Should Prayer Impose Upon The Rights Of Others? God Says NO!

Grads Don't Let Judge Stop Class Prayer

When more than 200 students stood up to recite the Lord's Prayer at their high school graduation in Russell Springs, Ky., they were rewarded with a standing ovation from the overflowing crowd of family and friends.

A prayer demonstration wasn't on the program. But students had decided earlier in the day to organize a protest after a federal judge ordered school officials not to allow a scheduled prayer at the ceremony. The court ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed by The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky on behalf of a student challenging the school's practice of annual graduation prayer delivered by the student chaplain.

It must be noted that while the court ordered the school not to sponsor a prayer during the school graduation ceremony, the court cannot order students and family members in attendance not to pray on their own accord under the terms of the First Amendment. So the actions of the students were not so much a protest as it was a free exercise of First Amendment rights.

Applause for the students continues to reverberate across the conservative-Christian blogosphere. On the surface, the story has all the elements of a culture-war rallying cry: Courageous students stand up to an "activist judge" in defense of "religious freedom and free speech."

The judge was not "activist" in any manner. His ruling was completely and fully within the scope of the First Amendment "establishment clause" and the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment that extended these basic rights, and the subsequent obligations, to encompass all state actions, including those of minicipalities and the schools.

But take a closer look. What exactly were those students standing up for in Russell Springs? The right of the majority to impose a Christian prayer on the minority? And why did most of the audience cheer them on? To congratulate the kids for using prayer to score political points against a federal judge? To humiliate the student who brought the lawsuit?

Whatever the motives, most of the audience was clearly angry and frustrated by having its prayer taken away. For years, Russell County High School seniors have elected a "class chaplain" — currently Megan Chapman — who gives the prayer at graduation. This year a student (who tried to remain anonymous, but was reportedly booed at rehearsal) filed suit to stop the practice. After all, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly declared school-sponsored prayers unconstitutional, even when delivered by a student.

But in this case the prayer was not officially sponsored by the school. However, I want to point out that the practice of prayer in the form of a protest was an un-Christian thing to do because it offended a member of the community and a brother (sister) in the eyes of God. St. Paul warned us that we should not say or do things that would offend our brothers and sisters... not just our brothers and sisters in Christ, but even those that have not adopted Christianity. The context of Paul's warning was in regard not only to the use of bad language, but also in terms of treating others outside of the Christian community.

When the seniors heard about the lawsuit, they attempted to cure the First Amendment problem by re-electing Chapman to give a "message," ostensibly leaving it to her what the message would be. But the judge wasn't impressed by the last-minute switch, perhaps seeing it as a fig leaf for keeping the prayer. The court canceled the prayer, setting the stage for the student protest.

Court orders do not carry much weight in the minds of adolescents that think they are right or justified.

It's important to note (for all those school districts contemplating solutions involving "student-initiated" prayer) that the fix proposed by the Russell County seniors might have worked — but only if they had done it earlier, if they hadn't tried to turn the chaplain into a messenger overnight, and hadn't set it up to be a prayer. That's because guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Education in 2003 suggest that student speakers may be allowed to give religious or secular messages as long as the student speaker is selected on the basis of "genuinely neutral" criteria and retains "primary control" over the content of the presentation.

While we must remain diligent regarding our First Amendment rights, including the right to express our religious beliefs, we must also remember that our rights are intertwined with and contingent upon our willingness to allow others to do the same. That is the constitutional protection that allows us to worship in the fashion that we choose... as well as allowing us the choice of not worshipping at all. It is indeed the same choice that the Bible teaches Christians, Jews and Muslims. Worship is a choice... a God-given choice that cannot be forced upon others. In the eyes of God, according to the teaching of Christ and the doctrines of all but a few sects of Christianity, it is a choice to worship... and nowhere in the Bible is it an all-powerful compulsion to worship... It is a choice.

Not everyone agrees the DOE guidance accurately interprets current law. But even under those guidelines, neither Russell County school officials nor the senior class can create a process to ensure that a student graduation speaker offers a prayer.

The DOE often gets things wrong, but the principle and foundation of the First Amendment remains applicable.

If proponents of graduation prayer in Russell Springs were willing to look at other options, there are legal and fair ways for religious people to acknowledge God during graduation festivities: A moment of silence gives everyone an opportunity to pray (or not) without having to participate in someone else's prayer. A community-organized baccalaureate that is voluntarily attended allows people to worship and pray in any way they choose and as much as they like. Both solutions accommodate the majority while protecting the minority.

There are legal and reasonable ways to facilitate the needs of the prayerful in a community without trampling upon the rights of others. The ACLU is one of the few organizations that will go to bat to defend constitutional rights. The ultra-conservatives and the Christian Right often forget the role the ACLU has played in defending the rights of the religious among us to practice their faith even under pressures to conform to the tyranny of the majority. We also must remember that in our own national history there have been numerous incidents where religious practice has been opposed, including opposition that has resulted in violence.

For some people, however, it's all or nothing. They see graduation prayer as a symbolic act that proclaims who we are as a nation. In other words, the conflict isn't really about "free speech" or even a 60-second prayer; it's about who gets to define what kind of country we are.

According to most surveys, only 40% of our citizens attend church, synagogue or mosques on a weekly basis. Not all Americans believe in God. Certainly there are Christians that do not understand God in the same manner as is offered by conservative (ultra-conservative) denominations or sects. Even among the various Jewish synagogues there are differences in the understanding of God. Among Muslims there are differences as well. It is in part due to these different understandings that our founders and framers placed the protection of the First Amendment into our Constitution as part of the Bill of Rights. Without these protections, those that formed a majority in our society could--and most likely would given our history--dictate how to worship. It is not only about defining what type of nation we live in, but also about protecting our right to worship in a manner chosen by us... a God-given right.

What would happen if a Baptist family in Russell Springs were suddenly transported to, say, a school district in Dearborn, Mich., with a large population of Muslim Americans? How would they feel about an Islamic prayer at their child's graduation? Or how about 200 Muslim students standing to recite the Quran during the ceremony?

Here's the American reality: We're all a religious minority somewhere in this country. How we treat people where we're in the majority helps determine how we'll be treated where we're in the minority.

Exactly the point of the First Amendment establishment clause and the free exercise clause.

It would appear that for most students and parents in Russell Springs, silent prayer is not enough. A baccalaureate with sermons and prayers is not enough. Even the fact that Megan Chapman expressed her religious views in her graduation speech (which she did) is not enough. Apparently, only by giving the majority the "right" to impose prayer (their prayer) on everyone else will these students and parents be satisfied

Fortunately, there is no such right. The First Amendment protects us from the tyranny of the majority — at least as long as we have judges with the courage to stand up for religious freedom..

Which is also why we have the ACLU and that the ACLU takes on such cases. The purpose of the ACLU is not to be anti-religious, atheist or even contrary to public opinion. The ACLU has defended the right to religious freedom and free exercise almost as often--if not more often--than it has defended the right to not have religion thrust upon us. While many pastors and Christian Right commentators fail to mention that fact, it is true. The ACLU is not against the free practice of religious values, only against the imposition of those values on others... the same tyranny that caused many of our founders to flee Europe.

Charles C. Haynes, the author of the original article appearing in the Baxter Bulletin, is senior scholar at the First Amendment Center. He can be reached at chaynes@freedomforum.org.