"Al Smith" <caddyshack_al@my-deja.com> wrote:
:|Specifically, I was thinking of the tradition of praying in school that
:|didn't hit it's first problem until 1946.
Are you aware of the following facts?
In 1962 the Supreme Ccurt str-uck down government-sponsored programs
of prayer in public schools. Ruling in the Engel v. Vitale case, the high
court, by a 6-1 vote, declared unconstitutional a New York law that gave
school officials the option to mandate the daily recitation of a prayer
that had been composed by the state Board of Regents. The following
year, the court, ruling 8-1, struck down laws in Pennsylvania and Maryland
that compelled daily Bible reading and prayer in public schools (Abingion
Township School District v. Schempp and Murray v. Curletl).
Many Americans inaccurately believe these rulings sparked the
controversy over school prayer that still rages today. But in fact
squabbles over sectarian practices in public schools go bacle at least as
far as the mid-19th century. In the 1840s, for instance, conflict erupted
in several northeastern cities when Roman Catholics protested their
children being forced to recite the Protestant version of the Lord's Prayer
and read the King James Version of the Bible in public schools. In
Philadelphia, the strife got so bad that in 1844 it ignited a three-day
riot during which several people were killed.
This type of conflict resulted in legal action over prayer in schools
in several state courts, including:
Ohio, .1869: Catholic parents petitioned the Cincinnati Board of
Education, seeking to have Protestant religious practices removed irom
public schools. The board consented, but a group of Protestant parents
challenged the decision in court. A local court agreed, but on appeal the
Ohio Supreme Court upheld the board's action and said public schools could
not be required to hold daily religious exercises.
Wisconsin, 1890: The state Supreme Court struck down mandatory Bible
reading, prayer and hymn singing in public schools.
Nebraska, 1903: In a case similar to the Wisconsin challenge, the
state Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a variety of Protestant
practices in public schools, including daily Bible reading and mandatory
prayer.
Illinois, 1910: Catholic parents challenged Protestant devotionals in
public schools. The Illinois Supreme Court agreed that the practices were
unconstitutional and went on to say that policies allowing students to get
up and leave the roam if they objected subjected them to undue pressure.
Courts in South Dakota, Washington and Louisiana also struck down
religious practices in public schools during this time. However, in some
states the practices were upheld, notably Iowa (1884) and Kansas (1904).
According to researcher Boardman W. Kathan,the issue came up in 22 state
courts. The practices were struck down in eight and upheld in 14.
(Contrary to popular belief, most states did not have laws on the books
authorizing prayer in public schcols during this time. Kathan reports that
prior to 1900, only Massachusetts had passed a law mandating prayer and
Bible reading in public schools. Between 1910 and 1930: seventeen state
legislatures passed similar laws. thanks to pressure from the National
Reform Assoc:ation, a Religious Right-style Protestant group that sought to
have the United States officially declared a "Christian nation.")
Thus, controversy over prayer In public schools did not suddenly erupt
for the first time in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling in Engel It is
true that Engel represented the high court's first opportunity to address
the matter, but the issue had long been a point of controversy in lower
state courts.
What Did The Supreme Court Say?
The Supreme Court's rulings in Engel and Schempp extended the
prohibition against state-mandated religious exercises in public schools
nationwide. Therefore, it is important to understand exactly what the court
said in those rulings.
Despite the claims of Religious Right leaders, the Supreme Court did
not declare all prayer in public schools unconstitutional. The court
majority struck down only government-mandaied or required programs of
prayer and Bible reading. The distinction is important. Voluntary,
individual student prayer remains legal in public schools. Furthermore, the
justices did not order the removal of all references to religion In public
education. In fact, just the opposite is true. In the Schempp decision,
Justice Tom Clark went out of his way to point out that objective study
about religion or the Bible remains legal in public schools. Wrote Clark,
"it might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study
of comparative religion or the history of religion and its relationship to
the advancement of civilization. It may certainly be said that the Bible is
worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have
said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when
presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be
effected consistently with the First Amendment."
THE FOLLOWING REPEATS SOME OF THE ABOVE, BUT THERE IS ALSO SOME NEW
MATERIAL INCLUDED IN IT.
Was school prayer widespread before 1962?
The religious right has a stake in making people think that the Supreme
Court rulings of the 1960s destroyed a common and widely accepted practice
of school prayer. In fact, laws requiring school prayer and Bible reading
were not nearly as widespread as prayer advocates claim, were late-comers
to the public education, were frequently and successfully challenged in
court, and were on their way out when the Supreme Court handed
down it's rulings in Engle v. Vitale and Abington Township School District
v. Schempp.
To begin with, research suggests that mandatory prayer and Bible reading
were not historically required n the public schools. Robert Boston, for
example, summarizes the research of Boardman W. Katham, a United Church
of Christ Minister who has researched public education extensively, as
follows:
As public schools evolved in the post-Revolutionary War period, there
was a general attitude of indifference toward religion among the American
public. While the Bible was often used in schools as a reader and speller,
formal daily prayers and devotional readings were held sporadically, often
only when a local clergyman visited a school (Why the Religious Right is
Wrong About Separation of Church and State, p. 102).
Rather, the move to require prayer and Bible reading in the public schools
didn't gain steam until the Civil War era, and even then didn't generally
manifest itself in law until early 1900s:
(P)rior to 1900, only Massachusetts has a law on the books dealing
with prayer and Bible reading in public schools. Between 1910 and 1930,
seventeen states and the District of Columbia passed similar laws. The
movement to get these ordinances on the books was spearheaded by a powerful
lobby of conservative church groups, led by the National Reform
Association.
Critically, these practices were soon challenged in Court as violating the
freedom of religion provisions of various state Constitutions. In 1910, for
example, an Illinois Supreme Court struck down religious exercises in its
public schools. Wisconsin ruled such exercises unconstitutional in 1890 and
Nebraska did the same in 1903 (Boston, pp. 100-101). In total, the issue of
religious practices in public schools came up in 22 state courts before
1962, with those practices being struck down in eight cases and upheld in
14.
Nor was Bible reading all that widespread. According to Boston (p. 101),
Americans United for Separation of Church and State took a survey of Bible
reading in the public schools in 1960, only three years before the Supreme
Court's Bible reading decision (Abington Township School District v.
Schempp). According to the survey, only five states required Bible reading
in the public schools, while twenty five states allowed such practices.
Eleven states had declared the practice unconstitutional, and the remainder
had no relevant laws on the books.
The fact is that school prayer and Bible reading was only infrequently
required by law, and had been declared illegal by a number of states before
1962. The school prayer and Bible reading decisions of the Supreme Court
were neither unprecedented, nor out of step with a growing body of laws and
court cases that saw these practices as an infringement of our religious
liberty.
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads [Virginia] SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members, there are members from
all over the US and a couple from overseas as well]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
