The University of Georgia's mascot, "Uga," is a beloved symbol of the school's athletic teams. Uga is a white English Bulldog that has been serving as the official mascot since the 1950s. The Uga line of mascots has become a prominent part of the University's identity and has even been considered one of the most recognizable college mascots. The lineage of Uga mascots is carefully maintained, with each Uga being owned by the Seiler family of Savannah, Georgia. The current Uga is Uga XI, whose registered name is "Que." Each Uga is given a Roman numeral to signify its place in the line of mascots.
" Each Uga is given a Roman numeral to signify its place in the line of mascots. They are known for their distinctive red jersey with varsity lettering that proudly displays the Uga name. What sets Uga apart from other college mascots is the fanfare and ceremony that surrounds the mascot.
Religious Freedom Protects Wicca, Too
Herbert Dettmer asked for candles, salt and a small statue so he could continue to practice his beliefs while he was incarcerated in Virginia in the early 1980s. He was denied access to these items — considered prison contraband — even though similar items were allowed in other religious ceremonies performed by prison chaplains.
The Virginia Department of Corrections did not recognize Dettmer’s beliefs as a legitimate religion. Dettmer, a member of the Church of Wicca, sued and won. In Dettmer v. Landon (1985), the District Court of Virginia formally recognized the Church of Wicca as protected by the First Amendment. The court reasoned that because Wiccan beliefs and rituals are “spiritual” and display “similarity to other more widely recognized religions,” the Church should be considered a “real” religion.
Dettmer and people who are a part of religious communities that are less visible should be protected by the First Amendment, but that doesn’t always happen because of ongoing tensions in how our courts define religion. Only by upholding protection of the most vulnerable religious minorities does the First Amendment protect religious freedom for all.
What is Wicca?
Wicca is a modern religion rooted in pre-Christian paganism in which followers practice witchcraft through rituals honoring the divine and natural world. Dating back to the Roman Empire, the term pagan historically referred to any “religious other” — primarily non-Christians — but today the word is used to characterize a wide array of religious traditions, most of which center around a reverence for nature.
Wicca is a largely decentralized religion, meaning there is no central authority dictating its rules. However, some communities adopt a more formal structure, such as the Church of Wicca, founded in 1958, of which Dettmer was a member. While all religious traditions are internally diverse, the varieties of practices within Wicca are particularly broad. For instance, some Wiccans worship both a feminine and masculine deity while others believe in one or none. Rituals within the Wiccan tradition differ widely but often center around the natural world, such as the 8 Sabbats, festivals marking the passing of the seasons.
Although Wiccans make up a small minority of the population, long-held misconceptions equating Wicca with devil worship have led to prejudice toward adherents. In August 2022, evangelical Christian protestors at WitchsFest USA, an annual pagan festival, disrupted the gathering, forcing some events to be canceled. Festival attendees said that harassing communities for their religious beliefs defies the spirit of the First Amendment.
Do courts protect religious traditions like Wicca?
When our courts interpret and apply the First Amendment’s protection of religious exercise, they sometimes protect Wiccans like Dettmer, but not always.
One reason: Our courts have never agreed upon a single definition of religion. Previous attempts to define religion were based on checkboxes that worked for the Christian majority, such as a belief in a single God, one central written text, a clear hierarchy of authority, etc. As a result, Christian (especially Protestant) traditions are structurally favored in religious freedom law.
But this cookie cutter definition does not work for non-Christian, decentralized traditions. The less a religious minority resembles the majority — in belief, hierarchy, rituals, holidays, etc. — the less likely it is to be considered a legitimate religion. Traditions that differ from those of the majority are more likely to be labeled as personal ideology or philosophy, making it more challenging for followers to access their First Amendment rights. Wiccans, whose practice doesn’t include the structures, central text or uniform code of beliefs that Christian traditions do, sometimes struggle to protect their First Amendment rights. Had Dettmer been an independent practitioner of Wicca, instead of a formal member of the Church of Wicca, the court may not have sided in his favor.
What happens when we (re)define religion?
Over the past few decades, our court system has expanded its definition of religion, slowly moving away from applying explicitly Christian standards. However, as the Christian majority shrinks and alternative religious communities increase in popularity, the questions remain: How are we still inadvertently limiting religious freedom when our standard of legitimate religion hinges on similarity to the religious majority? On the other hand, what unintended consequences might befall us if the court adopts a more expansive definition of religion? If we extend our definition of religion, do we open the door for communities such as the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster or followers of the Star Wars-inspired Jedi Order to make First Amendment free exercise claims? How should the courts balance what religious studies scholar and lawyer Winnifred Fallers Sullivan deems the “impossibility of religious freedom”?
While the law evolves, one thing is certain: Simply because you find a religious tradition unfamiliar does not change its First Amendment protections. Whether you are Christian, Jewish, atheist or Wiccan, at some point in time your tradition was likely deemed illogical, new or threatening. When we protect the free exercise of our most vulnerable religious minorities, we protect religious freedom for all.
Hannah Santos is the religious freedom program coordinator at the Freedom Forum.
What happens when we (re)define religion?
Uga is not just a costume or a person in a suit. The Seiler family takes great care of each Uga, ensuring their well-being and making appearances at various events and games. Uga is present at all home football games, sitting in a custom-built air-conditioned doghouse on the sideline. The presence of Uga at games adds to the excitement and tradition of University of Georgia athletics. Fans love to see the dog on the sidelines, and it has become a symbol of good luck for the team. Uga's presence at the games serves as a reminder of the rich history and tradition of the University of Georgia. Overall, Uga serves as more than just a mascot for the University of Georgia. It is a beloved and iconic figure that represents the spirit and pride of the school and its athletic teams. The Uga line of mascots is a testament to the deep-rooted tradition and loyalty of the Georgia Bulldog community..
Reviews for "Uga Mascot: The Iconic Bulldog Seen on the Sidelines of Football Games"
1. John - 1 star
As an avid sports fan, I have seen my fair share of mascots, but the Bom uga mascot was by far the most disappointing. It lacked creativity and originality. The design was tacky and outdated, which made it hard to get excited about the game. Overall, I found the mascot to be unappealing and a poor representation of the team.
2. Sarah - 2 stars
I attended a game where the Bom uga mascot was present, and I was far from impressed. The costume looked cheaply made, and the person inside lacked any enthusiasm or energy. It seemed like the mascot was just going through the motions without any real purpose. I think the team could definitely benefit from investing in a new mascot that is more engaging and entertaining.
3. Mike - 1 star
The Bom uga mascot left a lot to be desired. It was difficult to even recognize what animal it was supposed to represent. The design was confusing and unimpressive. Additionally, the mascot didn't interact well with the crowd or add any excitement to the game. I would strongly suggest the team rethinks their choice of mascot and considers something more engaging and visually appealing.
4. Emily - 2 stars
I have to admit, the Bom uga mascot was a letdown. The costume was outdated and worn out. It didn't seem to fit the image of a professional sports team. Furthermore, the mascot's movements were awkward and clumsy. It was not entertaining to watch and failed to bring any level of excitement to the game. I believe the team needs to invest in a new mascot design that is more visually appealing and entertaining for the fans.