Where is the tolerance?
I was saddened when reading the comments following the op-ed piece on Wood County School officials and religion. Several people made good points, but those points were soon lost in a sea of hatred and childishness.
I disagree with Mr. Underwood’s stance on not having religious speakers or prayers at school functions. This type of move is simply catering to the atheists and secularists, just as having these religious guests and prayers caters to religious groups and not the atheists/secularists. Either move is a lose-lose situation and only creates conflict. What about tolerance?
When I was in school, events such as proms and graduations were not only planned by the faculty and staff of the school. The student council was also involved in the planning. When it came to decisions such as who was to be the guest speaker, members of the student council could all submit nominations, and then the student council officers and faculty voted on the final choice. The option as to whether there would be an invocation or not at an event was also left to the student council for a yes or no vote. Why not let the students in Wood County also have a say? Put it to a vote, and the majority rules. If an invocation is chosen for an event, and you don’t agree, then just don’t bow your head. If a moment of silence is chosen instead, then the people who voted for an invocation can still bow their heads and pray silently.
As for the religious clubs, no student has ever been forced to be a part of a religious club, to my knowledge, so why ban them? Some people will say that this should be because of the “Separation of Church and State.” If you read this amendment, though, you will see that it states that “the government should maintain an attitude of neutrality toward religion.” It says nothing about keeping religion of any kind out of state functions. So, if a student is not religious, they should just find a faculty adviser to help start a club for their own group or belief (as long as it is legal!). If we want tolerance in our society, we cannot keep trying to push one group or another out. Tolerance is a willingness to abide with something whether you agree or not. What is proposed in the op-ed piece is not tolerant, nor are the comments opposing it.