Deciding what’s symbolic

Take note, Catholics, rosaries are considered gang symbols now. And public school systems are cracking down.

In a kerfuffle earlier this month that briefly put Albany in the national spotlight, The Oregonian reported that Jaime Salazar, 14, and Marco Castro, 16, were suspended from South Albany High School for refusing to remove their crucifix necklaces on the grounds that they were rosaries and gang-related. Castro did not comment to the press beyond confirming the story, but Salazar spoke out, saying he is “not a gangster and does not dress like one.”

He said Principal Chris Equinoa approached him one day and told him to put away the necklace, that it was a rosary and therefore gang-related. He replied, “No, it’s not a rosary. It’s a necklace and it’s Catholic,” saying it was given to him from his mother and worn for sentimental reasons.

South Albany High officials have refused to comment, citing policy against talking to the press about suspensions. Jim Haggart, assistant to the superintendent for the Greater Albany Public School District, said, “There’s more to the story, but because the boys are minors, we can’t talk about it.” In a fantastic display of bullheadedness, he went on to say that the issue “is not a matter of religion,” but is about gang symbols.

Sure thing, Mr. Haggert. And this whole waterboarding fiasco isn’t about torture, it’s about national security.

The line is never that easy to draw. Whether Salazar’s necklace was gang-related or not, as he claims, is not for us to know up in Portland. What is for us to know is that an undeniably religious symbol is being banned from public schools in our beloved state, and to put it mildly, it’s not fucking cool. Even if Jaime Salazar were the leader of South Albany High’s biggest gang, removing his rosary would still be inappropriate.

Albany is not completely alone. In 1997, a Houston-area high school had a similar situation, resulting in an altercation that made it to a U.S. District Court judge, who ruled in favor of the rosary-bearers, saying there was “insufficient evidence of actual disruption” at the school in question. More recently, an assistant principal at a Fredericksburg, Va. high school asked a 17-year-old student to conceal a rosary underneath his shirt last December. The student and his mother said they would attempt legal action.

Commentators have alluded to a grey area in which this particular issue falls. School officials want to crack down on gangs, citing concern for safety, while students and parents want to protect their religious symbols, citing concern for freedom. Safety and freedom, those two old stalwarts, sparring again.

The problem here is in that word “symbol.” Whether attempting to eliminate the usage of gang-related objects smoothes down some wrinkles or not (and those who would ban rosaries have not produced evidence that it does), it certainly does nothing to combat the existence of gangs themselves because symbols are just that: symbols.

The effect of such an action on gang violence pales in comparison to solid preventative action, i.e. social outreach to prevent at-risk kids from getting involved with gangs in the first place, and to turn current gang members away from their current lifestyle. Last week, The Portland Tribune reported a recent spike in gang violence over the last three months, events concurrent with a recent depletion of anti-gang resources.

The Northeast Coalition of Neighborhoods employed nine gang outreach workers at one time. It now employs two. Also, the summer of 2007 marked the first time in 20 years that the Northeast-based Youth Employment Institute did not have any money to provide jobs for at-risk kids. Wonder if there’s a connection?

This is not to say that South Albany High School officials are not promoting this kind of real action too, only to say that removing students’ religious objects is oppressive, disrespectful and takes attention away from more solid solutions to the gang problem.

To take away a person’s religious artifacts is no small action; it’s a serious violation of Constitutional freedom, one that secular Oregonians don’t always seem to understand. A vague attempt at protecting the notion of “safety” through such censorial measures brings to mind the oft-quoted Benjamin Franklin phrase: “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Until Haggart and Equinoa can prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the act of removing rosaries is producing a substantially safer school, administrators should keep their mitts off students’ necks. And to this disgraceful action, Oregon should say no.