Separating church and state in public schools: a moral dilemma

Separation of Church and State: A Moral Dilemma

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States guarantees the right to practice one's own religion without discrimination or retribution for doing so. Yet at the same time, when the question of opening each school day with a prayer is proposed it is met with public outrage. Religion has all but been taken out of America and the results can be seen everywhere you look. The media is filled with teenagers stealing, doing drugs, and committing violent acts. Many see it as a sign of the downfall of the society. They watch as it happens around them and yet stand around and blame others for the problems.

Religion gives us a higher sense of purpose in our lives. We are all a part of a larger whole. We are part of a family, a community, a country and a larger universe. As such, people tend to view their acts and activities during the day as a part of a larger whole. We are all born and live a finite lifetime, after which we die and go on to something large and mysterious. It is the connection to the past, present, and future that gives us our sense of morals. When we have a sense of our place in the scheme of things, we act in ways that are for the benefit of all, not just for our own interests. This is the benefit that religion has for the community. Those who practice religion are less likely to act in harmful ways because it is not beneficial to society as a whole.

The role of public schools is to educate our youth. When our country was young, prayer and Bible teachings were a standard part of the curriculum. Students leaned reading, writing and arithmetic, in addition, the school had a role of instilling values that would make the student good members of the community and a valuable part of society. Now things have changed and we are a country made of a much more diverse population. There are many groups who feel that they are being persecuted if they are made to assume a certain religion in school. This brings the role of the school and its social purpose into question. The fundamental question is whether schools should teach morals and attempt to make children into good, upstanding citizens, or should they just teach the academics and leave the social values to the parents and religious organizations.

The rise in crime, and particularly youth crime supports the idea that leaving the moral teachings to the parents or religious organizations is simply not working. In order to stop this trend and re-gain America's strength schools must not only instill their sense self-worth but must do their part to instill their sense of being a larger part of a whole. The only way to do this is to allow religion to be taught in schools. The following research will examine the history of the issue, give an overview of current policy, and examine both sides of the issue. The thesis will show that religion in school has many more benefits than it does harmful effects and that if we are to stop the current trend of youth crime and violence, we must allow religion to become a part of the school curriculum.

History of Policy

In 1925 the Scopes "Monkey trial" emphasized the point of teaching religion in schools. In this case, a Tennessee teacher was charged with breaking the law for discussing the theory of evolution in the public school system (Coeyman, 2000). We must remember that Darwin's book on evolution was published earlier, but was basically dismissed as not based on fact by the general public. It was not until the 1920s that the public began examining it in earnest and exploring it as a possibility.

In the 1960s the Supreme Court declared prayer in public schools unconstitutional. This led to a series of overreactions by some schools, banning religion altogether from the curriculum. Many teachers were reluctant to tell students that the Pilgrims came here to escape religious persecution. In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton stepped into the issue. He issued the following statement in a speech at the White House,

Nothing in the First Amendment converts our public schools into religion-free zones, or requires all religious expression to be left behind at the school house door. " President Clinton, July 12, 1995,

In 1995, the U.S. Department of Education issued a series of Guidelines for creating a more friendly atmosphere for acknowledging various religious views (USDOE, 1995).

Present Policy

Present policy on religion in public schools is so unclear that most persons in public school administration cannot discern what they are legally allowed and not allowed to do. The constitution permits religious activity both in and around public schools. However, some interpret recent Supreme Court rulings to mean that schools have been declared "Religion free zones" (ACLU, 1995).

Alternative To Offering Religion In Schools

If religion cannot be included as a part of the school curriculum, then some other alternative needs to be devised to promote a sense of belonging to something larger than one's self. If this is not possible, then it will be impossible to maintain a civilized and advanced society in the future. Perhaps instead of using religion as a unifying tool, we could use our sense of belonging as a nation to unify us into a cause and help maintain order.

Placing more law enforcement in schools and passing more laws will not cure society's ills. People will always, and have always found a way to get around these laws. In order to restore morals and integrity to America, the change must come from within. People must find it in themselves to uphold high moral standards. It cannot be forced upon them. If religion cannot be taught in schools, then some way must be devised to encourage self-exploration and examine the issues of right and wrong in their own way. Children must be encouraged to think about their actions and include others as a part of their decision making process. They need to learn to think about the future and nor just about the moment. These concepts could effectively replace religion in schools, aren't these the basic questions that religion is all about?

Another solution to the problem may be to allow religious groups to establish their own schools that students may attend by choice. These schools would have to prescribe to certain academic standards and meet the same performance standards as other public and private schools, but could then be free to pray and offer additional curriculum as they chose. This solution is complex and would take an extreme amount of cooperation and planning between existing state agencies, educational institutions and religious organizations to reach a consensus as to the logistics and particulars of such as program, but it is not impossible to accomplish.

Both Sides of the Issue survey conducted by the Educational Research Service summarized public opinion. Survey results are contradictory, indicating that while most feel the issue is important, they still have not resolved all of the complex issues in their own minds. Sixty-one percent feel that separation of church and state are a significant factor in the success of our form of government, yet only 31% feel that prayer in schools violates this concept (ERS, 2001).

According to a survey conducted by Public Agenda (In Walsh, 2001), "A majority of Americans believe religion belongs in the public schools, but most favor a moment of silence over nondenominational or overtly Christian prayers in the classroom. Many surveyed share the opinion that re-introducing religion into public school is a good way to alleviate many of the moral deficiencies so obviously present in today's youth. They feel that religion should be introduced, but not in a way that demeans or promotes any one doctrine or idea. Many of these supporters favor a moment of silence in which every student may pray silently according to their own faith.

This would seem like a good compromise because this allows each to practice his or her own religion without offending anyone else. However there are those who even oppose this idea. One such group is the atheists, who feel that even the act of meditation is a violation of their religious beliefs because it condones belief in a Supreme Being, no matter what one calls this Supreme Being or how they pray to it. It seems as if both sides are correct and that there is no easy solution to the dilemma. There are some that recognize this paradox and have attempted to bring the two sides together in a compromise.

The ACLU holds the opinion that to have an effective and strong country we need to adhere to the ideals of separation of church and state and that allowing religion in schools violates that common goal. The ACLU published the following rules regarding religion in schools (ACLU, 1995). The ACLU is comprised of many organizations both public and private, many of them religious in origin, that all hold to the same following ideals, 1. Students have the right to pray individually or in groups or to discuss their religious views with their peers so long as they are not disruptive." (ACLU, 1995). In rough interpretation, this means that students are allowed to pray before tests, read their Bible and to discuss religion with other students who would like to listen as long as they do not do it in a way that disrupts the rest of the class. Students may not be required or coerced to listen and must do it under their own freewill.

2. School officials may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation, nor may they organize a religious baccalaureate ceremony." If the school rents out its facilities they must offer the same terms and conditions to anyone who wishes to use them The question of whether a prayer can be initiated by a student is unclear at this time (ACLU, 1995). This same statement prohibits teachers and school administrators from initiating or encouraging religious activity as they are acting as representatives of the state. Teachers may not engage in religious activities in public places. However, they may pray privately in the teacher's lounge (ACLU, 1995). Except for the portion about students initiating prayer at a graduation ceremony, the above issues seem to set a good division between church and state yet not inhibit anyone's right to practice their own private religion.

However, there are other issues which are not do easy to divide. Under ACLU guidelines, "religion may be taught in schools, but schools may not teach religion" (ACLU, 1995). Religion has had an influence on the development of society, art, literature and history all have issues dealing with religion as a part of their development. This issue is unavoidable, as the history of religion cannot be separated from the advancement of civilization. One cannot teach about why the Pilgrims came to this country, World War II and Hitler, or the civil rights movements of the 1960s with out teaching about the religious influences behind them. There is a fine-line in the definition drawn between teaching about religion, and teaching the doctrines of a particular religion as being more acceptable than another.

This same argument applies to teaching about evolution. They may present the theory of evolution from a purely scientific standpoint, but may not, however, undermine any student's own beliefs about the origin of life on earth. Both doctrines may be taught, as long as one is not promoted over another one (ACLU, 1995). Students are allowed to express their religious beliefs in reports and essays, and teachers may not correct them solely on the basis of their opinions and beliefs. They may correct them for form, spelling, grammar and other standard items, but may not criticize their religious beliefs (ACLU, 1995).

This again seems as if a perfect compromise has been reached, that is until we enter into the issue of that is until we are presented with the issue of the right of a student to present their religious view to the public in the classroom. Teachers do not have the right to silence their opinions. However, they must also not silence conflicting views. Some religions consider "witnessing" to be part of their doctrine and according to the law, their opinions cannot be silenced without silencing their religion. However, the ACLU holds that those who do not wish to listen should not be subjected to it. Teachers may rule religious explanations that are irrelevant to the content of the classroom as "out of order" (ACLU, 1995).

This is just the beginning of the ACLU policy statements on the issue and many more issues are addressed, many of which have similar conclusions to those above such as the issue of religious holidays and the distribution of religious material on school grounds. It seems like these policy positions are a good compromise between the division of church and state and the right to practice religion. However, if these guidelines are accepted on religious grounds, how can they not be accepted on philosophical grounds as well.

Conclusion

If it is so wrong to try to persuade others to pray, worship, and keep to a high set of moral standards, then what is to prevent those who feel that it is their right to steal from others and commit violent acts from expressing their opinion as well. They may not do it on school grounds, but does that solve the problem? Some feel that it is correct to persecute a set of member o f one religious or social group. They may not be able to do it on school grounds, but does that solve society's ills, I think not. Schools were formed for the purpose of advancing society and for promoting cultural standards that will help mankind. Disallowing the teaching of moral standards in schools has created a society in which it is survival of the fittest, or he who has the bigger gun rules.

Returning to the basic functions that the school system was formed to accomplish would solve many of society's ills as well. While individual rights are important, the prohibition of practicing religion in schools has destroyed the idea that humans are a part of something larger than themselves. This disconnection from society has caused us to create a society of individuals. Taking religion out of schools has created a ticking time bomb and the timer is ticking. Teaching religion in schools would put us back on the straight and narrow and students begin to think about something larger than themselves and develop greater sense of self-worth and self-confidence. Students with a greater sense of belonging to a whole are less likely to commit crimes for selfish reasons and may be more willing to see things from a viewpoint other than their own. Religion teaches us to see beyond our own problems and children who can do this do not need rugs or alcohol to solve their problems. For this reason, taking religion out of schools has put us on a down hill slide. Putting religion back into the schools would help schools to perform their original purpose, shaping the future for a better society.