Prayer In Schools
...at they wished. The public schools that the mass population still attended, did not want to keep God out of schools all together. Yet, there was a new unspoken rule that the school faculty was not to force-feed students any religious information. That left a lot of undecided rules over the subject. The next problem public schools ran into was that each school district interpreted things in their own way. Things went on that way for a while into the mid 1900s when they ran into more important problems such as desegregation. That was the main point of focus for many years; school boards were too busy fighting for equal opportunities to worry over a prayer taking place in the school, (and actually many welcomed the peaceful idea). The Supreme Court ruled against prayer, and religion being taught in the classroom of public schools in 1971. That idea was not widely disapproved of; it was a fairly popular decision due to the fact that it would so obviously prevent controversy. There was not much debate over the subject, after that decision was reached, for a long time. The only time that religion was a part of public schools after that point was a part of graduation ceremonies, and in sporting events, where it is tradition to pray before games for the players’ safety and courage throughout the event. New controversy arose more recently when the Supreme Court ruled on the case of Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, on June 19th, 2000, “with a 6-3 majority that officially sanctioned, student-led prayers before football games at public schools violate the constitutionally mandated separation of church and state.” (press release, debate.net) That brings us to today’s ongoing debate. The question arises, who is fighting this battle for both sides? The group that is the most responsible for forcing the schools to question their rules is the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). They have helped bring forth numerous other court cases over the last few years, such as Wallace v. Stone which questioned the court-house’s hanging of the Ten Commandments. The ACLU has also supported and encouraged students across the country to file several cases against schools that also post the Ten Commandments from walls in classrooms. The ACLU and it’s supporters who oppose religion in public school, say that they are upholding the First Amendment to the Constitution. It states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...” (The First Amendment) They obviously interpret the Amendment differently then The Interfaith Alliance, who support public school prayer. The Interfaith Alliance (TIA) was founded in 1994, and is a non-partisan clergy-led organization dedicated to promoting the healing role of religion in the life of the nation and challenging those who manipulate religion to promote a narrow, divisive agenda. (posted statement on interfaithalliance.org) This is why they are one of the ACLU’s biggest opposers. TIA has played the reverse role of the ACLU, they have been funding, and supporting court cases that challenge religious oppression. They claim to “respect human dignity in our increasingly diverse society.” (posted statement by Interfaithalliance.org) These controversies have forced many schools to re-evaluate previously overlooked occurrences such as independent groups holding bible studies on school grounds before classes start, or hanging up flyers advertising religious activities. Even personal objects hung up in students’ lockers and faculty classrooms became a piece for hot debate, and over-evaluation. Some feel that a person’s personal beliefs are perfectly fine to express in public as they choose, and religion is allowed to be practiced as long as it is kept to a small agreeable group. Examples like a team prayer in a huddle before a game, or personal belongings kept on one’s locker. Opposers however, disagree with those ideas. They feel that if one person was to hang up a cross inside their locker or other religious artifacts, then what’s to stop others from hanging up pictures of Satan, or Adolf Hitler, and other disturbing figures that the individual sees as an icon. That is the idea that the Supreme Court has adhered to, stating that what one individual is allowed to do, another has that same right to do themselves. If that was allowed to go on, then the hallways of big city schools would be a gallery of religious warfare, and the principles office would be flooded with constant complaints of offense taken. Most recently, there has been an up roar over the prayer that takes place at graduation ceremonies. In Peoria, Illinois, the valedictiorian of Wahington Community Hish School has filed a federal lawsuit, asking a federal judge to block school sanctioned prayers at the graduation ceremony, and the ACLU is in the midst of the controversy. The ACLU recently learned of Washington's practice of including prayers at the graduation ceremony from local citizens who objected to their inclusion. According to local citizens, parents and students who contacted the ACLU of Illinois, the prayers offered at the service are reviewed and approved by the school administration prior to the ceremony. Others reported to the ACLU that when some students objected to the inclusion of the prayer at the graduation ceremony, the matter was put to a vote of the Senior Executive Board, a group that voted to affirm the inclusion of the prayers in the ceremony. (ACLU press release) That is why the ACLU has decided to take this case as far as it will go, and it leaves other schools questioning their on-campus traditions. In events taking place off school grounds however, such as sporting events, should the same rules apply? That is the question that is most frequently debated on at the moment. Under the recent ruling by the Supreme Court, yes, those rules apply on the sports field as well. “Even in an optional team huddle before the game, in which the players lead their own prayer for safety and strength before a football game, the school penalizes the team for breaking the school rules. Even though no one was offended by it, and the prayer was not led by the coaching staff but the players instead,” Sarah Glazer reported on Newsweek online. Many opposers of the Supreme Court ruling feel that if students wish to lead their own prayer then no one should stop them. After all, it is a victim-less crime, if no one is offended. Those for the ruling though, say that it’s not that simple. Th...