This was today’s editorial in the Athens Banner-Herald.
Ex-cheer coach fighting a fight that she picked Editorial
Is there a need to review the role of religion - particularly any Christian evangelizing by coaches - in University of Georgia athletics?
Probably, if just to determine whether any student-athletes feel coerced into accepting creeds they don’t necessarily believe.
But is the lawsuit filed by fired cheerleading coach Marilou Braswell, which suggests there is no standard at UGA for what constitutes acceptable expressions of faith by coaches, a proper vehicle for that review?
Certainly not.
A quick review: In November, Braswell was placed on 12-month probation by athletic association officials following an investigation into complaints by Jaclyn Steele, a Jewish cheerleader, about Christian overtones in the UGA cheerleading program. At that time, Braswell was told to remove all such overtones from the program.
In August of this year, Braswell was fired, after reading a prepared statement to the cheerleading squad telling them of Steele’s complaint, and noting that Steele would be returning to the squad for an unprecedented fourth year, without a tryout. Braswell also expressed her view the complaint was “totally without merit” and told the squad she had hired a lawyer to help make that point.
According to her letter of termination, Braswell was fired for the “discourteous and disruptive behavior” of reading the statement and for singling Steele out as the source of the complaint, in violation of the federal Family Educational and Privacy Rights Act.
But you wouldn’t know that from the Web site Braswell and her husband set up after she was fired.
Take a look at the site - www.helpmarilou.com - and note that in the first sentence on the home page, Braswell and her husband say her “fight vs. the University of Georgia” (a fight that now includes the lawsuit against the athletic association, UGA President Michael Adams, and the University System Board of Regents, seeking unspecified damages) is a result of “her being fired for her Christian beliefs, stance and lifestyle.” And, of course, the site provides information on how to contribute to the Braswell Defense Fund.
It seems Braswell was eager to pick the “fight.” Elsewhere on the Web site home page, Braswell and her husband opine thusly: “We believe that this may be a modern-day ‘Esther’ story, and that Marilou may have been born ‘for such a time as this.”’ (A quick Bible lesson: Esther, who was Jewish, was chosen queen of Persia in the 400s B.C. and was able to thwart a plot aimed at the destruction of the Jewish people. The phrase “for such a time as this” is a reference to a question asked of Esther, “And who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?”)
The Braswell Web site goes on to express the belief the ex-coach and her spouse have been specially chosen for the “fight.”
It reads, in part, “Although we would not have chosen for this to happen, we are honored to suffer for the sake of the Gospel. To God be the glory!”
Oh, puh-leez.
First off, Braswell wasn’t fired for “her Christian beliefs, stance and lifestyle.” She was fired because she apparently failed to learn a basic lesson of the workplace. It’s a lesson learned quickly by any 16-year-old who’s ever shoveled popcorn at the local multiplex: When the boss tells you to do something, you do it without complaint - if you want to keep putting gas in the Camaro.
If Braswell had simply complied, quietly, with the directive to keep Steele on the squad, she would still be a cheerleading coach.
Instead, she opted to read her statement, which was more a diatribe than a neutral recitation of circumstances.
It’s true that, late in the statement, Braswell said, “I will not tolerate any negative action, discussion or comments regarding Jackie.” But in the first sentences of the statement, she said she had “retained counsel to investigate the matter and prove my position” that Steele’s allegations were “totally without merit.”
Excuse us, but isn’t hiring an attorney about the most “negative action” one person can take against another?
Was it fair for Steele to get a fourth year on the squad? No. Do we think Steele was sincere in complaining she felt ostracized because of her faith? No.
But should Braswell be bucking for sainthood simply because she couldn’t keep quiet? Emphatically, no.
And finally, while we usually don’t quote Scripture - recognizing that battling with Bible verses is a fruitless exercise - we would suggest Braswell read I Corinthians 13:11. As soon as she decides to climb down from her cross.
Normally, a UGA cheer squad has six couples: six women (cheerleaders) and six men (their stunt partners). There were eight couples during Jaclyn Steele’s first year of cheering for UGA teams. The 6th-place woman tied in the tryout scores with the 7th-place woman. Coach Braswell, wanting to be fair, included the 7th-place woman and her stunt partner. But that stunt partner was tied with another man, so the coach included that other man, as well as his woman partner: Jaclyn Steele.
Jaclyn Steele was the 8th woman included on the UGA football cheer squad that year. Her stunt partner (not she herself) was the last to be included by reason of his own merit. Ms. Steele was the fortunate beneficiary of a chain of coincidences in the tryout scores.
Jaclyn was an alternate cheerleader that year, but she got to ride on the bus and bounce around the football stadium wherever the Dawgs played. At some point, she forgot how lucky she was to make the squad, and she began to imagine that she deserved it.
The next year’s tryouts proved otherwise. There were no freak coincidences in the tryout scores for Jaclyn’s second year. Her scores put her in the middle of the pack, and she was assigned to the men’s basketball cheer squad, where cheerleaders in the middle of the pack customarily go. Jaclyn probably became angry that she was not again placed in the football cheer squad. She approached the Anti-Defamation League, which apparently convinced Ms. Steele that a complaint against her coach for religious discrimination was the way to get back to the Big Time.
The least bit of investigation by UGAA at this point would have proved the falseness of Jaclyn Steele’s complaint. Coach Braswell had been Ms. Steele’s highest scorer, not her lowest, in the tryouts. If it had not been for the coach’s relatively high scores, Jaclyn would have done much worse. But either that least bit of investigation was never done, or else UGAA is run by people who know what the truth is, but prefer to assert lies, instead.
It is Coach Braswell, not Jaclyn Steele, who was the victim of harassment, intimidation, and retaliation. Ms. Steele improperly used the bias complaint process as a weapon against Coach Braswell to avenge herself for being FAIRLY demoted from the UGA football cheer squad to the basketball cheer squad.
Coach Braswell was called to a meeting with Damon Evans (UGA Athletic Director) and Ed Tolley (an Athens lawyer). At the meeting, Mr. Tolley falsely informed the coach that the Attorney General had demanded, over the phone, that she be punished for religious discrimination. Later, the Braswells made a phone call to the Attorney General’s office and learned that Mr. Tolley had been lying. The most likely motive for that lie was to intimidate Coach Braswell by making her believe that she could be headed for jail.
After the meeting, Mr. Evans told Coach Braswell that she was “on probation,” but he failed to identify any specific misconduct as the reason. Jaclyn Steele’s complaint might be presumed to be the reason, but if that is the case it means that the coach was presumed guilty before an inquiry into the facts pertaining to the complaint; i.e., the probation was itself a form of harassment against Coach Braswell.
Among other things, Mr. Evans told Coach Braswell that she was not to have the Bible studies, which had been held in the Braswell home. This was a violation of Coach Braswell’s freedom of religion and freedom of speech: both protected by the First Amendment.
Also, Coach Braswell was forbidden to score Jaclyn Steele thereafter at cheerleading tryouts. During Jaclyn’s third tryouts, the coach stood aside and let the average of the other judges’ scores substitute for her own score. As the result, Ms. Steele scored lower than she had ever scored before and was placed on the women’s basketball cheer squad.
At learning this, Jaclyn Steele and her parents began complaining that Coach Braswell was at fault for NOT scoring Jaclyn’s tryouts. When the coach reminded them that she was forbidden to do so because of Jaclyn’s religious discrimination complaint, Jaclyn went to the Athletic Department and filed another complaint for “cruelty.”
The ADL probably began making threatening noises about this time, hinting at a federal lawsuit against UGA for religious discrimination. And, probably to appease the ADL, UGAA administrative staff started violating UGA policies pertaining to cheerleading participation at the university.
Jaclyn Steele was awarded a fourth year of cheerleading, which was allowed to no one else - a violation of UGA policy.
Jaclyn Steele was given an easy ride to the most favored football cheer squad, as a primary, without having to try out - another violation of UGA policy - bumping another young woman, who had earned her place through difficult competition, into alternate status.
And that was only the beginning.
Jaclyn Steele demanded the right to choose her own stunt partner - a right no other cheerleader had.
Jaclyn Steele demanded the right to miss practices; e.g., so that she could enjoy a trip to Las Vegas. She also missed nearly three-quarters of summer practice while vacationing in California.
Any other cheerleader would be dismissed for such absences.
That year, UGA football cheerleaders were required to perform at basketball games. Ms. Steele decided that such work was beneath her dignity, and she demanded to be exempted from basketball duty.
At each of these demands, Coach Braswell requested guidance from Damon Evans. Each time, Mr. Evans told the coach to give Jaclyn what she wanted…but he would not put his directive into writing.
Ms. Steele has evidently proved that rules are rules, unless you’re a Jew: inconvenient rules do not apply to Jews.
It was necessary for the coach to explain Jaclyn Steele’s inclusion to her football cheer squad, lest adverse speculation run rampant, and the coach is not the sort of person to hedge with lies or evasions. Her short statement to her squad has been falsely described as “retaliation”: in fact, there is nothing retaliatory in it. If you’d bother to read that statement, you can see that once again Coach Braswell was trying to be gracious toward Jaclyn Steele, not spiteful as some might have you believe.
Each of UGA’s reasons for firing Coach Braswell is false. UGA said that the coach was discourteous and disruptive; she was neither. She was as generous toward Jaclyn Steele as she possibly could be, and her statement was meant to prevent disruption by insisting that the other cheerleaders accept Jaclyn as worthy (even if they knew otherwise).
As already explained, it was Jaclyn Steele who was engaged in retaliation - not Coach Braswell. The double-standard here is obvious: It’s OK for a young Jewess to try wrecking an innocent Christian’s reputation with vicious lies. But it is not acceptable for the accused Christian to discredit those lies by telling the truth.
UGA does not recognize that only because it finds such recognition to be politically inconvenient. If it bestowed such recognition, the ADL might sue them in a federal court. And the federal judge might be a Jew.
UGA accused Coach Braswell of disclosing information contained in Jaclyn Steele’s education records to unauthorized persons - her football cheerleaders - thereby violating the Family Educational and Right to Privacy Act (FERPA). In making that accusation, UGA created a false impression and used it as a false justification for firing the coach.
The basic idea is that you can’t copyright truth. Likewise, you can’t patent logic. The government can’t classify the laws of nature. Etcetera.
If a high school kid, speculating about the capabilities of US spy satellites, is smart enough to deduce some of the truth about US military assets, he’s free to share his opinions with anybody, as long as he has not confirmed his beliefs with officially protected classified information. You can’t copyright truth. You can’t classify the laws of nature.
In order for Marilou Braswell to have violated the FERPA rights of Jaclyn Steele, she would have had to have obtained her information from Steele’s education records. Coach Braswell has every right to share with others what she knows from non-protected sources or from her own experience, even if some of what she says is contained in a protected source. Since the coach had first-hand knowledge of what was going on, it wasn’t necessary for her to consult the education records.
If this principle were not followed, then ANY teacher’s saying ANYTHING about ANY student might get the teacher into trouble, if it happened that what the teacher said was also said in a protected document somewhere. A student’s right against disclosure must, therefore, be restricted to what someone learned by reading a protected document.
I’ve looked around the web and in the media, and I’ve seen the drum-beating against Marilou Braswell. It’s the same kind of thing that went on for several months following the murder of Rachel Corrie, in Gaza, by a Jewish soldier driving a bulldozer, on 16 March 2003. As it was then, so, I think, it is now: Jews in the media and out are working up a storm of hate against someone whom they’d backed into a corner with their lies.
In the narrow, this case involves a malicious accusation brought by a Jewess against a Christian. But I think that something larger may also be going on. Was Jaclyn Steele recruited by the ADL to be a “stalking horse” against Christians in general? Was the objective not so much to get Marilou Braswell fired as to establish a constraint upon the freedom of religion held by Christians? The answer, which I have no way to discover, depends on how much of this affair they planned in advance.
Interesting comment, and thank you for demonstrating why Marilou was fired. Braswell was a public employee, and thus was clearly bound by FERPA, which she violated by releasing Steele’s private information to the rest of the squad. Only Steele had the power to release the information about the the complaint and how she got on the squad to the other team members. If Braswell was honestly interested in setting the record straight for the team, then she would have discussed the matter with Steele and they together would have read a statement to the team. Instead, Braswell held a team meeting, which excluded Steele, and read to them only her views of the private issue.
If Marilou was the sincere Christian that she presents herself to be, she would have turned the other cheek. Instead, she retaliated, violating Steele’s privacy rights under FERPA. She still is unable to admit any wrong doing on her part.
Richt’s response to questions about Christianity in his program is to say that he wants to be complient and asks administrators to identify any problems. Braswell on the other had insists that she can do whatever she wants. It is clear to me that Marilou is one of those “True Believers” that thinks they can get away with anything because they are Christian, and cries “persecution” whenever they don’t get their way. Parents have a word for that, “spoiled.”
Given this comment, it seems clear to me that Marilou has been leaking Steele’s private information to defend herself. Not the moralest thing to do.
Update