Press "Enter" to skip to content

Gavin Sues to Preach at School of Mines; Food for Jesus at Sioux Falls Public Schools

A couple of big First Amendment pretzels land on my desk this morning. Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and separation of church and state—yum! Pass the mustard!

First, Black Hawk neighbor Mark Gavin is suing the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology.* Gavin's beef: Mines won't let him walk around campus and shout praise to the Lord. Gavin wants to walk around the Quad and other outdoor areas on campus to spread the Gospel. Mines says no: like any other private party coming to campus to hawk its message, Gavin has to pay $50 and work from a table inside a campus building.

The Center for Religious Expression, the Tennessee outfit carrying Gavin's legal water, declares that "the Quad and the grassy area in front of the Surbeck Center... are uniquely suitable for his expression, appearing and functioning like public parks." On its website, CRE asserts in ironically faint font the following definition of the "public square":

The "public square" has both a figurative and literal meaning. It can be a street corner, a park, a sidewalk, a bulletin board, a blog, a break-room at work, a play-ground at school, an accessible outside area on a college campus, or an actual public square where you can put down a soap box and say your peace. Basically, the public square is any place where, as citizens, we have the freedom to walk and talk [Center for Religious Expression, "Get Informed," downloaded 2012.11.10].

The South Dakota Board of Regents begs to differ:

Institutional facilities and grounds embody investments by students and taxpayers to advance the educational, research and service missions of the institution. They are not open to the public for assembly, speech, or other activities as are the public streets, sidewalks, parks or seats of government [South Dakota Board of Regents, Policy Manual 6:13, "Facilities Use by Private Parties"].

The Regents allow campus officials to set up rules and fees for permitting private parties to assemble and speak on campus. But Gavin considers those rules an infringement of his right to free speech.

Gavin insists he's not seeking donations or trying to convert people... but are we really to believe that he wants to preach on campus just for the sake of hearing his own voice echo off the Surbeck Center? Give me a break: Gavin wants to take advantage of a target-rich environment assembled at state expense to advance his religion. He wants to use the state to advance his church, and that's a First Amendment problem.

Fly to the other pole of I-90 to witness another example of religious groups exploiting state resources. First Priority of Sioux Falls seeks to preach Biblical literalism to every student in Sioux Falls, which is sure not to sit well with the many Mormon students in Sioux Falls. First Priority conducts this outreach by, among other activities, hosting regular "Collision Cafes" at Sioux Falls' public high schools. First Priority hands out breakfast to students to "advance the gospel of Jesus Christ on their high school campus."

The collision here is between church and state. First Priority could conduct its activities in any number of private venues around the city that young people could freely choose to visit. But unsatisfied with those opportunities, First Priority takes advantage of a public venue, public high schools, where the state compels young people to go each day. Courtesy of the taxpayers, First Priority gains easy access to a captive audience to promote its specific religious message.

Both Gavin and First Priority are trying to take advantage of state resources and the students gathered thereupon for public education to promote private religious agendae. I understand their motivation: high school and university students are good targets for proselytization. They seek identity and meaning perhaps more avidly than anyone else. If you're selling the cosmic, teens and 20-somethings are your market.

But if you want to preach to that market, you don't get to take advantage of our public education dollars to do it. Mines need not sweat Gavin's lawsuit. The Sioux Falls School District might want to sweat this use of public resources to promote one narrow religious perspective.

* Editorial disclosure and disclaimer: I'm currently working on a web project for a research lab associated with Mines. As always, my speech on this blog has nothing to do with my affiliation with anyone writing me a check.

31 Comments

  1. Bree S. 2012.11.10

    I always found those guys that holler the "Good News" at startled passersby to be annoying. It's been 2000 years and I think everyone in the U.S. knows who Jesus is. I'd hate to see Freedom of Speech infringed on though.

  2. Jerry 2012.11.10

    Nothing that a good butt kicking would not take care of, just sayin...

  3. Ed Randazzo 2012.11.10

    Let's pray that Jesus doesn't find Bree "annoying" and Jerry doesn't get his "butt kicking" into Satan's pit when they stand at judgment. We "annoying" ones don't like losing any of God's creations to Satan, even Madvillers.

  4. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.10

    If Jesus is in any position to judge, I suspect he finds us all annoying.

    Bree, I hesitate on Gavin's case in a way I don't in the Sioux Falls situation. An open campus green seems like a different situation from a school cafeteria. Still, the university isn't denying him a chance to speak; they're just requiring that he obtain the same permit and pay the same fee as any other private entity wishing to use the campus for its own purposes.

  5. Bree S. 2012.11.10

    Don't be ridiculous Ed. Southern Baptists won't be saving Methodists from "The Fires of Hell." In fact replace the subject and the object of the previous statement with any sect of Christianity and you will see the statement still stands, even if you don't grant freedom from the abyss to the members of other religions. What is hilarious here is your arrogant assumption that the parents of these college students didn't raise their children to know their Father in Heaven, and that we now must count on Mark Gavin, self-appointed Savior of the Straying Student, to save all their souls from Satan's pit.

  6. Bree S. 2012.11.10

    Still seems a step too far to me Cory. Tired of the proliferation of permits for every activity in our country.

  7. larry kurtz 2012.11.10

    why make me want to land on yer chest, BS?

  8. Bill Fleming 2012.11.10

    In the "old" days, when it was time for some of us to "preach the gospel of peace and justice" on campus, in the grape fields, or at the Jim Crow high schools and universities, or wherever, there was no stopping us.

    This guy needs to decide how important his mission is and act accordingly. If that means a trip to the pokey, so be it. Protesters routinely end up in the slammer for a few hours. It's a badge of honor.

    If he really believes in what he's doing, he'll do it.

    Otherwise, like Ed, he's just posing for the camera.

    A bogus crusader.

  9. larry kurtz 2012.11.10

    "Fox news doesn't cal white supremacists 'terrorists', they call them viewers"

  10. Bree S. 2012.11.10

    I'm sure you have a plethora of statistics to back up that ridiculous statement Larry.

  11. larry kurtz 2012.11.10

    SDSMT used to enjoy a huge endowment from Homestake: whether that continues is of no consequence to this interested party. If the 'prophet' has any impact on forcing conciliation on the chemical toilet for crimes against Earth, I'll mail him a couple grand.

  12. larry kurtz 2012.11.10

    You reading this, Professor Adelstein?

  13. Bill Fleming 2012.11.10

    Agreed, Larry. There are good reasons to be holding demonstrations on Campuses right now. But somehow I'm thinking this guy doesn't quite have his finger on the pulse of it.

  14. Jerry 2012.11.10

    Ed, I will take my chances, as always. I agree with some of the others that say if he wants to take his chances, go for it, and get arrested. He will find many to preach to in the heartbreak hotel or they will just kick his butt.

  15. Tony Amert 2012.11.10

    The reason that things like this aren't allowed on campus is that it is still an authoritative environment. Older adults walking around campus are generally assumed to be associated with the school and are given some degree of deference. The school doesn't want students confused by someone not associated with the school walking around and talking to them.

    That is why they are asked to setup in a specific location on campus. So that the students know that they are not authority figures. A good example of this is credit card companies trying to entice kids into taking on debt.

    I know people can say things like, the kids are 18 years old and should know better to attempt to lessen the need for this policy. However, from my experience they are necessary. Kids who go to college keep a kid mentality longer.

  16. grudznick 2012.11.10

    Organized religion should be eliminated. I don't mean Mr. Ed and Mr. Howie and all those fellows because that's disorganized religion. I mean the organized cults of larger masses.

    The first step should be to institute a new, incredibly massive tax burden placed directly on cult churches of the weak minded. Obama can do this with his mandates.

  17. Barry Smith 2012.11.11

    Where are the Hare Krishnas when we need them? They always had such a moderating effect on the the idea of unfettered proselytization.

  18. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.11

    Bree, I don't like permit-mania myself. But don't universities need some control over what takes place on their grounds? Don't they have an obligation to protect students from folks who would take advantage of the captive audience and the authority perception that Tony mentions?

  19. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.11

    Indeed, Barry, we need some non-Christians to come mix it up and challenge the Center for Religious Expression to spend its money defending them as well.

  20. Brother Beaker 2012.11.11

    Corey,

    I think the issue raised is more complex. If I am reading between the lines correctly (since the school is not directly commenting given "pending litigation"), the school has two separate sets of rules, one for commercial speech and one for non-commercial speech. I am guessing that means that if you want to hold a Democratic rally, you can do so on the quad. If you want to recruit employees or sell magazine subscriptions, you have to sit inside the Surbeck Center and wait for people to come to you.

    Time, place and manner restrictions are generally permissible, but not all the restrictions placed on commercial speech can be imposed on non-commercial (political/religious) speech. And even organizations that solicit funds can be non-commercial. If SDSM&T does, in fact, have two sets of rules, they may be using the wrong one for this applicant.

  21. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.11.11

    I've been wondering about that, Brother! Mines's talk of commercial speech does seem out of place here, unless Gavin is selling some raffle tickets we haven't heard about. Mines seems on safer ground just referring to BORPM 6.13.1 and not opening the door for Gavin and his Tennessee agenda lawyer to haggle about an unfair "commercial" designation.

    Just to check: even for a Democratic rally in the Quad, I need to get permission from Mines administration, right?

    But here's a thought: what if Gavin did go down to the Quad and start shouting, "Jesus saves!" I assume the school can ask him to leave. I assume the school can even have him removed forcibly if he stands and keeps shouting. But can the school issue a fine? Can police ticket him for trespass? What's the legal penalty for speaking on campus without a permit?

  22. Roger Elgersma 2012.11.11

    The military recruiters come into the high school cafeteria to con our youth into a job of killing in unnecessary wars or the school loses funding. The preachers are not funding the school so they do not have the clout. I think the local school should decide who is appropriate for education and what would be appropriate in another venue. My parents sent me to a Christian school so they could have more control over who came and talked to us.

  23. Brother Beaker 2012.11.11

    In order:

    If you want to hold a (non-commercial) rally, I am sure that there are restrictions and you certainly need a permit. I am guessing that BORPM 6.13.1 is not a magic bullet because there are exceptions.

    If not, no one could come onto campus and present other than those actually representing the university. The exceptions, then, have to be content-neutral and uniformly applied. Again, think "time, place and manner."

    If you fail to get a permit, the school can ask you to leave. If you fail to leave after that you can be arrested for trespass, a misdemeanor. If the notice against trespass is communicated to the offender in person, it is a Class One misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in jail. If notice is given in another manner (posting, fencing, etc.), it is Class Two misdemeanor, punishable by 60 days jail.

    I am not sure whether violating the permit policy is, in and of itself, criminal. I would guess not and the offender would only be subject to the trespass procedure or for other offenses (e.g., disorderly conduct) committed at the time that he is violating the permit.

  24. Douglas Wiken 2012.11.11

    I suspect that if this man selling religion can con some campus group into having him as a speaker, they can get the space to have him.

    SDSM&T never has had any real imagination. Why not stake off a 20 square foot area for the preacher man someplace on the quadrangle where he isn't immediately adjacent to classes or sidewalks?

    To make any court case interesting, some atheist or agnostic should demand from the court a religious right to proselytize on the campus without paying for space.

  25. Joan 2012.11.11

    I don't have much faith in any of these people that think they have to preach in other than their respective churches or another setting where they have been invited. To me it smacks of cramming their religion down other people's throats. Back a long time ago, when I lived in Mitchell there was a pastor from one of the more radical churches in town that every day/night during Corn Palace Week, he would be standing in front of one of the downtown bars with a microphone, yelling Bible verses and preaching. Most of the people laughed at him.

  26. grudznick 2012.11.11

    How well will young Mr. Gant run the next election if he's not even on the ballot?

Comments are closed.