Secular Elation

Also note that the 1st amendment doesn't just prohibit establishing a religion. It prohibits passing any law respecting an establishment of religion. School-sponsored prayer does respect an establishment of religion.

So? Hell, the government tolerating the existence of churches is 'respecting an establishment of religion!'

Secular Elation

Any government sponsership of religious activities (e.g., school prayer) is unconstitutional.

How so? All I see in the constitution is "congress shall make no law respecting and establishment of religion."

It doesn't matter whether students have the option of not participating. It is not the state's place to lead such activities. These are private matters and should remain such.

How do you derive this opinion from the constitution?

Subtle, possibly consequence-free coercion is
still coercion and violates the Establishment clause.

Please elaborate.

Secular Elation

(1) "School organized" implies "School endorsed."

There's a difference between implying something and actually meaning something.

It means "the school has reviewed and approved of this activity for its students." By implication, those not included are at best suspect. They are "not approved" (even if this does not mean the same thing as "unapproved")

How do these students who do not participate become "suspect?" They are simply not participating. How is the school "not approving" them?

(2) Nothing is free of coercion in a school setting.

Officially, it isn't.

The teachers are there to evaluate the students, and the students (most of them) recognize that their duty is to do that which will cause the teachers to give them a positive evaluation. In light of this, a student going along with a teacher's request can never be considered fully voluntary.

But the teacher isn't requesting to the student to participate in the prayer. If a student has an option, then it is voluntary.

[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: Secular Elation ]</p>

Secular Elation

I sense that you are struggling with a free speech issue. Perhaps you are viewing public schools as totally democratic institutions.

Of course it isn't totally democratic! Which seems to give credence to organized prayer in school.

Buffman

S.E.

Of course it isn't totally democratic! Which seems to give credence to organized prayer in school.

????

Captn Kidd

Actually, no. That's simply the absence of any action on religion.

Alonzo Fyfe

S.E.

I am wondering how you would design such an official prayer so that it did not communicate the message that "we prefer that students pray in the manner we prescribe here" AND students were 100% certain that they would not be judged negatively for nonparticipation.

To me, this seems impossible.

The fact that the adult SAYS that something is 100% voluntary is not sufficient. The child knows what the authority figure wants, and can well recognize that this may be different from what the authority figure says.

So, the only way that there can be no pressure (however subtle) for the student to show up and participate is if the authority figures really did not care if students showed up for the ritual or not.

And if they really did not care, they would not have the ritual. If they are going to the effort of organizing the ritual, then they care that people show up, and this means that there is pressure on the student to conform to the expectations of the authority figure.

[Addendum: Perhaps if the prayer occurred outside of regular school hours in a large auditorium where no attendance was taken and no record made of who was not there so a student can get lost in a sea of no-shows, then we can say that the event is totally voluntary. Anything short of this, I do not see how the claim of "totally voluntary" can be made. But, then, that is what is supposed to be happening at church, so the need for a similar ceremony at school is, well, questionable.]

[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: Alonzo Fyfe ]</p>

Captn Kidd

Secular Elation,

You're asking some good questions, many of which require long answers with many legal references.

Just two years ago, the Supreme Court reviewed a case (Santa Fe Independent School District)that covers most of these issues. The issue was whether the practice of allowing a student to lead a prayer prior to a football game was a violation of the establishment clause. The Supreme Court's finding: "

The District's policy permitting student-led, student-initiated prayer at football games violates the Establishment Clause.

The complete text of the decision is available here:
<a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&court=US&case=/us/000/99%2D62.html" target="_blank">FindLaw</a>

Secular Elation

I am wondering how you would design such an official prayer so that it did not communicate the message that "we prefer that students pray in the manner we prescribe here" AND students were 100% certain that they would not be judged negatively for nonparticipation.

I do not mean to propose such a system of school prayer. I'm only playing devil's advocate.

The fact that the adult SAYS that something is 100% voluntary is not sufficient. The child knows what the authority figure wants, and can well recognize that this may be different from what the authority figure says.

Why does the adult want anything? The adult is simply following what would be the school prayer session.

Much of your posts seems to be concerned with "pressure" on the student. That is, your concern for the social well being of the student.

That's life; he's going to be criticized and "pressured" by many things in life. Why be politically correct in being socially sensitive toward these students in particular?

Heck, because of the simple fact that a student is atheist is bad enough! Abstaining from prayer is simply an addition to this.

captainpabst

I taught in the public schools for 3 years. (Currently looking at going to grad school) It's my opinion that public education is completely stagnant and must evolve from its current state. (and that's an understatement)

About the 'pressure' on students to say the pledge, or acknowledge a creator (specifically the Christian God - I live in the bible belt after all) - I've witnessed this first hand. In fact, in the school I was in, It was so blatant that many school-wide assemblies were opened with prayer - BY A FACULTY MEMBER! This, of course, is illegal. But this school's administration prided itself on resisting secular society's attemps to 'take God out of our schools.' Anyway, the coercion was most definitely present. If a student were to be noticed not bowing their head or folding their hands or in some way acknowledging the prayer or the pledge, he or she would most definitely be looked at 'sideways,' stood a good chance of being picked on or ostracized, and would probably be branded some sort of rebel or 'unsaved' heathen. It's ridiculous. The student body should not be led in prayer, nor any student who takes issue with the idea subjected to it. I honestly feel the same way about the pledge (with or without 'under god'). Not reciting it like a sheep when everyone else does can cause people to think idiotic things - 'what, you don't love America?!'

This school even had a yearly lock-in called "The Happening." It took place at the school and was understood to be a "Christian" event. All were welcome, but certainly not required to attend. Nevertheless, the kids who didn't go without giving a good reason stood a chance of being 'judged' by their peers. No, I'm not making this up.

The problem is (at least in this town with its homogenously Christian inhabitants) that people are brought up as "Victims of Groupthink" (as per the book by Irving Janis). Most students don't feel as though they are being coerced into anything. After all, when they grow up believing God is good, Jesus loves you, and America is the promised land, why should they be offended by a group prayer, or take any sort of exception to the pledge? Just because many students (even Newdow's daughter, apparently) don't mind being "Herded Into Pools" (fIREHOSE song) doesn't make it ok to do so, at least in this context.

I'd like to quote a passage from Jiddu Krishnamurti's "Think On These Things":

Emphasis mine. Surely education should help bring about level-headed, free-minded young people, right? Well, groupthink doesn't lend itself to freedom.

Incidentally, I handed an excerpt (containing the quote) of Krishnamurti's out to a couple of my classes a couple of times. The responses were varied, ranging from one girl saying, "but this isn't Christian!" - (later Krishnamurti says that if you respond to the world's problems as a Christian (among other groups), you don't stand a good chance of solving the problem, heheh) - to another girl coming up after class asking for any other books I could refer her to. That one nominated me for Who's Who Among American High School Teachers. So go figure. I just wish students were taught to think for themselves.

[ August 21, 2002: Message edited by: captainpabst ]</p>