EDITORIAL: Monroe must let religious club use school facility

EDITORIAL: Access to school facilities protected by law.

   The Monroe school board’s hands are tied.
   It has no choice but to allow the Fellowship of Christian Athletes to hold meetings in Monroe Township High School, even though the group’s mission is, in the words of its Web site, to "encourag(e) people to make a difference for Christ" and to present students and coaches with the "challenge and adventure of receiving Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord." It approved the club in December and let the decision stand last week at a meeting attended by about 250 people.
   While we are concerned that the group may engage in the proselytizing of students, we must acknowledge that the club has federal law and Supreme Court precedent on its side. The federal Equal Access Act, passed by Congress in 1984, protects the rights of student-led, special interest, non-curriculum clubs to use school facilities and a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court decision prohibits school districts from barring religious groups from using school facilities if the district allows other clubs and organizations access to their buildings.
   Given this, we believe Monroe has acted in the only way it could. By allowing the Fellowship access to the school, but not providing a paid adviser (it is allowing a staff member to volunteer as a facilitator for the group), it is taking care to avoid even the appearance of an endorsement of the group and, by extension, its message.
   The alternative to granting access would have been to ban nearly all student-led, non-curricular groups — such as the Young Republicans or the Stamp Club.
   That said, we are concerned with the tenor that the debate over the club is taking in Monroe, which already is racked by generational divisions and anger over the defeat of a proposed school expansion plan in September.
   More than 250 people attended last week’s school board meeting. Many — including a significant number of seniors — were angry that the board would allow a religious group to use school property.
   Communitywide debate generally is healthy. However, the language and tactics used by both sides — seniors likening the club’s approval to Nazi Germany, supporters attacking seniors as outsiders who do not care about the community or its children (and at least one response on our Web site that called seniors Nazis) — has added nothing to the debate, which pits two competing First Amendment principles against each other.
   On the one hand, there are questions about whether allowing a religious club in a public school violates the establishment clause, which prohibits government from endorsing individual religions. At the same time, banning the club would appear to violate its members’ rights to free speech and peaceful assembly.
   The courts have most recently addressed this issue on free-speech and assembly grounds — and Monroe has little choice but to do the same.
   One thing opponents of the board’s decision should realize — and take advantage of — is that it has opened the door for other groups with other religious — or anti-religious — missions to use the building, which is a benefit we applaud. In fact, we would encourage Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, atheist, gay and lesbian, civil rights, antiwar and other student-led groups to petition the board for access to the district’s schools.
   After all, the best way to address speech we disagree with is not to silence its speakers, but to counter it with more speech.