BY: KELSEY WILLIAMSON
(Gainesville, Ga.) – To pray, or not to pray? That is the question America is asking when it comes to prayer in schools.
The U.S. Supreme Court banned prayer in public schools more than 50 years ago, but it may not have been the popular decision at the time. It may still not be the popular opinion as a new Gallup poll revealed that 61 percent of Americans favor the ability to pray in the classroom, and even more think public school rooms and facilities should be available for student religious groups to use.
A large number of responders even indicated that they are in favor of allowing students to say prayers at graduation ceremonies. But not on the football field?
The Columbus Dispatch reported that Licking Valley High School is being investigated by the Freedom From Religion Foundation because a player, a student, led his team in prayer – and coaches chose to pray too.
FFRF attorney Rebecca S. Markert claimed that “While students may wish to engage in prayer on their own, school staff, including coaches, cannot participate or encourage such religious activities.”
Students may practice or pray if they want to, but coaches cannot exercise their religion?
As a topic that has been widespread over the past six months, answers to the prayer question vary in different situations.
A volunteer football coach in Arizona was fired for letting his players continue to pray after being instructed to tell them to stop. A school system in Georgia was investigated by the American Humanist Association for letting students and players pray before games. A Tennessee school was instructed by the American Civil Liberties Union to stop prayer before games, even those that were student-led. Licking Valley High in Ohio was not only accused of violating policies about prayer before games but also encouraging a specific religion because the marching band’s shirts featured the word “salvation” as part of their 2014 field show, “Salvation is Created,” which Pavel Tchesnokov wrote in 1912.
However, in each of these situations, students continued to pray, wear religious symbols, and speak their minds. In Tennessee, the cheerleaders led the Lord’s Prayer in direct violation of the ACLU’s request. In Ohio, the superintendent stopped responding to the FFRF’s comments.
What’s next? Organizations telling students to stop wearing rosary beads or cross necklaces? Yarmulkes and hijabs?
Many of these objects, crosses, rosaries and Hebrew writing in particular, are current fashion trends. But according to many of these organizations’ arguments about participation equaling advocacy, wearing a shirt with a verse or a symbol on it, or a piece of jewelry featuring a religious icon should qualify as “endorsing” the religion.
The letter from the AHA to Chestatee High in Georgia stated that “This involvement in prayer as a ‘participant, an organizer, and a leader’ would unquestionably ‘lead a reasonable observer to conclude that he was endorsing religion.’”
But according to the Gallup poll, so is a majority of other people, or at least endorsing the right to practice freely.
Annie Laurie Gaylor is the co-president of the FFRF, which advocates the “protection of the constitutional principle of the separation of state and church,” according to the group’s website.
She stated to the Huffington Post “I think that luckily constitutional law is not voted on by the majority.”
However, if opinion has only changed slightly over half a decade, maybe the Supreme Court got it wrong 50 years ago. Maybe this freedom should return.
The Constitution does say freedom of religion, not freedom from religion, after all.
David Williamson says
FALSE: “The U.S. Supreme Court banned prayer in public schools more than 50 years ago.” Actually, it ruled that teachers could not lead students in prayer.
MISLEADING: “61 percent of Americans favor the ability to pray in the classroom, and even more think public school rooms and facilities should be available for student religious groups to use.” No one has told students they cannot pray in class. They cannot disrupt class with prayer, but they can pray in class. Religious student groups can meet under the same guidelines as any other non-curriculum-based group.
FALSE: “Licking Valley High School is being investigated by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.” FFRF doesn’t do any “investigating,” they file complaints on behalf of residents.
FALSE: “A volunteer football coach…was fired for letting his players continue to pray…” This isn’t even plausible. The reasons for the firing are unclear and it would be illegal for the coach (volunteer or not) to tell the students not to pray.
FALSE: “A school system in Georgia was investigated by the American Humanist Association.” AHA doesn’t “investigate,” as with FFRF, they file complaints on behalf of residents.
The misinformation and biased, subjective opinion goes on and on. Is this a blog or a newspaper?
David Williamson says
Which Article or Amendment “say(s) freedom of religion?
Kelsey Williamson says
David –
Your claims that the points made in this editorial are false lead me to believe that you did not notice the supplemental articles from other news sources included throughout the piece.
The first comment discusses the statistics surrounding prayer and religious affiliation in schools. The Gallup poll mentioned is also cited in this article, from the Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/02/pray-in-public-school_n_5917000.html), if you would like to look at the data for yourself.
Both the FFRF and the AHA have legal arms that can conduct investigations into the claims filed. The Appignani Humanist Legal Center is the group tasked with investigating the Georgia school.
As for the volunteer football coach being let go, the direct quote from KVOA Tuscon states, “Catalina Foothills High School volunteer freshmen football coach Gary Weiss said he was instructed to tell his players to stop praying before and after games or he would be let go. He refused. Now he says he’s out of a job.”
Thank you for taking the time to read the editorial! Have a great afternoon!
Brian Westley says
All of David’s comments were accurate. This article has several falsehoods and much of the rest is misleading.
And you didn’t even understand his second, short question: the constitution doesn’t literally say EITHER “freedom from religion” OR “freedom of religion”. It says:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”