Nanny State Nabobs Nix Taunting Sports Cheers

In late December, the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association urged state high school administrators to enforce "guidelines" pertaining to sports fans. WIAA Communications Director Todd Clark inveighed against unsporting behavior, particularly in student cheering sections.  To wit, the WIAA wanted to ban chants as: "Fundamentals"; "Air ball"; "You can't do that"; "We can't hear you."; "Overrated"; Scoreboard" and "Season's over".  There is some thought that even the patriotic "USA" chant may be verbotten.  Per the WIAA's guidelines, these cheers could lead to a suspension.

Much to the WIAA's chagrin, these guidelines went viral on social media and were subject to considerable derision and some pointed First Amendment protest.

ESPN Sports Analyst Jay Bilas took to Twitter to mock the well-intentioned Nanny State sportsmanship dictat with reductio ad absurdum zeal. Bilas suggested a replacement tersely cogent cheer for "Air Ball" with the thoroughly polite " "We note your attempt did not reach the rim, but only to alert the clock operator that a reset is unnecessary."

High School students in Ashwaubeon, Wisconsin chose to make a symbolic protest against the WIAA's assault on their free speech rights by putting duct tape over their mouths at a basketball game.

 None of these cheers are even vaguely bawdy, such as the cheer of frustration: "Nuts and bolts--we got screwed".  These nanny state rules (disingenuously veiled as "guidelines") seems to demand sucking the spirit from zombie-like seat warming fans as their teams effectively compete for their participation trophies.

Once the story acquired national attention, the WIAA tried to back down. WIAA Executive Director Dave Anderson tired to quell the media maelstrom by issuing a "Sincere Apology" email which insisted that there were no new directives, no new rules, no new mandates, and no new enforcement expectations. Parsing Anderson's email, the key is phrase is new. Reading between the lines, the chants were just examples of unsportsmanlike behavior that WIAA guidelines prohibit.

The WIAA mandate touched upon Bilas bailiwick for "Toughness: Developing True Strength On and Off the Court" (2014). Bilas did recognize that there are ways of unruly fanaticism that crosses the line without over-regulating kids. Bilas recalled while he was playing basketball at Duke in the 1980s, the University President wrote an open letter challenging fans to behave better and be creative without crass cheers. This prompted the Blue Devil student section to react to bad calls with the cheer: "We beg to differ". A more modern approach might be to remind students that they should not do something they would not want put on television lest it go on their permanent records.

This is more than a high school sports story. It  exemplifies the totalitarian instincts political correctness which demands conformity from feckless fans. The WIAA follow-up employs the non-apology apology, denying the directive is anything new. It also shows the micromanaging mien of the Nanny State which nudges people through rules masquerading as "guidelines".  Lastly, it imposes overbearing burdens on people without challenging them to find creative alternatives to encourage more civil cheering.

Duke Ditches Plan to Sound the Friday Call to Prayer Across Campus

Duke University announced that the Muslim Call to Prayer would be broadcast every Friday at 1PM. This was being done to promote religious pluralism for the 700 Muslim students on campus. Imam Adel Zeeb, the Muslim chaplain at Duke explained: "The adhan is the call to prayer that brings Muslims back to their purpose in life, which is to worship God and serves as a reminder to serve our brothers and sisters in humanity." 

 Off-campus, however, reaction to this news was swift and condemnatory.  The Reverend Franklin Graham took to social media to express disapproval of Duke's decision.  Although Muslim students had been meeting in the basement of the Chapel for years, Rev. Franklin felt that amplifying the adan was poisonous pluralism.  Franklin posited that: "You're taking that bell tower, and you're turning it into a Muslim minaret. I think it's a slap at the Christian faith."

The day after the Duke Call To Prayer idea was shared with the world, Duke University backtracked on the decision. Michael Schoenfeld, Duke's Vice President for Public Affairs and Government Relations, stated:

“Duke remains committed to fostering an inclusive, tolerant and welcoming campus for all of its students. However, it was clear that what was conceived as an effort to unify was not having the intended effect.”

It may not have just been Franklin Graham's moral suasion which won the battle for the bell tower. Franklin Graham's initial Facebook post suggested that alumni and donors ought to withhold support until the decision was reversed.

After University officials opted  against amplifying the adan, Rev. Graham posted his support for Duke's decision.

Omid Safi, the director of Duke's Islamic Studies program, disputed the notion that the Call to Prayer was an effort to supplant Christianity on campus.

"Every day from that same Duke chapel, church bells ring, and twice on Sunday. The cross is on the emblem of Duke University. The entire quad, and the entire campus of Duke University is laid out as a cross. And the Christian chapel is the very symbol of Duke University. So the kind of fanatical proclamation that Christianity is being erased from Duke’s campus is frankly a poor indication of the intelligence of that argument."

While it is true that Duke University was founded by Methodists and Quakers, the Blue Devil's campus has long been operating as a secular school.  It is facile reasoning that the church bell rings twice on Sunday at Duke Chapel as it ignores the symbolic importance of the adan.  Duke's Chapel is at the highest ridge on campus and one of the highest points in  Durham County.  Having the Collegiate Gothic Chapel broadcast the prayer Friday afternoon would be interpreted by radicalized religious as establishing the dominance of Islam over those academic ivory towers.

It is reminiscent of the controversy over the 2010 proposed "Cordoba House" at Park 51 near Ground Zero in lower Manhattan.  There was a great effort by Developer Sharif El-Gamal to plant a mosque in the area, even though there was not a large enough community to support it.  Three years after the mosque opened, El-Gamal announced that he aspired to build a three story museum dedicated to Islam near Ground Zero.  

What explains this obsession with establishing iconic Islamic edifices near prominent real estate?  As Robert Spencer speculated about the current Park 51 plans:

“The structure as you describe it would be as grotesque as a three-story museum dedicated to exploring the faith of Shintoism and emperor-worship, and its arts and culture, with a sanctuary for prayer services and community programs, at Pearl Harbor." 

We in the west seem like we are metaphobes who are incapable of appreciating the significance of symbolism or the political impact of Islam.  They fail to consider that Islam is a holistic system which incorporates law, governance as well as spirituality.  

Radicalized Islamists seek to impose sharia law through cultural jihad.  France is grappling with a suspicion the political correctness coupled with Islamic accommodations is creating an Islamicized France. While the majority of North American Muslims seem content to live in a secular society with a pluralistic polity, it is easy to understand why some are chary about allowing accommodations which can be seen as a primus entre pares situation.