You know, the atheist who are a very small minority in the population have been trying to impose their religion of atheism on the culture now for quite a while. You know, getting Bible, prayer out of schools. Christian symbols out of public places.In regards to the so-called, removal of the Bible from public schools, Mr. Ham might want to read up on the Edgerton Bible Case (1890). Sorry to say that it was not atheists responsible for the removal of sectarian instruction from schools, but a group of Catholic parents.
It started in 1886 when a group of Catholic parents protested the use of readings from the King James Bible to start the school day. You see in their eyes, the Douay–Rheims Bible was the only correct translation; the KJV was a perversion. When school officials ignored their request, the parents went to court, charging that daily Protestant readings contradicted Wisconsin's Constitution which prohibited sectarian instruction. After the Circuit Court rejected their argument in 1888, the parents appealed to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The 1890 ruling, that reading any version of the Bible in public schools constituted sectarian instruction and failed to separate church and state, became a precedent in later cases.
Which brings us to the issue of prayer, again an issue brought to the Court's attention not by atheists, but by families of the Jewish faith. In Engel v. Vitale (1962) the Court determined that it was unconstitutional for a school or public school employees to require students to recite prayers. Justice Black in writing his opinion,drew an interesting parallel, governmentally created prayer recitation is much like the English creation of the Book of Common Prayer. It was to avoid exactly this type of relationship between government and organized religion that many early colonists came to America.
It is a matter of history that this very practice of establishing governmentally composed prayers for religious services was one of the reasons which caused many of our early colonists to leave England and seek religious freedom in America. The Book of Common Prayer, which was created under governmental direction and which was approved by Acts of Parliament in 1548 and 1549, set out in minute detail the accepted form and content of prayer and other religious ceremonies to be used in the established, tax supported Church of England. The controversies over the Book and what should be its content repeatedly threatened to disrupt the peace of that country as the accepted forms of prayer in the established church changed with the views of the particular ruler that happened to be in control at the time.Let's see, then there is the Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) case; brought by non-atheist Edward Schempp, a Unitarian Universalist. Mr Schempp filed suit against the Abington School District to prohibit the enforcement of a Pennsylvania state law that required his children, to hear and sometimes read portions of the Bible as part of their public school education.
That same year, the most famous (or infamous depending on your POV) of SOCAS cases, Murray v. Curlett (1963). Yes, Madalyn was an atheist, but she was not the instigator for removal of prayer from schools as many believe (see above). The Court ruled that requiring students to participate in prayer and/or Bible reading was unconstitutional. The Murray case was consolidated with Schempp's on appeal to the Supreme Court.
Regardless of who initiated these court cases, Ham ignores two significant developments that occurred in the mid 1990s. The first is the Westside Community Board of Education v. Mergens (1990) case; the second is the 1995 Religious Expression in Public Schools guidelines.
Simply put, the Court ruled that schools must allow student groups to meet to pray and worship if other non-religious groups are also allowed to meet on school property. The important point from Justice O'Connor and why the Bible is allowed in schools:
There is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect. We think that secondary school students are mature enough and are likely to understand that a school does not endorse or support student speech that it merely permits on a nondiscriminatory basis,,,[a]lthough a school may not itself lead or direct a religious club, a school that permits a student-initiated and student-led religious club to meet after school, just as it permits any other student group to do, does not convey a message of state approval or endorsement of the particular religion.This decision permitted religious activities to take place in public schools. The Court believed that it was important that the activity be student-led and initiated in order to avoid excessive entanglement.
A second point of (willful) ignorance on the part of Ham, the 1995 guidelines entitled "Religious Expression in Public Schools." These guidelines, which are still in effect today, were sent to every school superintendent in the country with the purpose of ending confusion regarding religious expression in public schools. These guidelines, listed below, were updated in 1996 and again in 1998, and still hold true today.
- Student prayer and religious discussion. Students have the right to engage in individual and group prayer as well as religious discussion throughout the school day so long as it is not conducted in a disruptive manner or during school activities and/or instruction. Students may also participate in before or after school events with religious content, but school officials may not discourage nor encourage participation in such an event.
- Graduation prayer and baccalaureates. Schools may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation or organize baccalaureate ceremonies. Schools are permitted to open their facilities to private groups so long as all groups have equal access to those facilities under the same terms.
- Official neutrality regarding religious activity. School administrators and teachers, when serving those capacities, may not solicit or encourage religious activity. Likewise they also may not prohibit such activity.
- Teaching about religion. Public schools may not provide religious instruction, but they may teach ABOUT religion. Schools also are not allowed to observe holidays as religious events or promote such observance by students.
- Student assignments. Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, art, orally, or in the written form.
- Religious literature. Students may distribute religious literature to their classmates on the same terms as other groups are allowed to distribute non-school related literature.
- Student garb. Students may display religious messages on items of clothing to the same extent that they are permitted to display other comparable messages.
I was going to continue on and counter a few other statements Ham made, but I grow weary. What was supposed to be a simple posting concerning this video clip has turned into a major diatribe. But I will leave you with this thought to ponder: “What they’re really doing, the atheists, they’re really wanting to impose their anti-God religion on us, on the culture. And so we need to stand up against that.”
Good thing Ken Ham was there to stand up for God, the all powerful omniscient needs all the help he can get. Sorry to say Mr. Ham, you are wrong. It would behoove you to take the advice of Justice Black, "and leave that purely religious function to the people themselves and to those the people choose to look to for religious guidance."
__________
Our history as a nation reflects the history of the Puritan, the Quaker, the Baptist, the Catholic, the Jew and many others fleeing persecution to find religious freedom in America. The United States remains the most successful experiment in religious freedom that the world has ever known because the First Amendment uniquely balances freedom of private religious belief and expression with freedom from state-imposed religious expression.
Public schools can neither foster religion nor preclude it. Our public schools must treat religion with fairness and respect and vigorously protect religious expression as well as the freedom of conscience of all other students. In so doing our public schools reaffirm the First Amendment and enrich the lives of their students.
U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley, 1998
Elisabeth Hasselbeck Cheers on Creationist Attack Against Atheists (Video)
No comments:
Post a Comment