God vs. Copyright vs. Public School Teacher... AGAIN

The previous post in this blog was about public school officials who changed a famous song, God Bless the USA, to remove the word "God." This, of course, is a violation of U.S. Copyright law. But it's also just plain silly that the school somehow believed it inappropriate to utter "God" in a public school. Our history is rich with references to God and it is clear our Founders had no intention of removing God from public life when they wrote the Constitution. (Thomas Jefferson, from whose letters we get the phrase "Separation of church and state," and who is typically regarded as one of the "least Christian" of our Founders, even approved the use of the Bible and the Watts Hymnal for practice reading in Washington, D.C. public schools.)

Now another similar issue has arisen in Albemarle County’s Broadus Wood Elementary School (Virginia). A 5th-grade school teacher wanted to use the song We Are the World in a school performance. But, apparently thinking that "God" may not be mentioned in school, she altered this line:

We are all a part of God’s great big family

so that it became this:

We are all a part of one great big family

And she dug a little deeper in verse three of the song, changing this line:

As God has shown us by turning stones to bread

to this one:

We can’t let them suffer; no we cannot turn away

One has to wonder what this same teacher would do if students were studying the Declaration of Independence. Would she change "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights" to simply say "endowed with certain inalienable rights"? Our Founders knew that if our rights come from man rather than God, then man (or a teacher) can take our rights away.

Read the full story on the site below:

http://bearingdrift.com/2012/04/18/worldly-albemarle-county-teacher-deletes-god-lyric-from-we-are-the-world/

Copyright Violation Is OK if You Are Just Removing "God"

Most Americans know the song "God Bless the USA" by Lee Greenwood. It was at the top of the charts for a long time, and is even used at official immigration naturalization ceremonies.

But it was deemed inappropriate at a Bellingham, MA elementary school. They wanted to use the song, but were afraid someone might be offended by the use of the word "God" in the title and lyrics. Note that there were no complaints about the song. School officials decided to change it to "We Love the USA" instead.

There are hundreds of posts on the blog you are now reading about the silliness of thinking that saying "God" in a public school is unconstitutional somehow. But apparently school officials were so afraid of possible suits by the ACLU or the Freedom from Religion Foundation that they did their own preemptive strike. And they were so worried that (apparently) they decided they could violate copyright law. Some aspects of copyright are confusing, but at the bottom of almost any published sheet music are words saying that no one can change or adapt the work without written permission of the publisher.

Composer Lee Greenwood said:
“Maybe the school should have asked the parents their thoughts before changing the lyrics to the song. They could have even asked the writer of the song, which I of course would have said you can’t change the lyrics at all or any part of the song. The most important word in the whole piece of music is the word God, which is also in the title God Bless The USA. We can’t take God out of the song, we can’t take God out of The Pledge of Allegiance, we can’t take God off of the American currency. Let us also remember, the phrase God Bless the USA has a very important meaning for those in the military and their families, as well as new citizens coming to our Country. The song is played at every naturalization ceremony behind The National Anthem. If the song is good enough to played and performed in its original setting under those circumstances, it surely should be good enough for our children.” (as found on FoxNews: http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/school-removes-god-from-lee-greenwood-song.html)

No court decision has said that you can't use the word "God" in a public school. And CERTAINLY the U.S. Constitution doesn't say that. Our Founders took no actions that would make one think such a thing. Please, people! Read the Constitution!

UPDATE (unconfirmed, but from a good source): The school has reversed itself and will use the song now. I did not hear if it will be the original version, with God, but I assume so.

Banning Heaven from Street Names - Is That In the Constitution?

People across the nation were inspired by some of the heroic deeds of the first responders, as well as other police and fire personnel and various volunteers after the attacks in New York City on Sept. 11, 2001. One Brooklyn firehouse lost seven firemen on that day, and they naturally want to honor them. The city named a nearby street for them: "Seven in Heaven Way."

You readers know what's coming next, right? An atheist group is complaining to the city about the sign, demanding it be changed. "Heaven" is a Christian concept, they say. Well, that's partly right. Heaven, or similar concepts using other words, are part of many religions. But Heaven is not part of atheism.

According to an article in New American:
Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission noted, "There are cities that have religious connotations in their names. Why not a street. Do they want us to rename Los Angeles, Corpus Christi, and St. Joseph?” Added Land,  "In a country where 85 percent of the people say they are Christian or claim to be Christian, should it be surprising that you name cities and streets with religious terminology?”

That makes sense to me. Our Constitution specifies (in the Bill of Rights) that Congress may not make a law establishing a religion, and the provision is being applied to our states as well after a Supreme Court decision. But clearly a street sign requires no state law to be passed; it is a decision that cities make for a variety of reasons, and such decision do not require statutes to back them up. Even if they did, there is a difference between recognizing religion and establishing a religion. We have "Armed Forces Day" each year, but every citizen is not required to be in the military, for example. And many, if not most, cities have a form of Martin Luther King on a street name (sometimes on several). But the residents of those cities are not all black.

Read more here:

Atheists Complain Over NYC Street Sign Honoring Fallen 9-11 Firemen

Major Network Seems Not to Like Phrase 'Under God'

Maybe it's time for a refresher on the Declaration of Independence. It contains a very important phrase, which points out that our rights are endowed by our Creator. That phrase was important as we sought independence from England and England's king. There are rights that are not the King's to give; they would not be the yet-to-be formed U.S. Government to give; they are rights given by God to human beings. Doesn't that seem like an important concept?

To be specific, those words from the Declaration of Independence are, "We hold these truths to self-evident, that all men are created equal, and they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights." Is there any reason to be ashamed of those words?  Aren't those same words indicative of people of all races having the same rights? We certainly aren't ashamed of that concept today.

And given that thought, it seems easy to accept the words "under God" that are in our Pledge of Allegiance. After all, that phrase was part of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. After a bold statement in our Declaration that our rights are given by our Creator, and the landmark Gettysburg Address saying we are a nation under God, having it in the Pledge seems consistent.

Yet, it seems that NBC is not at all comfortable with those words. In this weekend's broadcast of the U.S. Open Golf Championship, NBC played a moving "Americana" segment with the Pledge interwoven. But NBC decided to move the words "under God" out of the script. They are a non-governmental company (although there are serious ties these days between the Federal Government and the parent company of NBC), so they can do what they want. But if I ran the company and didn't care one way or the other about history, God, etc., I still might have guessed differently about which version might offend fewer members of the audience.

Read more here:
NBC Cuts 'Under God' From Pledge of Allegiance

Pledge of Allegiance Challenged Once Again - and Survived

The well-known atheist Michael Newdow has continued to endless quest to remove any reference to God from all public arenas. He was unhappy about the children in Hanover, New Hampshire, being allowed to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, which includes the words, "under God."

On June 13, 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States rejected Newdow's appeal from the Boston Federal court. The Boston First Circuit's decision had been unanimous. The decision stated that the Constitution does not require complete separation of church and state. In my opinion, as expressed countless times in this blog, that makes sense. Our Declaration of Independence states that our rights are not given to us by the government, but rather are given to us by God. If we do not believe that, then we have no rights of our own. And if we think it is wrong to recite that we are a nation "under God" in our Pledge, are we not abandoning the belief that our government is not all-powerful?

Read another opinion of the case here:

Supreme Court rejects atheist's latest challenge to Pledge of Allegiance

See the Boston circuit decision here:

FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION v. HANOVER SCHOOL DISTRICT