It occurred to me this morning that to not blog about the Jesus Lunch issue would be akin to ignoring a fire in my own backyard. While the main focus of the blog is to discuss politics, so many issues involving the Jesus Lunch and Middleton High School are political in nature, so that's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Full disclosure. For non-local readers, here's a link summarizing the issue with the "Jesus Lunch":
Chicago Tribune article about "Jesus Lunch"
This happens to be my school district, and with a child at the High School, I've got some interest. Here's a brief summary. On City (not School) property immediately adjacent to the High School, a group of parents got a permit from the City to host a lunch, that happens to also promote a Christian message. The School has a long term, non-exclusive, lease with the City for same property, and contends, via an e-mail, that the "Jesus Lunch" group needs to comply with School policies regarding several things, including food handling, adult visitors on the campus, and activities that are not student-led. Specific mention in the e-mail is that "We (the District) are in no way interested in opposing religious practice in otherwise legal circumstances". Uh, sure, whatever you say.
Well here's how I see it. Starting with the "legality", apparently the lunch group has a permit from the City of Middleton to host lunch, so unless there's something misrepresented in the initial permit application, it's hard to see where there's a legal issue. The e-mail also leads off with a history of the lunch, and that it started on school property, moved and moved again finally to the current location. Here the e-mail mentions that the proselytizing "would have been allowable but would have required school administration to inform parents of any incentivizing of students to eat lunch free in exchange for attendance". Since the story broke last week, it's gotten picked up by national news outlets and lines are being drawn with "religious freedom" on one side and "separation of church and state" on the other, with the typical parties taking the typical sides. Let me see if I can present a different perspective.
Yea, it's proselytizing, duh, but is it breaking either a law or school policy? If on school property, I would absolutely think it would appropriately be disallowed (church/state, yada yada yada), but it's not. It's City property. Yes, the District has a lease, but the City also granted the group a permit, and from watching the City rep of TV it seems they don't appear inclined to rescind the permits granted to either group. And unless the permit granted to the lunch bunch included the prerequisite to comply with District/School policies, I think it's an uphill climb to enforce those policies on the group, including the food handling issues, etc... Public comments in the local media have included, "but when someone gets food poisoning...", and "how would they (lunch bunch) like it if there were an 'Islam Lunch'". Well, from where things sit now the District is absolutely off the hook if someone gets sick from lunch (besides, the campus is "open", so students are currently free to get food poisoning anywhere). Regarding the uproar (from either side) that if this were any other group that wasn't Christian-based, that's an interesting topic. I think that for many there is indeed a double standard, and that a non-Christian-based gathering would be less accepted by parents, and equally likely more-accepted by administration, despite denials from both sides.
So if not an anti-Christian sentiment on the part of the School District, then "why"? I think it comes down to control. I recently had a great discussion with a friend who contends that long-standing institutions risk developing such a focus on self-preservation that it risks supplanting the mission(s) of the institution itself and stifling growth and progress. I think that's as likely a motive behind the District's actions as any sort of "anti-Christian" sentiment, although I can't rule this "PC-based" impetus. The lunch group apparently consistently pulls about 400 students attending the weekly meals, which is roughly 20% of the student enrollment. As a School administrator, that's a pretty big chunk of students collectively out of the direct control of the District during the school day, and even if the food poisoning threat is spurious, any adverse issue occurring in conjunction with the lunch would undoubtably lead to claims that "the District didn't do anything about it", so here, the District's doing something about it.
What about the Jesus Lunch organizers? I don't have any basis to question their religious motivations, but apart from that I don't appreciate that they weren't welcoming, for whatever reasons, a fight with the District and/or the publicity. Just an observation, but their public response (not what the District has presented) has seemed to me almost gleefully standoffish, and I guess that's their prerogative.
So where do I stand in this local "culture war"? While I don't consider myself an "evangelical Christian" (please out of curiosity, let me know if you disagree!) I don't have a problem with the lunch, so long as it's not on School property (proper). Likewise, in-school promotion of the lunches (which I'm told does occur), I think is a violation of school policy and is wrong, regardless of who's doing it. So why the fuss? I think that religion/spirituality/religiosity for many is not an oft-discussed topic in the home, and for those who don't discuss it at home, dammed if they're going to have it discussed with their kids during the school day, Christian or otherwise. On the flipside, I think there are many families out there that are simply concerned (read, afraid) with what they perceive as a palpable disintegration of traditional social values, in and out of the school environment, and if a "Jesus Lunch" brings those values to light, all the better. But I'll add that I don't at all agree that "traditional values" equates with anti-LGBT or anti-anything. Sure there are some extremists, but there are always extremists on any side.
Do I have a solution? Oh hell yes (religious pun intended)! There's a "Jesus Lunch" scheduled for tomorrow, the police have already RSVP'ed and almost without a doubt the media will be in tow as well. The District has already said that they were not going to interfere with it, but both sides are lawyered up. Fine. But the following week happens to be Passover (April 22 - April 30, Jewish festival commemorating the liberation of the Jewish people from slavery in Egypt), which comes with a variety of dietary guidelines (think of it as Jewish Lent). While the Jewish population of Madison is very small (0.58%), it's not zero, and might switching things up and offering a Kosher meal service during Passover (open to all, as is the Jesus Lunch) serve to quell things between the warring factions? For the District, it could help address the "anti-religion" claims against them, while for the Jesus Lunch organizers, they would take a week off and demonstrate they're not evangelical at the expense of all other religions. Of course, it has to be off school property, and area temples (reform, conservative, orthodox, not my call) would have to be involved, but in the end it could help all sides save face in the scrum.
That's my take, I'll be back to fully blogging the aftermath of the New York primaries later this week. Thanks for reading, and of course, your comments are welcome and encouraged!
No comments:
Post a Comment