Voluntary school prayer is not voluntary

Human Quest, May/Jun 2001 by Montgomery, John

The Quaker "moment of silence" is one of my earliest recollections of the opening of meetings of peace organizations which, Quaker or not, used it. The Society of Friends not only contributed leadership to the peace and pacifist movements, but also a sense of quiet awe and devotion as we faced our decisions and work.

In recent years the "moment of silence" became a political issue during the political and religious effort to get prayer in the public schools by a Constitutional amendment. The President of the United States and some in the field of religion have spoken of a moment of silence at the beginning of the school day as a "compromise", or way of respecting the Constitutional restrictions on government sponsorship of vocal prayer in the classroom.

It is a little-known fact that fully half of the states now authorize a moment of silence in their public schools. In 1985 the Supreme Court in an Alabama case, Wallace v. Ja ree, ruled a moment of silence unconstitutional when the state legislature authorized it as a way of getting prayer services in the schools. However, the Court did not oppose an earlier 1978 law still on the Alabama statute books which said, "a period of silence, not to exceed one minute in duration, shall be observed for meditation..."

Justice O'Connor noted in her concurring opinion that 25 states permit or require public school teachers to have students observe a moment of silence in their classrooms.

There are, however, objections to a moment of silence. A prominent Constitutional scholar, Walter Dellinger, wrote in the Yale Law Journal of July 1986: "Since a normal school day ordinarily includes any number of occasions during which an individual student acting on her own initiative can engage in a moment of silent prayer or reflection, the formal creation in public school classrooms of an organized teacher supervised moment of silence is an event that has no apparent purpose -- unless the government is attempting to convey a message."

This suggests that the Federal and state governments should stay out of the business of specifically providing a moment of silence as a compromise way of providing for prayer without appearing to provide for it. Another Constitutional law professor, Norman Redlich, called the adoption of a moment of silence "either by statute or school board resolution...an act of public hypocrisy. It is as if the public officials were winking to millions of school children and saying `We'll show you how to get around the Constitution.' It sends a message that a fundamental constitutional value-- separation of church and state--can be circumvented by a phony gesture."

A Baptist executive speaking from a religious perspective about a "moment of silence", told me, "I object to the government telling me or my children when to, pray, where to pray, and how long we must or must not pray."

The advocates of a school prayer amendment to the Constitution are not satisfied with individual silent prayer. They want to be sure that school children pray publicly and vocally. The columnist Carl T. Rowan illustrated this with the story of the father asking his son, "Did you say your payers before you got in bed?"

Son: "Yes."

Father: "I didn't hear you."

Son: "I wasn't praying to you."

Rowan went on to say that advocates of a school prayer amendment are saying: "We want you to pray publicly where we can see you and hear you."

Once "voluntary prayer" of the sort these prayer advocates favor is allowed, the students more articulate in their or their parents' religious convictions will be praying a message that other students must hear daily or leave the room. The religious liberty of those who do not pray would be at stake. There are numerous other problems. Is prayer in a secular atmosphere, such as the classroom, to be used as reverent communication with God, or a Christian witness to classmates whose religious beliefs are different? Will the teacher keep student prayers from being cursory, facetious, antagonistic to those of other races, faiths and politics, or will anything couched in the form of prayer be acceptable? How many mornings will be devoted to prayer for the success of the football team?

One reason some want periods of vocal prayer in the classroom is their desire to have the public schools acknowledge that the United States is a Christian nation rather than a country of diverse religious perspectives. Although a majority of Americans may profess a belief in Christianity, it should be obvious that a nation as such does not exemplify Christian Values. Nations and their governments go to war, engage in unequal justice, permit racial and sexual discrimination, and condemn many to poverty.

Another reason advanced for school prayer is that it will improve the moral climate of the nation. Suchan assertion by politicians is not theologically grounded. Prayer is not magic. It does not by its very use confer any miraculous benefit on a classroom, such as insuring good conduct. It does not prevent crime; many criminals pray for success in crime. Prayer didn't keep certain TV evangelists from defrauding the public or from sexual exploitation; it didn't keep numerous clergy from sexual molestation of children and female parishioners. It doesn't keep some members of Congress from subsidizing or supporting the tobacco industry whose cigarettes annually kill thousands of people. During all the years of the Ku Klux Klan lynching and intimidation of African Americans, every Ku Klux Klan meeting was opened with prayer.