Prayer in SchoolsPrayer in Schools

William Allan Kritsonis, William Allan Kritsonis, PhDPhD

Prayer and the Public Prayer and the Public SchoolsSchools

Most people of faith understand Most people of faith understand that personal issues of prayer that personal issues of prayer when manipulated by government when manipulated by government can lead to dangerous can lead to dangerous consequences, including consequences, including exclusion, octracization and even exclusion, octracization and even violence. For this reason the faith violence. For this reason the faith groups represented in this work groups represented in this work diligently to make sure that diligently to make sure that individual conscience is respected individual conscience is respected by rejecting calls for laws to by rejecting calls for laws to mandate prayer in the public mandate prayer in the public schools.schools.

Recent Court Decisions about Recent Court Decisions about Prayer in SchoolsPrayer in Schools

• By the 1990s the courts began By the 1990s the courts began addressing prayer at school addressing prayer at school extracurricular extracurricular eventsevents with less with less clarity. While some courts clarity. While some courts allowed student prayers from the allowed student prayers from the podium at graduation exercises, a podium at graduation exercises, a federal federal appellate court in in HoustonHouston ruled in 1999 that the recent ruled in 1999 that the recent controversy has revolved around controversy has revolved around prayer at school athletics events. prayer at school athletics events. Guidance was provided by the Guidance was provided by the Supreme Court in Supreme Court in Santa Fe Independent School DistSanta Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe. v. Doe [2000] when it upheld a lower [2000] when it upheld a lower court ruling invalidating prayers court ruling invalidating prayers conducted over the public address conducted over the public address system prior to high school games system prior to high school games at state school facilities before a at state school facilities before a school-gathered audience.school-gathered audience.

Continued from Slide 2Continued from Slide 2• Those in favor of sponsored prayer Those in favor of sponsored prayer

in state schools publicly often say in state schools publicly often say that "prayer" is forbidden in state that "prayer" is forbidden in state schools. schools. [1][1] Prayer is not and never Prayer is not and never has been forbidden. Regarding the has been forbidden. Regarding the Free Exercise Clause of the First AFree Exercise Clause of the First Amendmentmendment, the courts have consistently ruled , the courts have consistently ruled that students' expressions of that students' expressions of religious views through prayer or religious views through prayer or otherwise cannot be abridged unless otherwise cannot be abridged unless they can be shown to cause they can be shown to cause substantial disruption in the school.substantial disruption in the school.

• Reinstatement of state-sponsored Reinstatement of state-sponsored prayer has been attempted in prayer has been attempted in different forms in a number of areas different forms in a number of areas of the U.S. Some introduced a of the U.S. Some introduced a "moment of silence" or "moment of "moment of silence" or "moment of reflection" when a reflection" when a studentstudent may, if may, if he or she wishes to, offer a silent he or she wishes to, offer a silent prayer.prayer.

ACLU on Constitutional ACLU on Constitutional Amendment on School Prayer Or Amendment on School Prayer Or

Moment of Silence (2002)Moment of Silence (2002)Some, like former Secretary of Some, like former Secretary of Education William Bennett blame Education William Bennett blame the 1962 decision, Engel v. Vitale, the 1962 decision, Engel v. Vitale, banning official prayer from public banning official prayer from public schools, for everything from low schools, for everything from low SAT scores to high teenage SAT scores to high teenage pregnancy rates. But many pregnancy rates. But many educators and other experts tell us educators and other experts tell us that these problems flow from the that these problems flow from the enormous and increasing gulf in enormous and increasing gulf in wealth and opportunity and wealth and opportunity and education, between the richest and education, between the richest and poorest people in our society. A one-poorest people in our society. A one-minute prayer or moment of silence minute prayer or moment of silence in school everyday will do nothing to in school everyday will do nothing to change that.change that.

Prayer at Graduation Prayer at Graduation CeremoniesCeremonies

Recently, some high schools haveRecently, some high schools havebanned prayer from graduationbanned prayer from graduationceremonies. In May 2006, theceremonies. In May 2006, theACLUACLU of Tennessee convinced of Tennessee convincedMunford High SchoolMunford High School 's principal to's principal toban official prayer atban official prayer atgraduation.graduation.[2][2] In response, In response,students pulled out cards with thestudents pulled out cards with theLord's PrayerLord's Prayer written on them and written on them andbegan to read. Also, some havebegan to read. Also, some haveconcluded that the school's ACLUconcluded that the school's ACLUclub faculty adviser has lost herclub faculty adviser has lost herjob over the incident.job over the incident.[3][3]

In Different Regions of the In Different Regions of the WorldWorld

United KingdomUnited Kingdom• In In England and WalesEngland and Wales, , the School Standards the School Standards

and Framework Act 1998and Framework Act 1998 states that all pupils states that all pupils in in state schoolsstate schools must take part in a daily act of must take part in a daily act of collective worship, unless their parents request collective worship, unless their parents request that they be excused from attending.that they be excused from attending.[1][1] The The majority of these acts of collective worship are majority of these acts of collective worship are required to be "wholly or mainly of a broadly required to be "wholly or mainly of a broadly ChristianChristian character", with two exceptions: character", with two exceptions:

• Religious schools, which should provide Religious schools, which should provide worship appropriate to the school's religion worship appropriate to the school's religion (although most religious schools in the UK are (although most religious schools in the UK are Christian.) Christian.)

• Schools where the Local Education Authority's Schools where the Local Education Authority's Standing Advisory Council on Religious Standing Advisory Council on Religious Education has determined that Christian Education has determined that Christian worship would not be appropriate for part or worship would not be appropriate for part or all of the school. all of the school.

• Despite there being a statutory requirement for Despite there being a statutory requirement for schools to hold a daily act of collective schools to hold a daily act of collective worship, many do not. OFSTED's 2002-03 worship, many do not. OFSTED's 2002-03 annual report [2], for example, states that 80% annual report [2], for example, states that 80% of secondary schools are failing to provide of secondary schools are failing to provide daily worship for all pupilsdaily worship for all pupils

The History of Prayer in The History of Prayer in SchoolsSchools

• School Sponsored or Employee- Led Prayer. School Sponsored or Employee- Led Prayer. More than40 years ago, the U.S. Supreme More than40 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two major school prayer Court handed down two major school prayer decisions. The first, decisions. The first, Engel v. Vitale(1962), Engel v. Vitale(1962), involved a denominationally neutral prayer involved a denominationally neutral prayer composed by the New York State Board of composed by the New York State Board of Regents: “Almighty God, we acknowledge Regents: “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our Country.” The second case, and our Country.” The second case, School School District of Abington v. Schempp (1963), District of Abington v. Schempp (1963), involved state laws requiring selection and involved state laws requiring selection and reading of passages from the Bible and reading of passages from the Bible and recitation of the Lord’s Prayer. The Court recitation of the Lord’s Prayer. The Court ruled against the state- endorsed prayers in ruled against the state- endorsed prayers in both cases. Since the state had in effect both cases. Since the state had in effect made a law respecting an establishment of made a law respecting an establishment of religion in these cases, the Court ruled that religion in these cases, the Court ruled that the Constitution was violated.the Constitution was violated.

Doe vs. Duncanville ISDDoe vs. Duncanville ISD• In 1995 the Fifth Circuit ruled in a long running In 1995 the Fifth Circuit ruled in a long running

case involving the Duncanville I.S.D. that school case involving the Duncanville I.S.D. that school districts and their employees may not lead, districts and their employees may not lead, encourage, promote, or participate in prayers with encourage, promote, or participate in prayers with or among students during curricular or or among students during curricular or extracurricular activities, including before, during, extracurricular activities, including before, during, or after- school related sporting events (Doe v. or after- school related sporting events (Doe v. Duncanville I.S.D., known as Duncanville II). The Duncanville I.S.D., known as Duncanville II). The appeals court rejected the contention that such a appeals court rejected the contention that such a restriction denies school employees a restriction denies school employees a constitutional right to join students in prayer constitutional right to join students in prayer activities. Participation by coaches and other activities. Participation by coaches and other school employees would “signal an school employees would “signal an unconstitutional endorsement of religion,” the unconstitutional endorsement of religion,” the court noted, since they are representatives of the court noted, since they are representatives of the school. However, employees are not required to school. However, employees are not required to leave the room when students pray on their own, leave the room when students pray on their own, or otherwise treat student religious beliefs with or otherwise treat student religious beliefs with disrespect. In short the law is clear that neither the disrespect. In short the law is clear that neither the public school nor its employees may sponsor public school nor its employees may sponsor prayer at school or at extracurricular activities and prayer at school or at extracurricular activities and athletic events.athletic events.

The Lee Case: Clear Creek ISDThe Lee Case: Clear Creek ISD• When it decided the When it decided the Lee caseLee case, the Supreme , the Supreme

Court returned a somewhat similar case to the Court returned a somewhat similar case to the Fifth Circuit. In that case the Fifth Circuit had Fifth Circuit. In that case the Fifth Circuit had upheld the Clear Creek I.S.D. school board’s upheld the Clear Creek I.S.D. school board’s resolution leaving the inclusion of invocation resolution leaving the inclusion of invocation and benediction at graduation exercises to the and benediction at graduation exercises to the discretion of the senior class. Under the discretion of the senior class. Under the resolution, if the senior class votes in the resolution, if the senior class votes in the affirmative, then an invocation and benediction affirmative, then an invocation and benediction can be given by a student volunteer. T He can be given by a student volunteer. T He message must be nonsectarian and message must be nonsectarian and nonproselytizing. The Fifth Circuit pointed out nonproselytizing. The Fifth Circuit pointed out that, unlike the disfavored that, unlike the disfavored Lee Lee practice, the practice, the Clear Creek prayer program did not implicate Clear Creek prayer program did not implicate school officials in prayer decision-making and school officials in prayer decision-making and did not have the same psychologically coercive did not have the same psychologically coercive effect on objecting students. The ruling was effect on objecting students. The ruling was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which refused to hear it in June of 1993, thus leaving refused to hear it in June of 1993, thus leaving the Fifth Circuit decision standing. the Fifth Circuit decision standing.

Overall ConclusionOverall Conclusion

• Both the federal courts and the Texas Both the federal courts and the Texas Education Code recognize that students Education Code recognize that students can engage in personal prayer at school can engage in personal prayer at school and at school-sponsored extracurricular and at school-sponsored extracurricular and athletic events separate and apart and athletic events separate and apart from school involvement. Infrom school involvement. In Doe v. Doe v. Duncanville I.S.D. I, Duncanville I.S.D. I, the trial court the trial court pointed out that “Students may pointed out that “Students may voluntarily pray together, provided such voluntarily pray together, provided such prayer is not done with school prayer is not done with school participation.” The judge added, participation.” The judge added, “Athletes may pray before or after the “Athletes may pray before or after the games, but again , the activity must not games, but again , the activity must not suggest that school officials are suggest that school officials are sponsoring or participating in the prayer sponsoring or participating in the prayer in any manner.” The Fifth Circuit in any manner.” The Fifth Circuit affirmed the decision. TEC 25.901 affirmed the decision. TEC 25.901 declares that a public school student has declares that a public school student has an “absolute right” to pray or meditate in an “absolute right” to pray or meditate in school in a nondisruptive manner. school in a nondisruptive manner.

CreditsCredits

““Prayer in Schools”Prayer in Schools”• Course ADMIN: 5023/ Prairie View A&M UniversityCourse ADMIN: 5023/ Prairie View A&M University

• Professor: Dr. PetterwayProfessor: Dr. Petterway

• By: Lelia JonesBy: Lelia Jones

SourcesSourceshttp://www.cleffpublishing.com/articles/jj122902.htmhttp://www.cleffpublishing.com/articles/jj122902.htm

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/church-state/http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/church-state/prayer.htmlprayer.html