Should formal prayer in public schools be prohibited?
The debate concerning the legitimacy of formal prayer in public schools channels two raging currents of American constitutional law. The regulation of education and the protection of religious liberty.
Accordingly, the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States provides inter alia that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Thus religious liberty receives the dual protection of the establishment clause, that demands the separation of government and governmental functions from religious doctrine, and the free exercise clause, that precludes government interference with the exercise of religion.
YES, secular public schools
Side Score: 11
|
NO, God is great
Side Score: 8
|
|
|
|
2
points
Formal prayer in public schools epitomes the fine line between what constitutes the establishment of religion and prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Obviously, private schools have every right and privilege to engage in formal prayer; however, formal prayer depending on circumstances in public schools is a clear establishment of religion. Certain circumstances may arise when prohibiting the free exercise of religion is still unconstitutional in public schools because it is always difficult to argue and vindicate for prayer of government sponsored schools. Furthermore, concerning the U.S. Supreme Court in two monumental cases decided the provision of formal prayer in Engel v. Vitale 1962, which any kind of prayer, composed by public school districts, even nondenominational prayer, is unconstitutional government sponsorship of religion and Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971), which Established the three part test for determining if an action of government violates First Amendment's separation of church and state. [1] Side: YES, secular public schools
2
points
The Constitution also makes it clear Church and State are to remain separate. Since public schools are a function of the State, for that State institution to incorporate religion is Unconstitutional. Any child or group of children or even teachers should be allowed in their own time to pray if they like. But while teachers are "on the clock" so to speak, they should not be allowed to spend time organizing or participating in organized prayer. Further the children, while they are taking advantage of the school provided by taxpayers, should not be allowed to spend that time paid for by the public, organizing or participating in organized prayer. After school fine, before school fine, as long as no State time or treasure is being spent supporting that practice. But the idea that a school should be allowed to say "we're all meeting for prayer time at noon" is ridiculous. And frankly it is kind of dumb. It makes the non-prayers like myself like whichever silly religion even less, and every person participating could just as easily say their silly prayer to them self without all the hubbub. Side: YES, secular public schools
Opening Statement: One’s recital of the ‘Pledge of Allegiance’ is an act of veneration expressing allegiance to the flag and the republic of the US. This is de facto worship. Moreover, the pledge of allegiance is merely a patriotic prayer of the Patriot religion. (I’ll argue those premises if necessary, but only in response to intelligent inquiries.) Conclusion: [not argued] Prohibit all public prayers in school that venerate God,the State or anything that is worshipped. Side: YES, secular public schools
|
2
points
1
point
1
point
People should be allowed to pray if they choose to. To prohibit someone from praying aloud or overtly at school, where they spend most of their time, is to rebuke their freedom of speech and it teases their freedom of religion as well. How is it fair to tell people they can't practice their beliefs or routines because it makes others uncomfortable? Aren't we a country that embraces diversity and religious tolerance? Eliminating an individual's freedom of religion and freedom of speech--THAT is Unconstitutional. Side: NO, God is great
|