Journal Entry #3

Reflection #3

    In this reflection I will attempt to explore the rights of Christian citizens with regard to public schooling.  It is now common practice not to allow prayer or other religious activities which occur in settings that are not voluntary in terms of who is present.  Many Christians see this as a violation of their beliefs and their rights to exercise those beliefs.  They believe that the state is actually hostile toward religion and works toward the promotion of anti religious beliefs.  For example, many Christians see the study of the theory of evolution in direct conflict to what they believe as part of their religion.  They fault the state for allowing something like evolution to exist in our schools while forbidding prayer as part of the educational process.

    The reason the state behaves in such a way is due to the law; specifically, the establishment clause.  According to this clause schools are supposed to be neutral with regard to religion.  It is instructed that congress should enact now law that either promotes religion or inhibits the free exercise thereof.  Therefore, the state cannot promote any specific religion, nor can it forbid anyone from participating freely in religion.  This is sometimes referred to as the separation of church and state.  Many Christians believe this in in conflict with what our founders intended when writing the constitution.  They believe that this was written in an attempt to keep the state from developing a state-mandated religion rather than allowing communities to incorporate religious practice into educational and governmental life.

    I understand the philosophy of educators who believe that society must disallow religious activities which occur in situations where attendance is mandated.  However, I am not convinced that the solution is to deny Christians citizens and children the rights to exercise their religion in a way that they believe is necessary.  For example, if there is one student at graduation who does not want to have prayer at the conclusion of the ceremony, it is standard practice that the will of that student will prevail (actually even if there is none opposed the the prayer, according to the law there should be no prayer).  This is because courts have ruled that this student should not be subjected to a religious activity that in in opposition to personal beliefs.  Furthermore, the courts have ruled that the graduation ceremony is not, realistically, voluntary because the student has worked so hard to reach that point in educational life.  I would argue that, in the example above, the rights of the majority are important enough that they should not just be dismissed.  For many of them, prayer is something that seals and validates the graduation ceremony.  Furthermore, the graduation ceremony is not, realistically, voluntary because the student has worked so hard to reach that point in educational life.

    I think we should look at the question: "What are schools for?"  I believe schools should serve their public.  In other words, the schools have a responsibility to provide educational growth to the communities in which the are found.  The views and beliefs of these communities should be considered when making decisions on the practices and procedures of the institution.  Another factor to be considered it that the schools are set up in a way that they are funded by the people they serve.  It is often stated that schools cannot support any religious activity on the basis that they are funded by the state.  At the same time it seems to be overlooked that money for schools does not come from the state.  The money to fund schools comes to the state from the citizens of our country; it is they who should decide what they receive for what they are paying.

    A common response to this is to cite the problems of what is called "tyranny of the majority".  While it is important to realize that the majority may be wrong and the minority should be protected, I believe that it is necessary for our government to ensure that rights are not taken away from the majority.  If one operates on the assumption that "tyranny of the majority" correctly characterizes a philosophy which advocates the allowance of activities which are supported by the majority, one must admit that the majority of American citizens are paying for an education that is in conflict to their views and beliefs.  From this prospective, one can clearly see why many Christians believe that their opinions are not being taken seriously.

    Given the previous information, it seems natural that the next question might be: "What is the correct solution?"  I believe that we must look for more adequate solutions rather than assuming that we have already found the one, best, only, correct solution.  This solution should incorporate the idea of not taking rights away from Christian citizens in order to remain neutral.  I have been considering the possibility of "safe passage" as being an appropriate solution.  Safe passage means that the Christian citizen can have an educational experience that does not conflict with the views of that person.  For example, schools would not support religious activities but would not require students to participate in programs, activities, and education that would refute ones own beliefs.

    In summary, I believe that we need to continue to look for more appropriate solutions to the dilemma of what to do when some want religious activities and others do not within the school system rather than accepting that Christian rights should be denied.  The state must remain neutral and neither support nor inhibit any specific religion but should remember that its citizens are supporting the school system and should have a voice in its operation.  Tyranny of the majority should not lead educators to assume that the rights of the majority or irrelevant and need not be considered.  It should also be remembered that the majority of citizens in our country may be forced to pay for a public education which is in opposition to what they believe.  Finally, I do not claim to have all the answers.  However, I can see that the current accepted solution is causing many Americans to feel disenfranchised.  Another possible solution is that of safe passage, meaning that Christians may function in the present school system without being subjected to practices which violate their religion.  I believe other possible solutions are out there for us to discover.  In order to begin looking for those solutions, we must first admit that our current processes may not be the one, best answer.  We may not, as educators, already have the only correct answers.

 < Back