There will be prayer in schools. It's not a difficult concept. What makes it difficult is the sometimes fanatical fervor some on the religious right go to in an attempt to foist their religious beliefs on those around them.
That's why when there is an article that shows at least some semblance of tolerance for the existence of other religions, it bears noting. In this case, it's a settlement following a Texas court ruling prohibiting the use of a student vote as to whether or not to have a prayer at the commencement (source: Americans United For Separation of Church and State). Judge Sam Sparks noted that the policy adopted by the school district - to hold student elections on whether or not to have a prayer at a commencement ceremony - has been ruled Unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, which has ruled that schools cannot impose prayers through student elections.
This is important, though there will be many on the religious right arguing that this is somehow preventing them from being Christian. That's not the case. The ruling does not even prevent students from praying at graduation. They can pray as much as they want. They just can't have a student-led prayer, or a Christian invocation at the beginning of the commencement. In other words, Christians are still as free to practice their religion as every other religious denomination in the district is.
Some on the religious right, though, won't see it that way. Many of them have come to equate religious liberty in America as somehow being hostile towards Christianity, under what I view as some form of insecurity. That is, they need the state to sponsor their religious beliefs, lest their beliefs be wrong, and they need this to be imposed on everyone, so that those "dang heathens" can see the rightness in being Christian.
Cross-posted with additional commentary by Photog at Rambling Photos of a Life Lived.
4 comments:
The settlement "also provides that [Judge] Sparks retains the power to enforce the school district’s promise not to conduct or lead further student elections on prayer at graduation ceremonies." Brilliant, in that it allows individuals much quicker redress if they believe the school district is acting in violation of the settlement agreement.
I still don't agree with your "insecurity" assessment of the religious right. I believe they are rather like petulant children who have had their way for far too long. Now, with the help of judiciary, they are being taught to "share" and "play nicely with others" - e.g., people of other faiths and (ir)religious persuasions - and they just don't like it.
Christians have been allowed to conduct corporate prayers when and where they chose. They were able to include Bible reading in the educational curriculum. And now, courtesy of Madeline Murray O'Hara's pioneering efforts (a personal anti-Christ for the religious right) and the continued apocalyptic fallout, their "right" to practice religion is being stifled. In fact, the judiciary is simply attempting to restore the balance, long abused by the religious right, required under the 1st Amendment: "Congress [nor state government] shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
I like reading the thoughts of both of you, Steve and Photog. And I chime in with 'hear hear!' I have little or no use for the religious right sentiments, and those crappy emails that threaten me if I don't love Jesus I will pass it on to everyone in my address book. I accepted Jesus personally many years ago, and I don't want Him pushed down my throat. Thank you very much.
I HATE those e-mails! Why do people feel the need to bully/threaten me to forward some e-mail about Jesus. I also despise the one that reads: "forward this to 10 people and God will bless you ... " As though God sits up in heaven saying to Himself, "Sally sent 10 emails so I am now OBLIGATED to bless her." What the heck!?! Do they really think they can put God in a little box like that?
I believe (and Scripture clearly supports) that God is sovereign and can do whatever He wants, regardless of whether we forward the e-mails or not.
I suspect for many of them it's a purely selfish endeavor. For the rest, it's a sort of positive sum view, where freedom means allowing them to espouse their religious views. Of course, they fail to adequately consider how that impacts everyone else who pays taxes, or children of different faiths who are forced to listen or alter their behavior somehow.
Post a Comment