First Amendment Issues: Prayer In Public School Essay

Inclusion of plea in modern American school schedule has been a arguable and highly debated protrude during last several decades. When tragedy of the Columbine senior high school School in 1999 occurred, in which twelve students and unmatchable teacher died, the issue of moral education and role of theology in the life of popular education has been brought to an entirely different level. Right after the tragedy, The Wall drive mood Journals editorial page was alive with debate over an article written by syndicated columnist, Peggy Noonan.Writing ab bulge out the culture of decease of which the two shooters, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, were a product, she observes A man called into a Christian tuner station this dayspring and said a true thing. He said, and I am paraphrasing those kids were sick, and if a teacher had blethered to them and said, listen, theres a way out, there really is love out there that will neer stop loving you, theres a real god out there and I wan t to be able to talk to you about himif that teacher had intervened in that way, he would have been hauled into greet (Noonan, A19).Peggy Noonan hold with the mans observation and went on to write It occurs to me at the twinkling that a gun and a Bible have a few things in common. Both atomic number 18 small, black, have an immediate heft and are dangerousthe first to life, and the second to the culture of death (Noonan, A19). The next daylight Peggy Noonans article was published , a reader by the micturate of Bill Bailey responded to Ms. Noonans editorial. In his letter to the editor, he commented I conduct my churlren to habitual school to learn reading, writing, and arithmetic.I do not maneuver them to school to be lectured on the virtues of believing in a individual(prenominal) God. Teachers have no business lecturing my tikeren on the virtues of piety (Bailey, A19). One can conclude that prayer in school render an important and pressing problem for contemporary A merica, not only from socio-cultural and public perspective but also from legal one. CASE ANALYSIS human face scenario 3 relates to the legal problems emerging from the First Amendment to the United States organic law.According to it, telling shall consecrate no lawfulness respecting an make upment of religion, or prohibiting the free forge thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press or the right wing of the populate peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances (First Amendment). In this way, any establishment or preference by the Congress or any other soil authority of a national, state or local religion over another is prohibited. Same legal principle applies to the preference or establishment of non-religion over religion.According to the case scenario, Johnny, who is an atheist, objects the daybreak prayer held in the public high school he is attending as well as a prayer at his graduation. assume the dispute reac hes the US Supreme solicit, the decision will be make in the estimate of Johnny and his grows on the both issues of dispute morning prayer and prayer at graduation. The detailed analysis is provided below and is base on the First Amendment to the US Constitution, as well as US Supreme motor inn cases, particularly, Engel v. Vitale, Abington t avouchspeople School District v. Schempp, Wallace v. JaffreeDuring Engel v. Vitale hearings, in a six to one vote, with two Justices removing themselves from the case, the Court declared the Regents Prayer unconstitutional for violating the First Amendments establishment clause, because that prayer was composed by political officials as a part of brassal program to further unearthly beliefs (Engel v. Vitale, 370 US 421, 1962). Hugo Black delivered the majority opinion, which expressly rejected the districts claims that that it met constitutional standards because the prayer was denominationally neutral and had a subject opt-out form _or_ system of governing for students.According to Black, the establishment clause is violated by the enactment of laws which establish an official religion whether those laws operate directly to coerce nonobserving individuals or not (Engel v. Vitale, 370 US 421, 1962). From this perspective, tastes that led to decisions made in Engel v. Vitale can be utilize to the dispute between Johnny and his parents and Tree pose High School, both regarding morning school prayer and prayer at graduation.By this logic, at bottom the schoolhouse, school officials must protect the balance of freedom that the First Amendment allows concerning apparitional expression. They must protect the freedom of each student who wishes to speak out about matters of religion and protect those who prefer to avow nothing at all about religion. Schools must not sponsor ghostly activities or express any opinion for or once morest a student who in person expresses a religious belief. Issues and the US Supre me Court logic emerged from Abington townsfolk School District v. Schempp case also serve in favor of Johnny and his parents.The Schempps brief explained the opt-out policy gave the child a strong choice between an impulse to obey the parents wishes and the pressure to conform to his group. If the child yields to this pressure, the result is disobedience, a loss of respect for the parent and interference with the parents right to control in matters of religion. On the other hand, if the child obeys the parent, he suffers a loss of standing in his group (Abington townsfolk School District v. Schempp, 374 US 230, 1963). This statement reflects the situation Johnny prepare himself moving with his family to Tree Stump from Providence.Johnny is coming from family advocating atheistic beliefs, and that item he moved into a very religious community should not violate his rights guaranteed by the US Constitution and make him adapt or loose standing with his group. According to the Abi ngton brief the districts law requires only that those who wish to do so may listen to insouciant readings without discussion or comment from a great work that possesses umpteen values, including religious, moral, literary and historical (Abington Township School District v.Schempp, 374 US 230, 1963), They warned that a finding against the districts would set a dangerous precedent whereby there could be eliminated from the public life of this nation all those customs and traditions that evidence the religious nature and origin of our country and are now and have foresightful been cherished and accepted by a vast majority of the people (Abington Township School District v. Schempp, 374 US 230, 1963).The presence of the opt-out policy sufficiently protected individuals religious rights and therefore, they saw no need for the Court to contradict upon Americas religious traditions. The position of Abington School District credibly reflects the judgment of Tree Stump High School. Ho wever, as with Engel, the Supreme Court rejected the school districts arguments and by a vote of eight to one struck down all state laws mandating Bible readings.Justice turkey cock Clark focused on numerous judicial opinions, including Engel, in which the Court held that the government must remain neutral toward religion. Clark argued that not only did the establishment clause require such neutrality, but so too did the free process clause, which recognized the right of every person to freely choose his own course with reference thereto, free of any compulsion from the state (Abington Township School District v.Schempp, 374 US 230, 1963). The US Supreme Court judgment in Abington Township School District v. Schempp favors the position of Johnny and his parents. anticipate high school graduation event was held outside the Tree Stump High School boundaries, the graduation prayer issue would not be regulated with rulings made in Abington Township School District v. Schempp and cha racteristic cases. The First Amendment protects a students right to express the assent without discrimination.It also forbids anyone from having a captive audience or forcing anyone to participate in any type of religious activities. Case Wallace v. Jaffree involved an Alabama state law that directed public schools to provide a scrap of privacy for meditation or voluntary prayer. A previous Alabama law mandated a moment of silence just for meditation, but in 1981 the general assembly expanded the statute to include voluntary prayer. The Court determined that the clear aspiration of the law was to promote religion, and thus it must be invalidated.In striking down the Alabama law, the Supreme Court did not say that all moment of silence must be invalidated, but rather, the Court suggested that only those laws that either included clauses about prayers or whose legislative intent clearly called for a promotion of religion would be unconstitutional. According to the US Supreme Cour t ruling, the States endorsementof prayer activities at the beginning of each schoolday is not consistent with the established principle that the government must pursue a course of complete neutrality toward religion (Wallace v. Jaffree 472 US 38, 1985).By this logic, the Supreme Court decision favors once again Johnny and his parents. At the same time, Johnnys teacher claim to replace a morning school prayer with a moment of silence does not contradict neither the First Amendment to the US Constitution nor the Supreme Court rulings, as long as prayer and religion are not endorsed during it. WORKS CITED The First Amendment to the US Constitution, Available at <http//www. law. cornell. edu/constitution/constitution. billofrights. htmlamendmenti>, Accessed June 16, 2009 Noonan P. The Culture of Death, The Wall route Journal. 22 April 1999, A19.Bailey B. codt Blame Shooting on Absent God, The Wall Street Journal. 28 April 1999, A 19 Engel v. Vitale, 370 US 421, 1962, Available at < http//caselaw. lp. findlaw. com/scripts/getcase. pl? court=US&vol=370&invol=421>, Accessed June 16, 2009 Abington Township School District v. Schempp, 374 US 230, 1963, Available at < http//caselaw. lp. findlaw. com/scripts/getcase. pl? court=US&vol=374&invol=203>, Accessed June 16, 2009 Wallace v. Jaffree 472 US 38, 1985, Available at < http//caselaw. lp. findlaw. com/scripts/getcase. pl? court=US&vol=472&invol=38>, Accessed June 16, 2009