Feather

Well, apparently that's not all there is to it. The teacher isn't actually forcing the kids to believe what they say, and she isn't enacting a law, so she's not really "establishing" a religion.

GaryP

These are 5 (!) year olds! The teacher is not "actually forcing them to believe what they say". How is this good for either separation OR Religion? Or does it get the ready for church so that they can continue to say what the don't really believe if they would take the time to actually think about it?

This is one of the most clear-cut cases of illegality in schools that I have evfer heard of. And as Pensee said, It isn't all that unusual.

Feather

I didn't realize there was a Lancaster in OH. My parents live in Lancaster, CA.

Anyway, I'm trying to apply fromtheright's argument that Judge Moore's posting of the Ten Commandments on Government Courthouse grounds isn't "establishment" to this case. The teacher hasn't passed a law. She's not acting a law. She hasn't appointed any holy men. She hasn't coerced the children into believing (merely reciting words--two totally different things).

Seems to me that unless she enacts or acts on a statute to coerce belief in a religion and/or support of an establishment of religion she's not violating separation as it is strictly written in the First Amendment.

Daggah

Ever heard of the 14th amendment? It extends the 1st to all government-owned agencies.

Including schools.

AWAKENOW

This type of activity is hardly surprising, especially given human nature. I am sure the people leading the prayer probably don't mean any harm - they are probably just being ritualistic. However, history should serve as a guide (not to mention the constitution). Children are very malleable and see teachers as infallible icons, for they can do no wrong. Just wait until they grow up.

beejay

I think Jayjay has the right idea. Tell the teacher ahead of time that you won't be doing anything illegal and you won't ask her to do it for you, since you want to run the class like you intend to teach a class when you are on your own. (And tell your college professor the same?)

Don't tell the kids their teacher is wrong. Don't try to explain the First Amendment to them and how it applies to the school because of the Fourteenth Amendment. If the kids ask why the change, tell them you do some things differently than Mrs. X.

You're going to be taping the day for your evaluation, but I don't think you need to go out of your way to tape this to prove this is going on. If there is ever a court case about this, the teachers aren't going to deny they did it...they are going to protest that it shouldn't be illegal.

You don't need to make this an atheist vs. Christian argument. Teacher-led prayer in school is clearly illegal. There is no question about this.

ybnormal

To very young impressionable children, suggesting a moment of silence, or anything even remotely close to prayer, is conditioning if not coercion... and in an 80+% xian environment, it is xian conditioning.

Someone please tell me why this is so much more different than the issue of sexual coercion and/or "bad touching", where I am told that a minor until 18, is totally incapable of knowing what is going on, much less capable of consenting to it?

Is not the only difference here, that one is a violation in the pants and the other a violation in the mind?

Jayjay

Even though this might be technically true, I don't think it's significant compared to the conditioning they go through at home. Comparing a prayer to sexual abuse is way off the mark at least... I used to go through teacher-led prayer through kindergarten and elementary school, and I don't feel scarred by it at all. Besides I recall doing stuff like mumbling obsceneties during prayer or crossing my fingers the wrong way just for spite. Kids aren't dumb.

The point about moment of silence is that maybe some kids will figure use the time thinking "hey, I don't really have to say the grace to eat, do I?". That kind of breaks the conditioning for them, when they realize that the food tastes exactly the same. Not to mention that it's a valuable lesson that some adults do things differently when it comes to religion. Those kids who do decide to say pray to their deity of choice will hopefully figure that you don't have to yell it out loud to make it count either.

The only problem I see with "moment of silence" is that it's maybe difficult to arrange with 5-year old kids. They might either think it's really a just a moment they have to be quiet for no reason and they'd prefer to pray to Jesus instead of doing nothing, or they might not grasp the concept of praying silently. Most of the kids are from christian families after all.

cjack

The funny thing is that the Constitution really isn't "strictly written" at all...especially the First Amendment! Otherwise there would be no need for a Supreme Court to interpret whether or not something is "Constitutional."

The issue as I see it in this case is that the teacher is imposing a more or less mandatory prayer on a captive audience in a taxpayer-funded building. The school is a state institution. The teacher is an employee of the state and (at the kindergarten level) a figure of considerable authority in the eyes of the children. She is using that authority to not only tell the children to pray, but to tell them to whom they must pray!

In a very real sense, the state (through the teacher, and with approval from the principal and superintendent) is telling these children that they must pray to the Christian God. How is this not a violation of the separation of church and state?

ybnormal

Jayjay
You either missed my point or I was not clear enough.

1) This IS kindergarten we're talking about here. ANYTHING, in any way connected to any nuance of prayer, is the conditioning of young children to the process of religion. Subtle or not, this is indoctrination into the process. The fact that this conditioning is less than they get at home, misses the entire point. There are children who get NONE of this conditioning at home. The state should not be in the "religion conditioning" business, period.

2) I did not compare "a prayer to sexual abuse".

I tried to make the point, that regarding most ANY OTHER issue, a child is considered totally incapable of knowing what is going on, much less capable of consenting to it.

You either understand that or you don't.

If you don't understand that, then I shall suggest that you are a victim of what I call the "perceived goodness" of this kind of religious indoctrination.

IOW, why should any 5 YO, be automatically considered capable of consenting to this religious training, by the state itself no less?

If you don't understand that, then I will suggest that the only reason you don't, is precisely this same conditioning, which you don't seem to think is all that big of a deal anyway.

Your final remark, that Most of the kids are from christian families after all., implies to me, that it's kinda OK for the state to help "Most" parents religiously condition their kids, since they are going to be Christians anyway.