rights just like everyone else and even though it's not the mainstream view she is entitled to her own view. And for people to treat her this way is wrong. But it puzzles me she should have known there would be some kind of up cry by Persueing her case. I bet she feels even more set apart then she did when the prayer was hanging in her school.
I feel like the pray should of stayed hanging in the school. We do have a freedom of speech and religion so I don't see a problem with it hanging in the school. I dont think that Jessica should have been treated the way she was though. There was no reason for people to be calling her an evil little thing. She was just fighting for what she believed in.
Calling a teenager "evil" for taking a stand against a religious mural that doesn't comply with everyone's beliefs is overboard. The constitution clearly is in her favor as the government can't support any religion or religions in a public school. Although, personally, I think the prayer banner should have stayed up, I believe that atheists have rights in this country as well. Jessica Ahlquist is very courageous in going against so many and she deserves all of the scholarship money her supporters have sent her.
Wow this is very interesting. The fact that the state reperesentative of Rhode Island went so far as to call this young girl "evil" is out of line. I myself do not agree with her lack of belief, but to criticize and judge her just because she's in her rights fighting for the removal of the banner doesn't mean that people have to ostracize her to such an extent. And it's ok that other atheists support her stance on the matter and went so far as to raise money for her for college. In all honesty, you don't see very much of that kind of support these days and from a student's stand point that just seems that people out there sill do support each other in times of need. So, to focus on this article's controversial issue, would be the negative outlook upon it. But to see it more as an example of a great support system from complete strangers for the sake of a students beliefs (or lack of) could be a more beneficial view.
i think what she did was a little ridiculous and i feel she went over board with the entire situation. she needs to realize she is in america and the vast majority of americans are christain. and if she feels out of place..., well sorry. if she really has a problem with what the banner states then turn your head and look the other direction, so you dont read nor see it. alot of people follow and like to see the word of the Lord everyday, and because of her that priviledge was taken away from them.
Honestly,in my opinion and this is my view towards a lot of things. If Jessica didnt like the banner then she shouldnt look at it. Now it would be different if they were forcing everybody to go and read it out loud and have to pray,but they probably dont do that. I believe that for those who are religious its a great prayer and for those who arent i believe that they shouldnt read it and go on with there buisness. Theres lots of things hanging at my school that i dont like but im not gonna bring it to court,i just dont look at it. I know everybody doesnt think like that but i mean really. After i read this story it kind of reminded me of the McDonalds case. Where hot was not on the cup but its implied that when you order coffee its gonna be hot. But whatever in the end she still won. i dont hate her or anything like that i just think she was dumb. If you dont like it dont look at it. 8)
The first amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. There for i think Jessica is right to have had the prayer sign removed from Cranston High School West. I understand that the mural has been in the school since 1963, and that to them it was "historical" and "artistic.", but this makes Jessica feel uncomfortable, and it probably makes other students uncomfortable too. Jessica amazed me by what she did.She was just just defending the Constitution.
The way I see it, the girl knew what she was getting into when she sued the school over the prayer banner. Taking an open stance on religion in a town that obviously takes their religious views so seriously, will obviously ostracize her even more. Law suits like this shouldn't even be taken seriously. The girl got her $40,000 scholarship and her fifteen minutes of fame, that was all she was after.
I don't think a banner with a prayer is worth going to court over. Something like that isn't worth the trouble just because you feel a little "out of place." I don't understand why people do this, is it that hard to live with a little bit of inconvenience in your life?
I don't think a banner with a prayer is worth going to court over. Something like that isn't worth the trouble just because you feel a little "out of place." I don't understand why people do this, is it that hard to live with a little bit of inconvenience in your life?
This Rhode Island student has every right to express her religious views and if this mural or sign is making her uncomfortable, she has the right to express that. I'm surprised that this was made into such a bigger deal than it could have been, especially on the East Coast rather than the Bible Belt. I'm honestly glad she got donations from supporters that will go towards her college fund. It's like a reward for standing up and being courageous.
While I agree that school and religion should be separate: I don't think what she did was right. There is almost no way that she could possibly feel ostracized by something as harmless as a prayer. Prayers are meant to wish well: not remove others from the group. She couldn't have been threatened, she should have just ignored it. She should have ignored something that didn't affect her at all, and at the same time she effectively made herself a target for personal attack. She knew that there would be backlash, so she has no place to play the victim.
While I agree that school and religion should be separate: I don't think what she did was right. There is almost no way that she could possibly feel ostracized by something as harmless as a prayer. Prayers are meant to wish well: not remove others from the group. She couldn't have been threatened, she should have just ignored it. She should have ignored something that didn't affect her at all, and at the same time she effectively made herself a target for personal attack. She knew that there would be backlash, so she has no place to play the victim.
Under the Establishment Clause, the expression of religion is unconstitutional. And I try to look at situations like this from both sides, but the fact that the prayer has been in the school since 1963 and after so many years is challenged to be removed is crazy to me. I understand what Jessica may feel about being out of place and obstracized because I would be just as offended if I saw something that did not pertain to my religion but this country was founded under God.
Alquist deserved to win the case because, the prayer was in fact going against her constitutional rights. The only thing she doesn't deserve is being treated the way she is by other people because of her religious beliefs. She fought for what she believed in and she won so, people should leave her alone and let it be. People may think that it is just a prayer, but that's because that's what they believe in therefore, people who aren't religious feel desecrated and vice versa.
I think this is so demonstrative of the power that a high school student can have. Usually, students are very limited in their power and their ability to voice concerns over many topics. Ms. Ahlquist seems to have opened the door a little wider for those who wish to challenge the constitutionality of what are sometimes considered well-established traditions in society.
What is even more shocking is that this, in Rhode Island, garnered such a negative response. I would understand such a backlash in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, etc. but not Rhode Island. I guess it shows that the US still has a long way to go as far as the issue of separation of church and state goes.
This makes one think about all the other possibly unconstitutional traditions currently present in our lives that we may not always stop to think about.
One aspect the article did not focus on which I find might be interesting to discuss is at what point does art in a government-funded institution become unconstitutional. That would be a very interesting topic to explore as well.
I think Ahlquist was right in what she did. It seems a bit ironic for her to be punished and called "evil" by christians that think she was wrong in defending the Constitution. I also think it is ridiculous that her supporters couldnt find one flower shop to deliver to her just because she is against a banner hanging in her school. Although I am a christian, i can see where she is coming from in wanting the banner removed. If a prayer banner is in a public and state funded school, it is violating the Constitution and out of place.
This is a difficult topic however as a christian and strong believer in God, i would have disagreed with the girl myself. I know that constitutionally, the sign might be considered wrong and she did have the right to have it taken down. Though i would be upset if i were a student who prayed that prayer when the day became difficult and needed an extra spiritual boost from God. I do apologize for the christians who are mistreating Jessica and calling her names, when they should show love and compassion and exemplify the teachings of the bible. They must remember that though the prayer was taken down,they are still free to pray and allow their faith to become as strong as they want it to. They must forgive Jessica and move on with their lives and continue to serve the lord as the christians they are.
This is a difficult topic however as a christian and strong believer in God, i would have disagreed with the girl myself. I know that constitutionally, the sign might be considered wrong and she did have the right to have it taken down. Though i would be upset if i were a student who prayed that prayer when the day became difficult and needed an extra spiritual boost from God. I do apologize for the christians who are mistreating Jessica and calling her names, when they should show love and compassion and exemplify the teachings of the bible. They must remember that though the prayer was taken down,they are still free to pray and allow their faith to become as strong as they want it to. They must forgive Jessica and move on with their lives and continue to serve the lord as the christians they are.
There many atheists around the country that are going protest against relgious things.
I honestly think being atheists is not a big deal. Im not atheists but i do have friends that are and I support them. Im not very religious...
Its Freedom of Religion.
I think this is excessive. The school is not making her read it or say it every morning or even at all. It has been there since 1963; it is part of the history of the school. How should something that is just hanging there make her feel ostricised more than a bible just sitting somewhere that she is? There is no action that the school is making her do involving the banner. It's just a banner. That would be like someone being offended by the arrow stuck in the ceiling of the LHS auditorium (something that has been there for years) because the arrow could be a danger if it fell out and hit someone.
I find it funny how the people of America preach about diversity and equal opportunity to express themselves freely, only to turn around and say, "Well but expressing your faith in Christianity is offensive to me." People talk up the importance of expressing themselves and spreading their ideas and religion, only to shoot down others if their ideas aren't the same. But when it comes to other religions such as Buddhism and Muslim faiths, Americans support and encourage them wholeheartedly because they're different. If it's anything BUT Christianity, it's not offensive.
i think what she did was a little ridiculous. she needs to realize that the majority of americans are christians and that we like to live by the word of the Lord. by complaining about the flag that was hung, she has runied a lot of peoples abiltiy to read the world of the Lord in school. i think she should have just gone on about her business and looked the other direction every time she came upon the flag if she did not like what it said.she turned something very little into a big dramatic situation that upset alot of fellow students.
This is a modern representation of the court cases we did in class. It is unjust for the general community too be shunning her like this. Even though she basically "broke" a community tradition, the community should respect her choice. This is showing a negative light toward the religious community. It is a slippery and controversial slope either way..
This is a modern representation of the court cases we did in class. It is unjust for the general community too be shunning her like this. Even though she basically "broke" a community tradition, the community should respect her choice. This is showing a negative light toward the religious community. It is a slippery and controversial slope either way..
In this situation, I feel as though the mural was in itself simply a mural. As long as the words were not spoken or used in school, I feel it is the right of the school to keep it based on the fact that it is a historical remnant from the school's history. I feel as though it is still in line with the Establishment Clause because it is not being endorsed, merely displayed. For the same reason, we still have the words In God We Trust on our Federal Treasury notes and it makes me wonder if thats such a big deal too. However, calling a sixteen year old evil for voicing her opinion is a completely different matter.
I agree with the decision of Alquist to challenge the prayer in her school. In her defense, it is a violation of her constitutional rights and should be respected, not frowned upon in Rhode Island. Even though the prayer had been in the school since 1963, it does not mean that it did not make students uncomfortable, Alquist was just the first to speak out about her rights.
I agree in regards to Alquist protecting her constitutional rights and having the courage to come out and challenge the prayer in the school. Even though the prayer has been hanging in the school since 1963, it does not mean that students have felt uncomfortable with it being there. It just so happened that Alquist was the first to stand up and share her voice and rights.
I agree with the decision of Alquist to challenge the prayer in her school. In her defense, it is a violation of her constitutional rights and should be respected, not frowned upon in Rhode Island. Even though the prayer had been in the school since 1963, it does not mean that it did not make students uncomfortable, Alquist was just the first to speak out about her rights.
Alquist had the right to testify that the prayer was against constitutional rights and should be removed from the school, no matter how long it had been hanging there.
Post a Comment