Deseret News | 'Messiah' moves from school to church

Reader comments
'Messiah' moves from school to church — for now

Anonymous | 7:25 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

Freedom of religion under increasing attack, LDS leader says...

L. G. KIRKPATRICK | 8:57 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

I'm glad I won't be among the herd of "ignert" creeps facing Jesus one of these days, and hearing Him ask, "Why persecuteth thou me?"

Mike | 9:12 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

If you don't like the Messiah, don't go. Then it doesn't affect you. Very nearly all "classical music" is religious and in most cases, very Christian. Does that mean we shouldn't hear that type of music in a public school at all?

Tell these schmucks to pound sand. Oh by the way, isn't Abravanel Hall a government owned and run facility? Seems like the Messiah is performed in there every year. Hmmm.

Comments continue below

California Steve | 9:23 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

Exactly what Elder Oaks was talking about. But we're supposed to shut up and take it.

Phantom Cat | 9:32 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

I see the "open minded" left is at it again. "Don't mention God or Jesus in public or we will sue!!!!" Of course, you can use their names in vain in public as much as you want. The left will defend that till the cows come home and tell anyone who's offended to "loosen up." Simply unbelievable.

Elder Oaks | 9:57 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

"The group is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of church-state separation 'as the only way to ensure religious freedom for all Americans.'"

So the only way to protect religious freedom is to not let there be even a sliver of religious expression in public life?

"Religious values and political realities are so interlinked in the origin and perpetuation of this nation that we cannot lose the influence of Christianity in the public square without seriously jeopardizing our freedoms. I maintain that this is a political fact, well qualified for argument in the public square by religious people whose freedom to believe and act must always be protected by what is properly called our “First Freedom,” the free exercise of religion."

Anonymous | 10:25 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

"It's unconstitutional to use public funds to support religious activities"

What about that don't you understand? It is the law, and it is in our constitution. If Holladay wants to take taxpayer money to fund a religious activity, it absolutely should be called out on it. It's not an attack on religion to make you play by the rules.

Tell Them to Pound Salt | 11:23 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

What is some out of state group telling us in Utah what to do with our Christmas traditions? The Messiah is a renowned choral work independent of its religious text. There is nothing inherently wrong with having it sung on school property. Don't be intimidated by these Secular Regressive bullies. It's part of their agenda to threaten and intimidate. Stand up for your rights of exprsesion. They're the biggest hypocrites around; all for everybody elses' rights, except mine, as a TRADITIONALIST who will continue to say "MERRY CHRISTMAS" everywhere I go during December. And play SIlent Night. C'mon people, get a backbone! We don't need to be mean about it, but when other people are treding on OUR rights of expression, then that's it. I'm going to defend myself. You know what? I may just show up with a rag tag group of community citizens on School Property and have our own "Sing In" as a PROTEST to this Secular Regressive piffle.

RedShirt | 11:43 a.m. Oct. 14, 2009

To "Anonymous | 10:25 a.m." no, it isn't illegal to use public funds to support religious acrivities. It is illegal to establish a state religion. In this instance, the state is not supporting any particular religion.

Think of it this way, the state is establishing the religion of atheism by not funding anybody.

Producing a piece of classical | 12:15 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

music which happens to have a religious theme DOES NOT qualify as the establishment of religion prohibited in our constitution. No one is forced to attend or support it. The school district probably charges all non-school users of its facilities for their use--I know ours does.

I think it's absurd that we can't mention Christmas in schools but we can have "Earth Day" and celebrate the "winter solstice". Both are religious holidays.

Anonymous | 12:28 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

I think the founding Fathers of America, who were very christian would roll over in thier graves watching what America is turning into. Maybe this group should sue thier ancestors because they prayed while writing the declaration of independance and intermingled christianity or the cause of Christ with everything. This nation was founded upon Jesus Christ. It is shameful.

Patrick Henry a ratifier of the Constitution said: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here." (The Trumpet Voice of Freedom: Patrick Henry of Virginia, p. iii. )

wow | 1:02 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

"Granite District and Holladay each received a complaint letter in February and September from Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The group is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of church-state separation "as the only way to ensure religious freedom for all Americans.""

The First Amendment guarantees religous plurlaism - not religous hate. As long as the government does not favor one church over another/establishment (and in this case it was inter-denominational) then it is an abuse of power to prohibit the use of public property merely because the group has a religous theme. A religous group has the same right to use a school as any secular group; otherwise the govenement is guilty of discrimination.
Americans United is not a credible civil rights group and I am ashamed Holladay cowed to their brand of politically correct bullying and intolerance that has no constitutional basis.

We're In! | 1:18 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

To Pound Salt, we agree with your plan to hold a protest sing-in on school property or other public property. If the school district continues to cave, count us in. Just name time and place and we'll be there! Let's call it Civil Disobeience spiced with Christmas Spirit!

John Pack Lambert | 1:38 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

Th use of public facilities is no more banned to religious groups than non-religious groups. If groups outside of the school are allowed hold activities at the school, than their being reigious in nature should not disqualify them.
Knowing the intense hatred for the Latter-day Saints held by some, I fear that moving out of the neutral ground of the school to a religious venue will undermine the true inter-denominational nature of the event.
Let me state this one more time, allowing religious groups to use school property is REQUIRED by the constitution if ANY non-school groups are EVER allowed to use the school property.

Anonymous | 1:41 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

What if you're Jewish,
What if you're Hindu,
What if you're Buddahist,
What if you're Muslim?

Think people,
It's called Karma.

What goes around, comes around.

The premise of Elder Oaks talk goes both ways.

If we as LDS want tolerence and acceptance -- show some for others.

Otherwise, it's just like my Mom and Grandma used to say:
It don't matter who's right or who's wrong --
if you'all can't get along and share - then NONE of you get anything.

John Q. Public | 2:00 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

Holladay City was using its tax funds to support the event sponsored by a religious group. The School District was giving the program special treatment despite it being sponsored by a religious group. The City & the District thus violate the Ut and the US Constitution.

Universal truths | 2:01 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

I liked the comments by Billy Graham's daughter a year or so back, when asked why God would allow the terrible destruction during Katrina.
She said, and I paraphrase, I think God is a gentleman.
And when people say they don't want him in their schools, and they don't want him in their homes nor in their lives.
He pulls back and lets them go their own way.
From the LDS point of view, I say, free agency isn't free. We may do as we please, even curse God, but there will consequences.
And if you don't believe that, you have been utterly deceived by the great deceiver himself.
I wish there were some way to gently open peoples minds and hearts to realize who they are listening to.

What About Humanism? | 2:10 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

Humanism was declared to be a religion by the US Supreme Court at least 100 years ago. It's stance is godless and completely contrary to Christianity, and is laced throughout our public school system's curriculum. Our tax dollars are definitely going to support it. Why isn't this organization going after that?

Anonymous | 2:17 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

To the person who states that the founding fathers of this great nation were very Christian needs to look into history a little better. Last I checked, the American forefathers were a mix of deists, atheists, and Christian. But most of them were deists. Our America forefathers did NOT want their new government controlling their religious practices. That is why gods are not mentioned in the Constitution and why we have the Bill of Rights and Separation of Church and State.

to RedShirt | 4:23 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

No, you are wrong.

1947 Everson vs. Board of Education: No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. "

RE: Anonymous | 2:17 p.m | 4:28 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

YOu are wrong.

Plain and simple, you are wrong.

You can give the Foundig Fatheres any labels you want, but you can not change who they were.

(NONE were athiest, you may be refering Thomas Paine who was a voice of the revolution, but NOT a founding father of the country)

There is no "separation" in the constitution, that is fact.

(it was actually used in a letter, which is NOT the law of the land)

You say: "Our America forefathers did NOT want their new government controlling their religious practices"

and yet here you are DEMANDING they control it!

To use the power government to silence any religious voice,

to control the schools,
to control the communitites,

And encourage the use of public funding that attacks religion be it through art, pbs, schools, etc.

The fdounding father were NOT hostile toward religion,

quite the contrary,

the said our Constitution needed a moral and religious people to succeed.

To Anonymous 1.41 | 10:04 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

I am completely fine for Jew, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, Atheists, and anybody else to attend the Messiah performance. All are welcome!

I feel the Spirit strongly during "The Trumpets Shall Sound". What a wonderful oratorio.

Anonymous | 11:34 p.m. Oct. 14, 2009

so what this group is actually saying is that religious groups should not be allowed to rent our public buildings. That is certainly discriminatory.

Marcos | 1:16 a.m. Oct. 15, 2009

Churches would do well to keep their proselytizing out of schools. Children go to school to learn and not to get converted. I'm Roman Catholic and I don't want my kids to be mislead by Protestant or LDS doctrine in public school. If I wanted my kids to have that kind of education, I would send them to a Protestant/LDS school. There's no "Interfaith" in Catholicism, I'm not a cafeteria Catholic. Religion is private, between man and God, the state shouldn't interfere with religion, and religion shouldn't interfere with the state. What if I successfully passed a law mandating all public schools in my county start their day with a 'Hail Mary', I don't think Protestants would be too happy about that. Separation of church and state exists because our founding fathers knew better, they knew that the only way to protect religion was to keep it out of the government and vice-versa.

to anon 11:43 | 8:34 a.m. Oct. 15, 2009

no, that's not it at all. Taxpayers money was used to fund part of the production. THAT is what the issue is. Did you read the article?

@ Marcos | 4:50 p.m. Oct. 15, 2009

So you would rather have your children preached to and mislead by the secular humanists that fill the ranks of our public education system... Good thinking.
Separation of church and state is no where in the Constitution, it says that government shall not establish a public religion or deny the free exercise of religion. Letting a group use a school off hours for a program does not establish a public religion.
No wonder our nation is failing, people are clueless.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.