Religious Freedom Suffers
Our position restrains the actions of schools and public
employees, not students. The principles of religious freedom allow for students
to engage in voluntary religious expression. Students have the right to pray
individually or in groups or to discuss their religious views with their peers
so long as it does not become disruptive. Students have the right to distribute
religious literature to their schoolmates and a school may confine distribution
of all literature to a particular table at particular times. Teaching only about one religion and its holy text(s) in
public school classrooms creates the impression that the school endorses that
particular religious message. Therefore, every effort should be made to balance
an academic exploration about one religious text, such as the Bible, with study
about other scripture and religious traditions.
But government-prescribed prayer is a completely different
issue. Whenever a government imposes or even favors religious beliefs on a
religiously diverse nation, religious freedom suffers. To lose religious
freedom would be to throw away one of the cornerstones of our nation and to do
irreparable harm both to religion in this nation and to the nation itself.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
If prayer isnt allowed in schols, then the first admendment of our Constitution is useless. We have the freedom of speech , and religion , so why cant we use it? I am in the 6th grad, and my life is totally devoted to my saviour, Jesus Christ, and I am not allowed to bring a bible to school , talk about god in school, or pray to my god in school. If my god made such a sacrifice to all of us, shouldnt we be thankful and pray to him? He died to forgive us, yet we are not allowed to mention him? I think that is stupid, and a waste of energy to tell a kid ot to pray to a school. Come o people be reasonable.
This is going way to far with being politically correct. When it comes to my religion , in public or on my own I expect to have freedom of rights. although I am only in Middle school I want my voice to be heard, I want not only christianity allowed but also any other religion. Isn't that why our forefathers came to america, religious freedom from the anglican church ?
I am in the sixth grade, going into seventh next year and i totally agree wih you.
Why was the moment of silence idea thrown out? Anyone? Was it disruptive or something?
By allowing prayer in school , in no way should religious freedom suffer. It's a personal choice. And if it becomes a problem, then it may be hindering religious freedom. But otherwise, it should not be a disturbance, but a personal private prayer. It should not make religious freedom suffer.
Well, of course, it'd be near perfect if students could pray in school in such a way that is satisfying to them and not disruptive to others. I'm not a religious person, but seeing a kid in quiet prayer over lunch wouldn't bother me, a Muslim student bowing in prayer on the floor in the middle of class wouldn't bother me either. I can't help but feel these would be deemed serious distractions to many. I also don't feel the tolerance level in most schools is high enough for prayer to be more of a benefit to students than a set-back.
By students praying in school, religious freedom is being strengthened, not hurt. The problem is that some students force others to participate in prayer, which does hinder freedoms granted by the constitution. Also, if prayer is played over an intercom system or recited by a homeroom teacher, then some student's rights would come to an end. However, prayer should be allowed in schools just like in the rest of the country.
Uhhhhh........What was the question?
It seems to me that the question was whether or not prayer should be allowed in public schools. Not whether or not one religion beats all. Or are these two arguing under the wrong heading? Speaking of which, the small print suggests a totally different question than the main heading. Which do we debate: fine lines or overall rules?
My point is as follows: Yes, the IA makes a good point that nondisruptive religion is fine. And darn well should be allowed. People have the right to express their opinion, so long as it isn't imposed on others. But allowing prayer in school DOES NOT MEAN (believe it or not) that any specific religion MUST be observed. All it means is that people can pray if they so desire. And yes, atheists, this means you don't have to pray, either. This also means no mandated prayer. That wouldn't be allowing prayer in school, that's requiring one specific religion in school.
Having said that, I now turn to the argument at hand. One, the arguer states that they intend to restrict only the staff. From doing what? Making an allowance for prayer? So kids praying without official permission is good, but it's bad if it is permitted by the government? The argument seems to be nitpicking about this idea of who gives the permission. If the result is meant to be the same, why the argument? There also seems to be an underlying assumption that the allowance of prayer in school requires a specific prayer by all. From what I understand of the question prompt, that makes this a strawman argument.
Additionally, IA has no real argument. They qualify their position and support of student prayer. But then they claim that they dispute a "completely different issue." First, if you admit that, put it under the right topic. Second, they state that government-prescribed prayer restricts rights. Yeah, we know...but what's the point? Of course a law imposing one sole religion violates rights of students. We all know that. Can you say anything else other than "freedom" over and over again? And I repeat, are we debating authoritarian government or prayer in school? I don't think this is a question between no religion and Catholicism. I think it's about, I don't know, ALLOWING PRAYER IN SCHOOL? Note the key word, allowing! Not mandating, not forcing, ALLOWING!
Sounds to me like Interfaith Alliance is arguing for something much different than what the question presented is. I don't agree with a teacher imposing their own personal religious beliefs onto the students in a public setting, though if it was done with the clear explanation that it is their personal experiences and not representative of the school then I wouldn't be sending the cops in anytime soon. If a "No" response to this question implies a ban of prayer by anybody, student or staff, in the school then that is nothing but unconstitutional. This assumes that the praying individual is not forcing others to pray along.
Everyone DOES have their own beliefs, but I don't think by teachers sharing religion that it really causes religious freedom to suffer.
Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. In my own experiences with life in general I couldn't have made it without Him.