Student Wears ‘God is Dead’ Shirt For Debate Team Photo

[TalkingDog]

http://proudatheists.wordpress.com/2010/02/17/arlington-student-wears-god-is-dead-shirt-for-photo/

When a student yearbook staff member came to take a second photo of the debate club a few weeks ago, Surber’s friend Reed Summerlin asked for an explanation.

The yearbook staffer indicated she had been asked by the yearbook adviser not to tell Surber the reason for the retake, Summerlin said. “She said it was about Justin’s shirt.”

“Given that photos of students in clothing with Christian messages are allowed in yearbook, one has to wonder if they are taking too much power into their hands with the whole discretion thing.”

[LiberalFighter]

1. So it's okay to wear a shirt praising god but not to profess otherwise?

[Wickerman]

2. Um, this was for DEBATE class? n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. Sounds like a great way to start a debate, to me. nt

[Wickerman]

'xactly

[darkstar3]

5. Well, you have to admit,

it WOULD start a debate. :)

[TalkingDog]

9. He's on the debate team.

He specifically said in the article he wears the shirt to school knowing it might provoke debate.

He wore it for the debate team photo, I suppose, as a testament (pardon the pun) to his debat-y-ness.

[Wickerman]

10. again, exactly

the irony is a killer, huh?

[LuvNewcastle]

4. If his shirt had read 'God Is Love,'

nobody would've said a word about it.

[darkstar3]

7. Because

if they DID say a word about it, it would somehow turn into a huge religious discrimination suit. Nevermind the fact that this is basically the same thing, because no one on that side of the crazy debate about God in school can see that...

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. God is love.

Love is blind.

Stevie Wonder is blind.

God is Stevie Wonder.

[DeSwiss]

12. And God says....

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji2ma2mfyhU">"You Haven't Done Nothin!"

[Amaya]

13. yes!

:woohoo:

[enlightenment]

6. Love the comment from the spokesperson for the district -

"The yearbook adviser's personal beliefs didn't play a part in the decision to have the debate club photo retaken, and she and the yearbook staff can exercise their discretion to omit offensive and inappropriate content, Gilman said."

Right, then. Their personal beliefs played no part in the decision . . . but they can omit 'offensive and inappropriate content'.

I guess there MUST BE an OFFICIAL list of what is considered 'offensive and inappropriate' in that school district, since the decision wasn't based on personal belief.

Maybe I'll drop them a note and ask to see that list . . .

[Christa]

11. I feel like Dick Cheney ...

so?


:eyes:

Rather God is dead than I love Bush.




:rofl:

[Jim__]

14. For the sake of discussion.

“I feel I am a victim of censorship,” Surber said.

I think we all agree with Surber that he's been censored; and we'll all agree that's wrong. But, according to the article, Surber was featuring Nietzsche's take on religion. My question, if that's what Surber was trying to represent, was he doing it honestly, or was he quoting Nietzsche out of context, and is that not a form of censorship? From the article:

Once a week, Surber wears a black T-shirt featuring the 19th-century philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche's take on religion. In block letters, the shirt reads “GOD IS DEAD.”

...

“I feel I am a victim of censorship,” Surber said.

And, from Nietzsche in The Gay Science - paragraph 125:

The Madman. Have you ever heard of the madman who on a bright morning lighted a lantern and ran to the market-place calling out unceasingly: "I seek God! I seek God!" As there were many people standing about who did not believe in God, he caused a great deal of amusement. Why? is he lost? said one. Has he strayed away like a child? said another. Or does he keep himself hidden? Is he afraid of us? Has he taken a sea voyage? Has he emigrated? - the people cried out laughingly, all in a hubbub.

The insane man jumped into their midst and transfixed them with his glances. "Where is God gone?" he called out. "I mean to tell you! We have killed him, you and I! We are all his murderers! But how have we done it? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the whole horizon? What did we do when we loosened this earth from its sun? Whither does it now move? Whither do we move? Away from all suns? Do we not dash on unceasingly? Backwards, sideways, forwards, in all directions? Is there still an above and below? Do we not stray, as through infinite nothingness? Does not empty space breathe upon us? Has it not become colder? Does not night come on continually, darker and darker? Shall we not have to light lanterns in the morning? Do we not hear the noise of the grave-diggers who are burying God? Do we not smell the divine putrefaction? - for even Gods putrify! God is dead! God remains dead! And we have killed him!

How shall we console ourselves, the most murderous of all murderers? The holiest and the mightiest that the world has hitherto possessed, has bled to death under our knife - who will wipe the blood from us? With what water could we cleanse ourselves? What lustrums, what sacred games shall we have to devise? Is not the magnitude of this deed too great for us? Shall we not ourselves have to become Gods, merely to seem worthy of it? There never was a greater event - and on account of it, all who are born after us belong to a higher history than any history hitherto!" Here the madman was silent and looked again at his hearers; they also were silent and looked at him in surprise.

At last he threw his lantern on the ground, so that it broke in pieces and was extinguished. "I come too early," he then said. "I am not yet at the right time. This prodigious event is still on its way, and is traveling - it has not yet reached men's ears. Lightning and thunder need time, the light of the stars needs time, deeds need time, even after they are done, to be seen and heard. This deed is as yet further from them than the furthest star - and yet they have done it themselves!" It is further stated that the madman made his way into different churches on the same day, and there intoned his Requiem aeternam deo. When led out and called to account, he always gave the reply: "What are these churches now, if they are not the tombs and monuments of God?"

[ZombieHorde]

15. I believe the phrase "God is dead" shows up in more than one place in Nietzsche's writings.

In the book, Thus spoke Zarathustra*, did not Zarathustra go around proclaiming the good news, "God is dead," to those who would listen?

*Your copy may have a slightly different title.

[Jim__]

16. Yes, but I don't think his shirt is a good representation of that either.

When Zarathustra says God is dead, he says it to himself in order to spare the saint the knowledge. From wikipedia:

Earlier in the book (section 108), Nietzsche wrote "God is Dead; but given the way of men, there may still be caves for thousands of years in which his shadow will be shown. And we — we still have to vanquish his shadow, too." The protagonist in Thus Spoke Zarathustra also speaks the words, commenting to himself after visiting a hermit who, every day, sings songs and lives to glorify his god:

'And what is the saint doing in the forest?' asked Zarathustra. The saint answered: 'I make songs and sing them; and when I make songs, I laugh, cry, and hum: thus do I praise God. With singing, crying, laughing, and humming do I praise the god who is my god. But what do you bring us as a gift?' When Zarathustra had heard these words he bade the saint farewell and said: 'What could I have to give you? But let me go quickly lest I take something from you!' And thus they separated, the old one and the man, laughing as two boys laugh. But when Zarathustra was alone he spoke thus to his heart: 'Could it be possible? This old saint in the forest has not yet heard anything of this, that God is dead!'

—trans. Walter Kaufmann , Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Prologue, sect. 2.

What is more, Zarathustra later refers not only to the death of God, but states: 'Dead are all the Gods'. It is not just one morality that has died, but all of them, to be replaced by the life of the übermensch, the new man:

'DEAD ARE ALL THE GODS: NOW DO WE DESIRE THE OVERMAN TO LIVE.'

—trans. Thomas Common , Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Part I, Section XXII,3

I think this is even less in the spirit of the shirt.

[ZombieHorde]

17. I actually read the book and I am pretty sure Zarathustra told people "god is dead," but not

that person.

eta: I just grabbed my copy off of my shelf and I see in part 1-3 Zarathustra is preaching the overman and god is dead to a small town.

[Jim__]

18. In part 3, I can only find him saying, "God died."

I can't find my book, but I can find it online:

in part 3, I find:

I conjure you, my brethren, remain true to the earth, and believe
not those who speak unto you of superearthly hopes! Poisoners are
they, whether they know it or not.
Despisers of life are they, decaying ones and poisoned ones
themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so away with them!
Once blasphemy against God was the greatest blasphemy; but God died,
and therewith also those blasphemers. To blaspheme the earth is now
the dreadfulest sin, and to rate the heart of the unknowable higher
than the meaning of the earth!

In part 2, I find the part about the saint:

When Zarathustra had heard these words, he bowed to the saint and
said: "What should I have to give thee! Let me rather hurry hence lest
I take aught away from thee!"- And thus they parted from one
another, the old man and Zarathustra, laughing like schoolboys.
When Zarathustra was alone, however, he said to his heart: "Could it
be possible! This old saint in the forest hath not yet heard of it,
that God is dead!"

And then in part 25 and in the Fourth and Last part, where he puts the words in the mouth of the devil:

Ah where in the world have there been greater follies than with the
pitiful? And what in the world hath caused more suffering than the
follies of the pitiful?
Woe unto all loving ones who have not an elevation which is above
their pity!
Thus spake the devil unto me, once on a time: "Even God hath his
hell: it is his love for man."
And lately, did I hear him say these words: "God is dead: of his
pity for man hath God died."-
So be ye warned against pity: from thence there yet cometh unto
men a heavy cloud! Verily, I understand weather-signs!

I'm not sure if the difference is just a matter of translation. But if in your book, part 3 says God died, then I would consider the quote from Gay Science to be the more likely place to get the quote from.

[ZombieHorde]

19. So lets see if I have this straight...

The boy's tee shirt is censoring Nietzsche because the quote is in Gay Science, but Zarathustra withheld the quote from the theist and avoided debate, and you believe Zarathustra proclaimed the same message to a village in the story, but did not necessarily use the same exact translated words?

Is this a fair assessment of your argument?

[Jim__]

20. The T-shirt is a direct quote from Nietzsche.

The T-shirt is a direct quote from Nietzsche. There is no reason to accept something similar from Nietzsche when we have the exact quote. Since the article refers directly to Nietzsche, the clear implication is that the boy is trying to reference Nietzsche.

Zarathustra did not withhold the quote from the saint to avoid debate. He withheld the quote from the saint to spare the saint this knowledge. It would make no sense to loudly proclaim to the world a message that Zarathustra decides to spare believers. Deliberately spreading this information to people would be a direct refutation of the actions of Zarathustra with the saint.

So, no, your statement is essentially ignoring my argument. In any quote you take from Nietzsche, he is not just proclaiming, "God is dead" (through characters), but he is also stating that this statement comes with a high price. Even when he says, "God died," he is teaching people about the need for man to become God and to reinvent himself; and the people do not understand what he is saying and laugh at him. In short, wherever Nietzsche makes this statement, he is also proclaiming that it has serious implications. The T-shirt totally ignores these implications. That is the essence of what I am saying.

[ZombieHorde]

21. OK

In any quote you take from Nietzsche, he is not just proclaiming, "God is dead" (through characters), but he is also stating that this statement comes with a high price. Even when he says, "God died," he is teaching people about the need for man to become God and to reinvent himself; and the people do not understand what he is saying and laugh at him. In short, wherever Nietzsche makes this statement, he is also proclaiming that it has serious implications. The T-shirt totally ignores these implications.

Like the translation of the quote, the T-shirt is not standing alone. The student provides the context through debate.

It would make no sense to loudly proclaim to the world a message that Zarathustra decides to spare believers.

Firstly, in the story, Zarathustra did not spare "believers," he spared "believer." Zarathustra preached God's death in the village.

Secondly, the argument is mixing reality with the imaginary. Zarathustra only spared that one guy in the forest and then preached God's death in the village in the fictional story. Nietzsche is the real messenger of God's death. Who did Nietzsche spare? Nietzsche proclaimed the message louder than the student in the OP did.

[Jim__]

23. "The student provides the context through debate."

A couple of notes: first, in the case of the yearbook photo, he won't be able to provide context. Again, this is not to say that he shouldn't be allowed to wear it; but, rather, claiming that he is misrepresenting Nietzsche's quote. It should at least have an ellipsis to show this is out of context; and preferably, also a short reference (e.g. The Gay Science).

And second, I'm not sure that the student understands the context. What we have from the article: Once a week, Surber wears a black T-shirt featuring the 19th-century philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche's take on religion. In block letters, the shirt reads “GOD IS DEAD.” indicates that he doesn't (we can't be sure this is his take). This statement had nothing to do with Nietzsche's take on religion; it had to do with Nietzsche's take on late 19th century European culture and its potential for nihilism. For instance, in part 3 when Zarathustra mentions that "God died," he is telling his listeners to surpass man:

I teach you the Superman. Man is something that is to be
surpassed. What have ye done to surpass man?

All beings hitherto have created something beyond themselves: and ye
want to be the ebb of that great tide, and would rather go back to the
beast than surpass man?

What is the ape to man? A laughing-stock, a thing of shame. And just
the same shall man be to the Superman: a laughing-stock, a thing of
shame.
...
Despisers of life are they, decaying ones and poisoned ones
themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so away with them!

Once blasphemy against God was the greatest blasphemy; but God died,
and therewith also those blasphemers. To blaspheme the earth is now
the dreadfulest sin, and to rate the heart of the unknowable higher
than the meaning of the earth!

... Nietzsche is the real messenger of God's death. Who did Nietzsche spare? Nietzsche proclaimed the message louder than the student in the OP did.

Whenever Nietzsche talked about God's death, he was talking about the cultural implications (e.g. from The Gay Science):

How shall we console ourselves, the most murderous of all murderers? The holiest and the mightiest that the world has hitherto possessed, has bled to death under our knife - who will wipe the blood from us? With what water could we cleanse ourselves? What lustrums, what sacred games shall we have to devise? Is not the magnitude of this deed too great for us? Shall we not ourselves have to become Gods, merely to seem worthy of it? ...

For Nietzsche, the death of God is a cultural event, not a metaphysical one. People have to react to it, they have to do something to make up for the death of God; specifically, they have to become God.

[ZombieHorde]

25. "in the case of the yearbook photo, he won't be able to provide context"

Yes, but this is not the function of a year book. The function of a yearbook, as I understand it*, is to remember one's class mates. If the student often wore his "God is Dead" shirt, then this shirt is probably a good choice for the book.

And second, I'm not sure that the student understands the context.

You may be right about the student misunderstanding Nietzsche. Philosophy is not as clear cut as some other subjects, such as math or anatomy. Although the student may completely misunderstand Nietzsche, honest misunderstanding is not the same as censorship.

*Obviously police and predators have a different use for yearbooks.

[Jim__]

26. I agree they should have run the photo.

There is a hint that other students on the debate team may have objected. That may be a school administrator engaged in CYA, or the administrator may have been keeping complaining students anonymous. It does sound like the school was definitely within its rights to censor the photo. From the complete newswire article:

"I support Justin and his opinions, but this is a touchy case," Summerlin said. "The loopholes will allow the school to say the T-shirt can't be in the yearbook."

The school district's lawyer advised school administrators that a student's First Amendment rights aren't violated if the yearbook staff decides not to run a photograph of that student, said district spokeswoman Misti Gilman.

The yearbook adviser's personal beliefs didn't play a part in the decision to have the debate club photo retaken, and she and the yearbook staff can exercise their discretion to omit offensive and inappropriate content, Gilman said.

Arlington's student handbook says that student publications sponsored by the school are not considered the private speech of students but are public activities of the school district, Gilman said.

...

Some of the other students in the original debate club photo may not have wanted to be associated with Surber's T-shirt, and they may have expressed concern about being in the same photo with Surber, Principal Kurt Criscione said.

I guess the bigger question is, should the schools have the right to censor these publications? I don't know all the implications of that, either way.

[ZombieHorde]

27. Perhaps the student should get a new shirt which says...

"God seems dead to me, but necessarily to those next to me."

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. I was under the impression that what Nietzsche meant...

was that God was no longer considered a credible source for wisdom, and thus not a credible argument or explanation for anything in the field of philosophy.

That can be easily extended to the study of rhetorical debate. The claim "because God says so" is dead.

[Jim__]

24. I agree that he meant god is no longer a credible argument or explanation for anything.

I believe his concern was that without God, the old values, the old explanations collapsed, and this would lead to nihilism. Nietzsche is often called a nihilist, but, I believe that he was actually fighting against the nihilistic consequences of The Enlightenment and its implicit loss of God. The loss of all explanation was extremely dangerous for society (Dostoevsky (sp) had the same fear). Since God had been the explanation, Nietzsche calls on man - some men - to become Gods themselves and thus restore some explanation and overcome the nihilistic tendency.

I also believe all this is lost in the T-shirt proclamation - GOD IS DEAD. I don't believe that's his true message. His message is - AND WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS.