Prayer in Public Schools and Graduation Ceremonies

Dr. W. Kenneth Williams, Scholar-in-Residence
Baptist Joint Committee
Washington, D.C.


State sponsored prayer in the public schools, whether in the classroom or at 
graduation ceremonies, violates the Establishment Clause of the First 
Amendment and offends the consciences of those would not choose to participate 
in the prayers.  This does not mean that students are prevented from engaging 
in voluntary private prayer in accordance with their own religious tradition 
and convictions, only that they cannot ask the state to help them do it.



Those favoring prayer in the public schools believe that government has the 
responsibility to interject religion into the educational process.  They 
reason that American's history tells of religious peoples seeking freedom to 
exercise their religious commitments.  They reason, further, that the framers 
of American democracy were religious persons who intended government to 
reflect a generalized faith while defending against the establishment of any 
particular faith.  Therefore, exposing school children to a divine referent 
through non-sectarian prayers at the beginning of the school day or in 
graduation exercises is defensible.  It continues a well-founded American 
tradition, contributes to general morality, undergirds the spiritual welfare 
of impressionable children, and is generalized enough so as to be inoffensive 
to religious minorities.

Reason gives way to emotion when the premises of school prayer supporters' 
logic is challenged.  Ever since the Supreme Court's landmark decisions1  of 
the early 1960s holding school-sponsored prayer to be unconstitutional, school 
prayer proponents have made increasingly emotional appeals to restore prayer 
in schools, essentially making their case on the basis of majority rule.  In 
spite of these efforts, the Supreme Court has consistently held to the notion 
of governmental neutrality concerning prayer in schools.2 

The focus of the debate lately has shifted from the classroom to graduation 
ceremonies.  Most recently, in Lee v. Weisman (1991), the school's principal 
selected the cleric and gave him guidelines to follow in fashioning his 
prayer.  This amounted to an establishment of religion, said the Supreme 
Court, and therefore violated the First Amendment.

Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority, declared that the government cannot 
make religious conformity the price for attending one's graduation ceremony.  
In his concurring opinion, Justice Souter made this observation:  "One may 
fairly say ... that the government brought prayer into the [graduation] 
ceremony precisely because some people want a symbolic affirmation that 
government approves and endorses their religion, and because many of the 
people who want this affirmation place little or no value on the costs to 
religious minorities.'"

Pat Robertson's American Center for Law and Justice, a legal advocacy group 
established in counterpoint to the American Civil Liberties Union, has sought 
to capitalize on a 1993 case that the Supreme Court chose not to review.  In 
Jones v. Clear Creek Independent School District, the 5th Circuit Court of 
Appeals held it permissible for a student to say a "non-proselytizing, non-
sectarian" prayer in graduation ceremonies, if the students voted to have 
prayer.  The ACLJ sees the Supreme Court's choice not to hear the case as 
tacit approval of the lower court's resolution.

This is wrong.  The Supreme Court receives more than 6,000 petitions for 
review annually.  It accepts only a little over 100.  Does this mean that the 
court approves of the other 5,900?  No.  It is simply impossible for the high 
court to review every case presented to it.  The ACLJ is making a claim that 
cannot be legally supported.

Other points to consider:
It is not true that God has been thrown out of the public schools.  Students 
may offer private prayers, read their scriptures during free time, and often 
may gather in groups for religious purposes before and after classes, so long 
as the school is not the sponsor and no member of the staff or faculty 
participates.

The proper place for corporate prayer at the time of school graduation is in a 
place of worship.  Baccalaureate services sponsored by a community's religious 
institutions reflect the very bedrock of American tradition  free people 
exercising their chosen religious commitments under the absolute protection of 
a free state.

The liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are not subject to majority 
vote.  In fact, they are "counter majoritarian"  established for the very 
purpose  of defending minorities against the tyranny of majority action.  The 
framers of our republic saw that majority rule can be as oppressive as that of 
a powerful dictator.  The use of public schools to endorse and promote the 
religious sensibilities of the majority rides roughshod over the rights of 
those of minority persuasions, or those who desire no exposure to religious 
practice at all.

There is no such thing as a "non-sectarian" prayer.  It is a contradiction in 
terms  like "grape-nuts."  It is really neither one.  True prayer has to come 
out of some sectarian tradition.  And if it could somehow be made truly "non-
sectarian," it would not be prayer.  Moreover, prayer reflects the missional 
purposes of a particular religion.  Therefore, how can there be, by 
definition, prayer that is "non-proselytizing"?  Such prayers have the same 
banal effect as letters bearing the salutation "To Whom It May Concern."

Children are impressionable.  They can be easily confused when the religious 
traditions of their home life conflict with the traditions to which they are 
exposed at school.  Religious instruction should be left to the home and  to 
the religious institutions, thus freeing children  particularly those of 
minority persuasions  from the pressures to conform to the majority.

However well intended, the reasoning of those who support state sponsored 
prayers in the public schools is flawed.  Government cannot endorse religion.  
It is not the government's place to endorse the religious practices of the 
majority culture.  Prayer is a private matter, to be taught in the places that 
are most competent for such instructionthe religious institutions of our 
communities.  We uphold the best of our democratic ideals when the roles of 
church and state are well separated. u


Talking Points About Prayer In School

Rob Boston
Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Silver Spring, Maryland


Much confusion exists in the minds of the American people over the issue of 
prayer in public schools. Religious Right groups have added to this confusion 
by making untrue claims about school prayer. This article gives responses to 
some of the Religious Right's most common claims about the issue. 




The Religious Right would have Americans believe a great deal of mythology 
about prayer in public schools. According to the Religious Right, even 
voluntary school prayer is illegal. They say students can be expelled for 
reading the Bible during free time and that religion can't be discussed in any 
context in public school classrooms.

None of this is true. Students are free to engage in voluntary prayer in 
public schools and may read religious texts during their free time. In 
addition, public schools all over the country use the Bible and other types of 
religious literature in objective programs of instruction designed to teach 
about religion.

Here are some common Religious Right arguments in favor of government 
involvement in school prayer with responses:  

Statement: Children can't pray in public schools.  
Yes, they can. In 1962 and 1963 the Supreme Court struck down mandatory, 
state-sponsored programs of prayer and Bible reading in public schools. The 
high court has never ruled that truly voluntary, individual prayer is 
unconstitutional. Individual students are free to recite voluntary prayers or 
read from religious texts during their free time. 

"Voluntary" prayer must really be voluntary and not a ruse to reinstate 
school-sponsored religious worship. Federal courts have struck down efforts by 
school officials to set up programs whereby teachers ask a student volunteer 
to lead the class in prayer. They have also struck down so-called "voluntary" 
prayer during "optional" student assemblies held as part of the school day.	

Statement: We had prayer in schools for 100 years and it never hurt anyone.
This is simply not true. Many Americans don't know it, but prayer in public 
schools was quite contentious in the mid and late 19th century. Roman Catholic 
objections to Protestant religious practices in the public schools led to 
civil strife in some cities. (Thirteen people were killed during Protestant-
Catholic riots in the Philadelphia area in 1843 after Catholics demanded that 
their children be excused from mandatory religious practices.) In modern 
times, members of minority religious groups have complained that government-
sponsored worship in schools favors majority faiths. Even many Christians 
considered forced religion to be distasteful. 

Statement: Madalyn Murray O'Hair, an atheist who hates religion, is 
responsible for having prayer taken out of public schools.
Well-known atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair has taken credit for having removed 
prayer from public school, but she played only a supporting role in the cases. 
The first school prayer case, 1962's Engel v. Vitale, did not involve O'Hair 
at all. It was brought by a group of parents on Long Island, N.Y., of various 
religious and philosophical backgrounds, who challenged a "non-denominational" 
prayer state education officials had composed for public schoolchildren to 
recite.

One year later, a Philadelphia-area family named the Schempps challenged 
mandatory Bible reading in Pennsylvania schools, and their lawsuit eventually 
reached the Supreme Court. At the same time, O'Hair was challenging a similar 
practice, as well as the recitation of the Lord's Prayer, in Baltimore's 
public schools. The Supreme Court consolidated the cases and in 1963 ruled 8-1 
that government-sponsored Bible reading or other religious devotions in public 
schools are unconstitutional.

Statement: The school prayer rulings are hostile to religion.
Just the opposite is true. The rulings preserve religious freedom by giving 
parents the right to decide what religious views and prayersif anytheir 
children are exposed to. Also, the justices have stated many times that 
objective study about the Bible and religion's role in history is legal and 
appropriate in public schools. In the Schempp decision, Justice Tom Clark 
wrote for the court majority, "[I]t might well be said that one's education is 
not complete without a study of comparative religion or the history of 
religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization. It certainly 
may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic 
qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or 
of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of 
education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment."

Statement: Most Americans support prayer in schools. The majority should get 
to do what it wants. 
Public opinion polls on school prayer show different results depending on how 
the question is worded. While many people say they support "prayer in 
schools," they have different ideas about what that could mean. In addition, 
even if a majority did favor requiring prayer in schools, it would not matter. 
The Bill of Rights protects everyone's beliefs and ensures that majorities do 
not run roughshod over the rights of minorities. 

Statement: Ever since prayer was removed from schools, public school 
performance has declined and social ills have increased.
It is true that some indices of school performance have decreased since 1962, 
but the problems experienced in our schools are reflections of the problems in 
American society that are caused by a whole range of socio-economic factors. 
We cannot blame every societal problem, from the increase in teenage 
pregnancies to the escalating divorce rate, on a lack of required prayer in 
schools. Complex problems require complex solutions, something schools across 
the nation are working on. We should support efforts to make schools safer and 
healthier  but we don't have to go against the U.S. Constitution to do that.

Statement: The Supreme Court has said organized school prayer is OK as long as 
it is "student initiated," "non-sectarian" and "non-proselytizing" in nature.
The Supreme Court has never issued such a ruling. One federal appeals court 
has approved prayer during public school graduation ceremonies under these 
conditions, but other federal courts have disagreed with that ruling. Many 
observers believe the question will eventually end up before the Supreme 
Court.

Some state legislatures are moving to enact laws permitting public school 
prayer that is "non-sectarian" and "non-proselytizing." Such legislation is 
almost certainly unconstitutional because it gives government officials the 
power to determine which prayers qualify as "non-sectarian" and "non-
proselytizing." It should also be noted that many believers consider watered-
downed, generic prayers to be deeply offensive.

Americans United for Separation of Church and State
8120 Fenton St.
Silver Spring, MD 20910
(301) 589-3707
(301) 495-9173 (FAX)