Editor,
Despite J.R. Giddens' comments regarding his religious association with Ritchie McKay, any promotion of religion McKay may have committed was welcomed and in the context of a personal conversation.
His mother's comment that McKay wants to get Giddens into church and it was mandatory to go to church can be disregarded, since McKay was stupefied by the comment and no one close to the team has made any similar claims. McKay brings up a good point when he said, "I just think because of all her son has been through, she was trying to convey a message that we were interested in her son - that we were trying to mentor him." There is no evidence that his Christianity has influenced his administration of the team.
Given the information in the article, the ACLU's concern is based entirely on an amiable, personal interaction between a coach and a player, which happened to be of a Christian nature. It would be understandable for the ACLU to grow wary if McKay had applied his faith directly to his coaching even if no complaints were filed, but the group has gone a step further, to the point of trying to regulate welcomed, personal interaction.
This amounts to a preemptive strike from the left, trying to quiet any positive talk of Christianity before it even comes close to violating the church and state separation. How ironic - I thought the ACLU supported free speech.
Kent Navalesi
UNM student
