Official Prayer in School: ACLU Opposes, Liberty Counsel Defends
It's been several decades now since the Supreme Court held that official state prayers during the public school day were unconstitutional, but many Christians continue to deny the validity of both the ruling and the reasoning behind it. They sincerely believe that the absence of their religion in schools is an attempt to destroy their religion — as if their religion could only survive with active state support.
A couple of days ago I wrote about the case of school prayer in Missouri, but it's interesting to look at the diametrically opposed positions of the activists who have become involved:
Two students and their mother have filed suit against the Doniphan School District in southeast Missouri. Filed on their behalf by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Eastern Missouri, the lawsuit claims that on two successive days in May 2005, school assemblies at Doniphan Elementary School began with teachers leading a prayer. The ACLU notes in a press release that the family bringing the suit is "not Christian," while both prayers were "Christian."
Source: Agape Press
So the ACLU is filing suit because of teacher-initiated and teacher-led Christian prayers. The ACLU is only involved because the parents of two students objected to their children being forced to sit through Christian prayers as part of getting a supposedly secular education. The Liberty Counsel, which is supposedly dedicated to religious liberty, takes the opposite side and doesn't appear to have any sympathy for the parents of non-Christian children in America's public schools:
Liberty Counsel, which is based in Orlando, Florida, has offered to represent the Doniphan School District free of charge in the case. Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, says it is unfortunate, but there is a difference between when the Constitution says and what today's courts are saying about school prayer. ... In this particular case and under the current interpretation, says the Liberty Counsel founder, such prayers likely would be ruled unconstitutional. Staver contends the ACLU is driving "anti-religious bigotry."
So Mat Staver admits that the courts would rule against the school, but he's willing to represent the school for free anyway...
"[T]hey're trying to use their legal threats as a bully-club to really silence people of faith and to rewrite our American history," he asserts.
Let me get this straight: the ACLU is using "threats" to "silence people of faith," and those "threats" are simply lawsuits which the Mat Staver admits the plaintiffs will win. In other words, the ACLU is using the "threat" of a successful lawsuit to get "people of faith" to stop breaking the law. And according to the Liberty Counsel, this is wrong.
On the other hand, Mat Staver and the Liberty Counsel don't think it's wrong for Christian teachers in public schools to use their power over other people's children to lead them in explicitly Christian prayers, even if not all the children are Christian or at least Christians who agree with the content of those prayers. It's not wrong for children in government schools to be subjected to the rituals of another religion — but whose religion?
Somehow I doubt that Mat Staver and the Liberty Counsel would be offering to represent the school for free if the teacher had tried to lead the students in Muslim, Hindu, Wiccan, or Satanic prayers. This indicates that far from being an organization dedicated to real religious liberty for everyone, they are actually an organization interested solely in promoting the interests and agenda of Christian Nationalism — an agenda which is ultimately contrary to the principles of religious liberty.
Religion in Public Schools:
Comments
TOO BAD THAT THIS COUNTRY WANTS NOTHING TO DO WITH ITS COMMON ROOTS OF FAITH. WE TIE GOD’S HANDS WHEN WE DISCONNTINUE ASKING FOR A GREATER POWER TO INTERVENE ON OUR OWN BEHALF. AMERICA THE FREE???