Prayer in School: One Hypocrisy of Our Democracy

Prayer in School: One Hypocrisy of our Democracy

This paper deals with the stance of our schools and government on prayer in school. In this paper I will show how our government is hypocritical in its dealings of the prayer in school issue and how some of us as citizens are hypocritical as well. I will discuss the freedom of religion rights and how its interpretation affects prayer in school. Also, I will address the popular phrase, "separation of church and state", that is often used to argue against prayer in school.

The First Amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". There are several ways to apply this to the issue of prayer in school. Arguments can be made for both groups of people who are for and against prayer in school. What does it all boil down to? Freedom of religion still applies, just do not organize or endorse it in our schools.

Prayer in public schools became an issue in 1960: Madalyn Murray O'Hair sued the Baltimore MD school system on behalf of her son William J Murray, because he was being forced to participate in prayer in schools. Ultimately, her actions and the actions of the American Atheist Organization resulted in the Supreme Court ruling of 1962. (Tragically, she disappeared in August of 1995. In January 2001, a full five and a half years after they were last seen, the bodies of the Murray-O'Hairs were finally found on a sprawling ranch near the little town of Camp Wood, Tex.)

The Supreme Court's previous last major school-prayer ruling was announced in 1992, and barred clergy-led prayers at public school graduation ceremonies. "The Constitution forbids the state to exact religious conformity from a student as the price of attending her own high school graduation," the court said then. Many viewed the ruling as a strong reaffirmation of the highest court's 1962 decision banning organized, officially sponsored prayers from public schools.

However, in 1993, the justices refused to review a federal appeals court ruling in a Texas case that allowed student-led prayers at graduation ceremonies. That appeals court ruling, which is binding law in Louisiana and Mississippi, conflicts with another federal appeals court's decision barring student-led graduation prayers in nine Western states.

In 1962, the Supreme Court ruled in Engel v. Vitale that a "Regents' prayer" that had been adopted by the New York State Board of Regents was unconstitutional. The board ruled that the Regents had authorized a religious gathering on public school property. (Volkomer, p.288) One of the hypocrisies in this ruling is that the very court that passed the ruling sits in a building with the Ten Commandments etched into stone on the walls. The same building has biblical pictures and a bible on the premises.

Our country was founded on the same principles we fight to keep out of our schools. It never ceases to amaze me how the American Civil Liberties Union fights for every person who complains that their rights are being infringed upon by a group of children praying in a classroom. Very seldom does the ACLU fight for those same children who desire to practice their right to prayer. It is understandable that school or other public establishments not endorse any specific type of religion or practice. However, the rights of these students to pray in school are just as important as the learning that takes place there. Students have no say in what classroom curriculum they receive, but it is forced upon them anyway. Who's rights are being infringed upon, the children who are forced to not openly pray in school or the handful of students who don't like the prayer? It is a tough subject to tackle but minority's rights should always be protected as well.

Several states have tried to get around this ruling by the Supreme Court but to no avail. In Alabama, a law that authorized silent time in school "for meditation or voluntary prayer" was found unconstitutional. (Volkomer p.288) Apparently, the Supreme Court ruled that this time was set up mainly to promote religious observance. Not only did the Supreme Court rule against the law, they told the state what they actually meant to do by establishing the law in the first place. Ridiculous rulings like this have only slanted our public school systems even more towards a state of disobedience and unruliness.

Petitions have been filed to have the words "Under God" taken out of the Pledge of Allegiance. The pledge has actually been taken out of our schools in most places altogether. Removing the words from the Pledge of Allegiance is as silly as taking "In God We Trust" off our money. I am sure that proposal is only months away. If we continue to remove all religion from anywhere but our churches and homes, we will send the message to our children that it is shameful to believe in whatever religion they believe in. School is a place of learning and sharing, at least it should be. With that learning comes tolerance and understanding. Our children should learn that being tolerant of other people's beliefs and religions is part of growing up and living in a civilized world. The parents that lobby for the removal of quiet time and silent prayer time in school have to evaluate their priorities in educating their children. While no religion should ever be forced upon anyone, the quiet practice of religions should not be oppressed either.

The current guidelines for prayer in school are designed to not be in favor of or against prayer in school. Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction, subject to the same rules designed to prevent material disruption of the educational program that are applied to other privately initiated expressive activities. Among other things, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other non-instructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities. While school authorities may impose rules of order on student activities, they may not discriminate against student prayer or religious speech in applying such rules and restrictions.

Students are allowed to organize prayer groups, religious clubs, and other such gatherings before school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other non-curricular student activities groups. Such