Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
You probably remember Coach Dave Daubenmire (yes, he still calls himself coach although he was only a high school football coach and hasn't been for quite some time, since he stepped down to became a full time windbag for the religious right). Well he's back with one of the silliest arguments against separation of church and state one can possibly imagine. It's the sort of thing my high school football coach, who could draw up a decent coverage scheme but would probably fail miserably any aptitude test that is given to high school students, might have written. Take a look at arguments like this:
Which brings me to "the establishment clause" so readily quoted by our courts, and dutifully obeyed by tax-paying Christians. "That is a violation of the establishment clause," pundits like to spew. But let's think a minute. I've heard of violating a law, but how does one violate a clause?
Gosh Coach, you got me there. I'm stumped. The funny thing is that he actually links to the dictionary definition of the word "clause" and the answer is right there in the second definition: "A distinct article, stipulation, or provision in a document." In legal terms, a clause is a distinct stipulation or provision in a given law. So of course you can violate a clause in a law. Tell you what Coach, we'll think a minute; you better think for several minutes. And then ask for help.
Then he makes this horrible analogy:
During football season Ohio State-Michigan week is unbelievable in my home state of Ohio, almost a religious expression, really. The Michigan fans, though few, are vocal. Good-natured ribbing takes place before and after the game, and no one feels his rights were violated.In Ohio, upwards of 90% identify themselves as Buckeye fans. That does not mean every person living in Ohio must root for Ohio State. It does, however, let you know that if you are a Michigan fan, you are in the minority. You are welcome to wear the Maize and Blue jersey, but don't expect the rest of Ohio to stop wearing the Scarlet and Gray. Ohio is Buckeye country. Acknowledged, but not yet established. Don't like it? Move to Michigan.
Gotta love those coaches and their sports analogies. Unfortunately, this one fails for one obvious reason - no one wants to prevent anyone else from "wearing their Christian uniform". Every person is free, and will remain free, to acknowledge their religious beliefs, shout them from the rooftops, publish them, whatever they want. But they can't demand that the government endorse those beliefs. That's the distinction. Keep trying to think, Coach. One of these days, you might just succeed at it.
Comments
Wow, that's hilarious. And you know he doesn't bat an eye when (other) pundits "spew" about "violations of the free-exercise clause."
But it's just good-natured ribbing, Ed. No-one's actually trying to establish Christianity as the law of the land! Oh, wait.
Posted by: Dave M.
| May 3, 2006 11:59 AM
90% of Ohioans call themselves Suckeye fans? I call BS on that. Let me see the survey. There certainly are a lot of OSU fans, but I know of a lot of people who hate Ohio State, who live in Ohio, and what about all those people who don;t even follow sports? If you go near Toledo, you are likely to find closer to a 50/50 split, as T-town is closer to Ann Arbor than Columbus.
I do think the comparison of OSU fans to Relgious fanatics is probably fair. They don't listen to reason and become very hateful when you tell them that you don't like OSU. The one that gets my goat is when they tell you that you were born an OSU fan because you were born in Ohio. Makes me sick. Last year I went to a wedding where the groom brought a TV so he could watch the OSU-Teas game (fortunately, OSU lost).
Posted by: bourgeois_rage
| May 3, 2006 12:05 PM
atari24's Law: If you use a sports analogy for anything outside of the world of sports, you lose the argument.
Posted by: atari24
| May 3, 2006 12:08 PM
Even though I don't appreciate Coach invoking Holy Saturday for the purpose of this argument, I have to say his analogy is a good one. If nothing else, it demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of the separation of church and state. The UM-OSU situation is analogous to what the religious right thinks is happening.
Posted by: Capt. Rational
| May 3, 2006 12:17 PM
90% of Ohioans call themselves Suckeye fans? I call BS on that.
I would call it BS, too. I grew up in Cincinnati, and went to Ohio State. It wasn't until I went to Ohio State that I found out that they called their football team (then coached by the legendary a$$hole Woody Hayes) that they had nicknamed the team after a poisonous chestnut "Buckeyes." I sincerely doubt that many people outside of Columbus knew that.
Of course, we in Cincinnati had our own university, UC, which nicknamed its sports teams the BearKittens.
Posted by: raj
| May 3, 2006 1:12 PM
Capt. Rational: actually, comparing different religions (who have differing beliefs that may or may not be at odds with each other) to competing sprts-teams (who are trying to defeat each other in a game only one team can win) demonstrates this coach's inability to understand the concept of peaceful co-existence between differing beliefs. Someone needs to tell the coach that we Pagans are not trying to get a higher score and "beat" the Christians; we're just...well...being Pagans.
Posted by: Raging Bee
| May 3, 2006 2:45 PM
Hey, raj. I'm a Bearcat. Grew up in Toledo, but I currently live in Cincinnati. Graduated from UC Engineering in 2003.
Posted by: bourgeois_rage
| May 3, 2006 4:33 PM
The funny thing is that he actually links to the dictionary definition of the word "clause" and the answer is right there in the second definition: "A distinct article, stipulation, or provision in a document."
He linked to it, but I'm not so sure he read the definition. He definitely did read the definitions for establishment and acknowledgement, and I think he got those down pretty good. But he seems to think that because they are two separate words, they both can't apply to the same thing at the same time. His point seems to be that if something is established then it can't be acknowledged, or if it is acknowledged then it can't be established. Or something like that. I guess. (?)
Posted by: 386sx
| May 3, 2006 4:53 PM
Raging Bee: Exactly my point! Coach thinks the "battle" between Christians and secularists is about scoring points and one-upping the other side, so using his mindset, it's a great analogy.
Posted by: Capt. Rational
| May 3, 2006 11:42 PM
So - there's only one college in Ohio?
This is a very simplistic analogy - probably what he thinks of as a fitting one. It is all about beating the other team - which is fitting for the younger Abrahamic religions - and doesn't acknowledge any kind of living together - just as they don't. Which makes it a good window into their way of thought, too. Unfortunately, he can't (apparently) think about how the OSU fan feels when he ends up in a different neighborhood...
Posted by: theRidger
| May 4, 2006 6:05 AM
So - there's only one college in Ohio?
This is a very simplistic analogy - probably what he thinks of as a fitting one. It is all about beating the other team - which is fitting for the younger Abrahamic religions - and doesn't acknowledge any kind of living together - just as they don't. Which makes it a good window into their way of thought, too. Unfortunately, he can't (apparently) think about how the OSU fan feels when he ends up in a different neighborhood...
Posted by: theRidger
| May 4, 2006 6:07 AM
bourgeois_rage | May 3, 2006 04:33 PM
I was making a joke. When I was a boy scout, I used to usher at the UC Bearcat football games.
Posted by: raj
| May 4, 2006 6:53 AM
No, I followed you raj. No harm here.
Posted by: bourgeois_rage
| May 4, 2006 8:19 AM