Name:
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Prayers in Schools
Introduction
The basic function of the school goes beyond training the minds of children. It incorporates nurturing and reinforcing values learnt outside the school environment. In this case, the home and community act as learning institutions. Religion and culture entails one of the few social themes that play fundamental roles in molding these values. The relevant institutions of upholding this include the church, mosque, temple and communities among others. This paper reviews the role of prayers in schools and highlights various historical events that characterize this institution.
‘Prayer in schools’ became a hot topic after the Engel vs Vitale case in 1962. Before then, non-sectarian, non denominational prayers were always made in classrooms before classes began. According to Dierenfield, The Supreme Court following its interpretation of the Clause ruled that the Regent’s prayer was inconsistent with the purposes of the Establishment Clause including the Clause itself (37). The ruling despite stopping the Regent style prayer in schools still permitted the voluntary type of prayer. The Murray vs Curlett case of 1963 was also another case that sparked the debate on school prayer. In this case, Murray, an atheist, filed a suit against his son’s school on grounds that he was required to start each school day with the Lord’s Prayer or reading the Bible hence violating the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause which guard against discrimination and compulsory religious education respectively. The Court ruled in favor of Murray as the reading of the Bible and narration of the Lord’s Prayer violated the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause (Dierenfield 39).
Several reasons have been considered to support the need for prayer in schools. Morality is one aspect whose foundation is believed to be strengthened by religion. It gives a clear insight of right and wrong and consequentially lays the boundary of determining right from wrong (Kens, 33). The absence of religious practices therefore results in the opposite of morality which is immorality. This is characterized by situations such as increased crime rates, increased abortion, and teenage pregnancies becoming rampant, increased cases of child abuse, drug abuse and lack of respect towards authorities among others.
These situations have been surveyed and data produced shows an upward negative trend since the abolition of prayer in schools. According to Dierenfield, a strong correlation exists between the expulsion of prayer and decline in morality (44). He cites William Bennett, the Education Secretary found out that divorce cases doubled between 1960 and 1990; suicide amongst the teens increased to 300%; teen pregnancy rose by 200%; while violent crimes catapulted to a high of 500%. In addition, he indicates that by 1967, the rate was at 17 and close to 30.0 by 1987.Classwork performance was also shocking; the SAT scores plummeted sharply over a short period of time. In 1962, these scores stood at 980, in 1966 they dropped to 970 and by 1980 they had reached 890 (Bergel). With these statistics, Dierenfield contends moral decadence is seen to have been influenced by the removal of school prayer (47).
Basing education on moral values and principles is of paramount importance. This is because it is beneficial, fosters the development of moral and ethical spirit in students by instilling values such as humility and discipline. Such ethical values developed over a period of time encourage students to believe in the value system which contributes to shaping their character, habits and positive behavior.
The deprivation of freedom of religion is equated to being non-religious. The body, soul and spirit complete the human being as these components mutually benefit from each other to ensure that the life of the human person is fully catered for. Withdrawing one of these components breaks the synergy which further affects the enjoyment of life. From Kens’ view, religion is one aspect that tends to address the spiritual provisions of humans (38). Introduction of rules, regulations and laws results in spiritual hunger that leads to development of behavioral constraints like increased violence which have detrimental implications.
Fiorina, Samul and Jeremy indicate that prayer in schools promotes tolerance amongst students (42). Students create a diverse community when at school as they hail from different backgrounds with differing lifestyles as well as religions. The neutrality of the school environment provides a favorable condition for students to learn from each other about the different religions and provide an opportunity for each of them to search for their own belief systems. It also encourages students to appreciate each others beliefs and therefore coexist peacefully.
Another argument supporting the need for prayer in schools is the foundation of the country which is based on religious principles. Several facts back this notion; the taking of biblical oaths in courts of law before taking the stand is seen as an aspect that upholds religious principles including the oath made by the president during his signing into office; the words ‘In God we Trust’ printed on the currency and its use as the country’s motto; sculptures of Moses carrying the ten commandments placed on supreme courts environs. Hence, if legal practices and currency standards are acceptable, the need to integrate these into institutions of learning is also essential (Fiorina et al 52).
The move by the Supreme Court to ban prayer in schools replaced the freedom of religion for freedom from religion. Banning school prayer diminishes the religious freedom of students who prefer praying and forces them to act according to the dictates of the non-religious minority. In this sense, the Supreme Court failed to address the free exercise clause which allows individuals to exercise their freedom of worship as long as it is neither repulsive to justice nor injurious to others.
The interpretation of the First Amendment by the Supreme Court is also questionable. It indicates that the congress is not responsible for formulating and implementing religious laws used by an institution and will in all instances enhance freedom of the same. The Separation of Church and State principle which recognizes the diversity of religion in the country prohibits the State from interfering with the freedom to worship and creating a state religion. Kens cites that this principle stemmed from the Amendment Clause of the Constitution (61).
Just as well, there are various arguments supporting the banning of praying in schools.The school is regarded as public while religious institutions such as churches are private. Public utilities like schools are run by funds from the government which funds are availed by taxpayers. Therefore, private issues in this case, religion, should not be the concern of the public and should be handled in private settings, that is, churches, homes among others. The appropriate situation is to avoid a mix up of what is private with that which is public.
Furthermore, the school is visualized as an educational institution where students are taught. Including prayer in these institutions would waste the time students are supposed to utilize for other purposes or studies as time is taught as a precious irredeemable commodity which if lost would never be recovered. Since the school is a Government- run entity, allowing specific prayer is seen as a Government alienation to a certain religion which is forced on students unknowingly hence violating on the freedom of religion further changing the validity of the need for prayer being compulsory rather than a healthy practice.
It is also seen as an act of offending individuals and may result in others being sidelined due to their affiliation to certain beliefs. Allowing prayer may thus result in hurtful feelings and ruined friendships where the rights and feelings of certain individuals are infringed (Kens 64). Favoritism may cave in scenarios where school administrators are affiliated to certain religious groups hence may favor students with similar affiliations.
Another concern, according to Fiorina et al is that, introducing religion builds walls between children who may previously not have been aware of their religious differences (68). Knowledge of their counterparts belonging to different religions may result in isolation, stigmatization and discrimination which would affect their performance and emotional stability in the long run.
Prayer in school violates the Separation of Church and State principle. Since schools are controlled by the state while religion is controlled by the church. Schools are entities meant to educate rather than proselytize. Students in schools are a captive audience and thus making prayer an official part of the school day counts as invasive and coercive. From this interpretation, praying establishes a state religion which violates the provisions of the Constitution.
It is important to note that laws established for certain purposes need to embrace the dynamic nature of their applications and should therefore be flexible so as to minimize conflicts that would arise as a result of their rigidity. Where this occurs, efforts to reconcile conflicts that arise are to be addressed to cover the gaps noted and any that may arise in the future. A directive by the former president of United States of America, Bill Clinton, to the Education Secretary to tackle the issue on religious expression in public schools is a stepping stone on institutional amenable efforts taken to reconcile this. The Education Secretary, in conjunction with a number of religious and educational persons note that religion can neither be fostered nor precluded but should be treated with fairness and respect while protecting the freedom of conscience of all students.
Conclusion
As observed by various researchers, supplanting the developments achieved through religion would result in a one- step- forward two- steps backward initiative meaning that a constant backward trend would result. I strongly support prayer in schools considering the moral developments brought about by it and factual evidence of societal concerns as a result of its absence. Considering the diversity of students in terms of ethnic, cultural and religious background, the neutrality of the school administration should be maintained, it should be conducted voluntarily including a voluntary audience and non-disruptive.
Works Cited
Bruce, Dierenfield. Legal Battles: Prayers in Schools. Kansas: University Press, 2007.
Morris, Fiorina, Samul, Abrams & Jeremy, Pope. Culture War: Analyzing American Myth. USA: Longman, 2010.
Paul, Kens. Evaluating Economic Regulation. Kansa: University Press, 2008.
