Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Because it is about Civil Rights.
I cannot name one publicized state/church complaint ever handled by the Freedom From Religion Foundation that wasn’t branded by someone as “petty” or “trivial” — whether the complaint was over huge Latin crosses on government property, or tiny tots being forced to bow heads and pray in kindergarten.
I’ve often wondered, if the violations we’re complaining about are no big deal, why don’t these public officials and critics just agree to stop them? We know from experience that when state/church violations go unchallenged, they create bad precedent and, often, even worse First Amendment violations. Although FFRF’s legal staff almost exclusively handles cases involving Establishment Clause violations, we make one exception. That is for violations of the Civil Rights Act.
FFRF was contacted by one of our Pennsylvania members, John Wolff, an octogenarian and retired electrical engineer, who was shocked to encounter a church bulletin discount at a local restaurant. Those bearing proof they had been to church that morning are given a regular 10 percent discount by Lost Cajun Kitchen in Columbia, Pa. FFRF Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert wrote not just one, but three letters over the course of a year and a half, in a patient attempt to educate the apparently uneducable restaurant owners.
--snip--
Recently, a few freethinkers have suggested that civil rights violations aren’t worthy of FFRF’s attention, that we should “pick our battles,” that negative reaction to such complaints makes atheists even more unpopular. So . . . should we blame victims? Empower hecklers with a veto? Would anyone call it trivial if a restaurant rewarded customers for being white with 20 percent off every Sunday brunch?
Ask those who have won landmark Supreme Court cases whether they were “popular” fights. FFRF and state/church complainants are not pursuing remedy of violations to be popular, or unpopular, for that matter. We are working to uphold essential principles of law that protect us all. Although constitutional law is not undertaken to gain social acceptance, history shows that standing up for one’s rights — as demonstrated by the civil rights and gay rights movements — is actually the surest path toward gaining social acceptance.
John Wolff deserves the support of all freethinkers and all Americans for standing up for civil rights: his, yours and everyone’s.
http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2012/07/dont-discount-civil-rights-2/
I’ve often wondered, if the violations we’re complaining about are no big deal, why don’t these public officials and critics just agree to stop them? We know from experience that when state/church violations go unchallenged, they create bad precedent and, often, even worse First Amendment violations. Although FFRF’s legal staff almost exclusively handles cases involving Establishment Clause violations, we make one exception. That is for violations of the Civil Rights Act.
The Civil Rights Act in relevant part reads: “All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation . . . without discrimination on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.” (See — religion is right there, along with race and color.)
FFRF was contacted by one of our Pennsylvania members, John Wolff, an octogenarian and retired electrical engineer, who was shocked to encounter a church bulletin discount at a local restaurant. Those bearing proof they had been to church that morning are given a regular 10 percent discount by Lost Cajun Kitchen in Columbia, Pa. FFRF Senior Staff Attorney Rebecca Markert wrote not just one, but three letters over the course of a year and a half, in a patient attempt to educate the apparently uneducable restaurant owners.
--snip--
Recently, a few freethinkers have suggested that civil rights violations aren’t worthy of FFRF’s attention, that we should “pick our battles,” that negative reaction to such complaints makes atheists even more unpopular. So . . . should we blame victims? Empower hecklers with a veto? Would anyone call it trivial if a restaurant rewarded customers for being white with 20 percent off every Sunday brunch?
Ask those who have won landmark Supreme Court cases whether they were “popular” fights. FFRF and state/church complainants are not pursuing remedy of violations to be popular, or unpopular, for that matter. We are working to uphold essential principles of law that protect us all. Although constitutional law is not undertaken to gain social acceptance, history shows that standing up for one’s rights — as demonstrated by the civil rights and gay rights movements — is actually the surest path toward gaining social acceptance.
John Wolff deserves the support of all freethinkers and all Americans for standing up for civil rights: his, yours and everyone’s.
http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/2012/07/dont-discount-civil-rights-2/
I think the takeaway here is in the second paragraph;
if the violations we’re complaining about are no big deal, why don’t these public officials and critics just agree to stop them?
This is where our common ground is to be found, DU'ers. I hope you will join me there.
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
