DOCSLIB.ORG

The Transformative Significance of the School Prayer Decisions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Pepperdine Law Review Volume 38 Issue 4 Article 1 4-20-2011 Constitutional Divide: The Transformative Significance of the School Prayer Decisions Steven D. Smith Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr Part of the First Amendment Commons Recommended Citation Steven D. Smith Constitutional Divide: The Transformative Significance of the School Prayer Decisions, 38 Pepp. L. Rev. Iss. 4 (2011) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol38/iss4/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Caruso School of Law at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pepperdine Law Review by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Constitutional Divide: The Transformative Significance of the School Prayer Decisions Steven D. Smith* I. INTRODUCTION II. CONTINGENCIES AND UNCERTAINTIES A. The Conclusion: Engel B. The Explanation: Schempp C. Unanswered Questions III. A CRAZY-QUILT, QUASI-CONSTITUTIONAL TRADITION A. The PerennialContenders B. Incompatible but (Sometimes) Indistinguishable C. Patterns ofDominance? D. The Conceptions as Quasi-Constitutional E. The Virtues of Quasi-Constitutionalism 1. Quasi-Constitutionalism as the Default Position 2. The Positive Advantages of Quasi-Constitutionalism F. On the Eve of the School PrayerDecisions IV. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SCHOOL PRAYER DECISIONS A. How the Decisions Transformed ConstitutionalDoctrine 1. Secularism as the Doctrinal "Test" 2. The Significance of the Public Schools 3. The Importance of Prayer B. Why the Significance of the School PrayerDecisions Went Largely Unnoticed (by Their Supporters) V. TRANSFORMATIONS: THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SCHOOL PRAYER DECISIONS A. Establishment ClauseJurisprudence 1. Subverting Everson * Warren Distinguished Professor of Law, University of San Diego. I thank Larry Alexander, Hugh Cawthome, Chris Eberle, Rick Garnett, Abner Greene, Andy Koppelman, Jessica Lowe, Wayne McCormack, David McGowan, Mike Newdow, Michael Perry, and George Wright for helpful comments on earlier drafts. I also benefitted from the commentary of participants in the Annual Law and Religion Roundtable and in a workshop at the University of Utah. 945 2. The Emergence of the "No Endorsement" Doctrine B. ConstitutionalLaw Outside the Establishment Clause C. Divided Discourse 1. The Historical Divide 2. The Cultural Divide VI. CONCLUSION: THE IRONIES OF THE SCHOOL PRAYER DECISIONS I. INTRODUCTION Everson v. Board of Education' was the visionary (or perhaps foolhardy) granddaddy of modem Establishment Clause jurisprudence; the school prayer decisions-Engel v. Vitale2 and Abington School District v. Schempp 3-were among that decision's dutiful descendants. Everson founded the modem enterprise; Engel and Schempp inherited Everson's legacy and faithfully maintained and built the family business. To change the metaphor, Everson was the primary proof; the decisions invalidating prayer in the public schools were among the virtually irresistible corollaries. Or at least so goes a standard understanding of modem Establishment jurisprudence.4 Everson is, as Douglas Laycock declares, "[t]he most important establishment clause case." 5 As a natural result, in professional constitutional discourse (as distinguished from politics and popular culture), Everson has been the more examined, and also embattled, decision.6 By contrast, though promptly and enduringly unpopular with the general public,7 the school prayer decisions have from the beginning generally 1. 330 U.S. 1(1947). 2. 370 U.S. 421 (1962). 3. 374 U.S. 203 (1963). 4. See John C. Jeffries, Jr. & James E. Ryan, A PoliticalHistory of the Establishment Clause, 100 MICH. L. REV. 279, 287 (2001) (asserting that "Everson began the modem edifice of separation of church and state" and that "[flor half a century, the Supreme Court followed Everson's lead"). 5. 1 DOUGLAS LAYCOCK, A Survey of Religious Liberty in the United States, in RELIGIOUS LIBERTY: OVERVIEWS AND HISTORY 272,288 (2010). 6. See, e.g., EVERSON REVISITED: RELIGION, EDUCATION, AND LAW AT THE CROSSROADS (Jo Rende Formicola & Hubert Morken eds., 1997). 7. Writing at the time, Philip Kurland observed that "[t]he immediate reaction to Engel was violent and gross." Philip B. Kurland, The School Prayer Cases, in THE WALL BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE 142, 142 (Dallin H. Oaks ed., 1963). Bruce Dierenfield reports that Engel provoked "the greatest outcry against a U.S. Supreme Court decision in a century." BRUCE J. DIERENFIELD, THE BATTLE OVER SCHOOL PRAYER: HOW ENGEL v. VITALE CHANGED AMERICA 72 (2007). At an annual Conference of State Governors, every governor except New York's Nelson Rockefeller condemned Engel and urged passage of a constitutional amendment to overturn it. Id at 146; see also ROBERT S. ALLEY, WITHOUT A PRAYER: RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS 28, 230 (1996) (recalling that the school-prayer decisions "sent shock waves through large portions of the citizenry" and "caused an enormous uproar against the Supreme Court"); JULIA C. LOREN, ENGEL V. VITALE: PRAYER IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 7, 61 (2001) (observing that "[t]he public outcry against the Court's ruling was swift and loud" and that "newspaper editorials across the country denounced the ruling"). Lucas Powe notes that "Engel produced more mail to the Court than any previous case 946 [Vol. 38: 945, 2011] ConstitutionalDivide PEPPERDINE LAW REVIEW enjoyed a virtual consensus of confident support among constitutional scholars and cultural elites.8 If Everson with its approval of the "wall of separation" was correct-and this is of course a contested if-then the school prayer decisions were pretty much inevitable.9 So it is commonly supposed. In this article, however, I will argue that these common assessments are mistaken. Controversial though it has been, Everson was in an important sense an expression of one deeply-rooted (albeit contested) but relatively concrete and confined American political tradition-the tradition, which Everson affirmed but distinguished, of denying public financial assistance to churches or to "sectarian" schools. The school prayer decisions, by contrast, were a constitutional turning point, working to transform not only the jurisprudence of religious freedom but constitutional discourse generally, and indeed the American self- understanding. Far from being an automatic corollary of Everson, the school prayer decisions quietly subverted and fundamentally redirected Everson's teachings. Without denying the significance of Everson, therefore, I will suggest that the school prayer decisions were the more momentous of the cases. If the outcome of the cases today seems foreordained (to legal observers, at least) and not especially transformative, that fact is in part a manifestation of the decisions' success in reshaping constitutional understandings in their own image. By helping to establish a larger (and few write to say what a good job the justices are doing)." LUCAS A. POWE JR., THE SUPREME COURT AND THE AMERICAN ELITE, 1789-2008, at 260 (2009). This opposition, though perhaps less strident today, has not disappeared; thus Kent Greenawalt reports that "[a) large segment of the American population persists in condemning the Supreme Court for taking religion out of schools and thus contributing to a secular, immoral, materialist cultural ethos." KENT GREENAWALT, DOES GOD BELONG IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS? 9 (2005); see also Mary C. Segers, The Religious Equality Amendment and Voluntary School Prayer, in EVERSON REVISITED: RELIGION, EDUCATION, AND LAW AT THE CROSSROADS, supranote 6, at 192-98. 8. See Jeffries & Ryan, supra note 4, at 322 ("The broad consensus of elite opinion on this issue ... was demonstrated when Leo Pfeffer, counsel for the American Jewish Congress, rounded up 110 law school deans and professors of law and political science to sign a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee supporting Engel and opposing school-prayer amendments on the ground that such observances in public schools would endanger 'the institutions which have preserved religious and political freedom in the United States."'). Not all leaders supported the decision, however; Erwin Griswold, Harvard Law School Dean and later Solicitor General under Presidents Johnson and Nixon, was critical. DIERENFIELD, supra note 7, at 136. 9. See Jeffries & Ryan, supra note 4, at 326-27; cf GREENAWALT, supra note 7, at 39 ("To understand why the decisions about prayer and Bible reading were so one-sided, we look to the Everson case."); William Bentley Ball, Litigating Everson After Everson, in EVERSON REVISITED: RELIGION, EDUCATION, AND LAW AT THE CROSSROADS, supra note 6, at 222 (describing Schempp as "complementary to Everson"). Mary Segers reports that "[t]he connection between the 1947 Everson decision and the Court's school prayer prohibitions in Engel and Schempp is clear and well acknowledged by scholars of Supreme Court jurisprudence." Segers, supra note 7, at 193. 947 constitutional framework within which they themselves appear virtually inevitable, the decisions have been in a sense self-validating. And yet this assessment cannot be the whole story because the momentous quality of the decisions also seems to have been largely invisible even to those who rendered those decisions. Although the general public immediately perceived the school prayer decisions as radical,o the Justices themselves seem for
Recommended publications
  • Prayer Is Serious Business: Reflections on Town of Greece

    Prayer Is Serious Business: Reflections on Town of Greece

    PRAYER IS SERIOUS BUSINESS: REFLECTIONS ON TOWN OF GREECE Perry Dane1 Abstract: In his dissent in Marsh v. Chambers, which upheld the practice of chaplains delivering public prayers in state legislative chambers, Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., observed that “prayer is serious business – serious theological business.” This two-part essay returns to that simple, but important insight in discussing the Supreme Court’s recent return to the question of legislative prayer in Town of Greece v. Galloway. The first part is based on remarks I delivered as part of a panel discussion held several months before the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Town of Greece. I proposed that the Court should overrule Marsh, or at least not extend its reach beyond Congress and state legislatures to local governmental bodies. But I also argued that, if the Court was unwilling to draw such bright lines, it should resist the temptation to parse individual prayer practices to make sure that they remained inoffensively “non-sectarian.” The second part of the essay was written after Town of Greece came down. It contends that both the majority opinion and Justice Kagan’s principal dissent failed spectacularly to appreciate that “prayer is serious business.” The majority listed a litany of purposes for public prayer, but neglected to include the most obvious – to pray. The dissent repeatedly discussed the audience for various public prayers, but ignored the most obvious intended audience – God. The two opinions are actually remarkably alike in reducing civic prayer to political declarations of identity. For Justice Kennedy, the prayers recited in the Town of Greece reflected a patriotic and inclusive national identity that transcends specific religious expressions.
  • The Role of Religious Values in Judicial Decision Making

    The Role of Religious Values in Judicial Decision Making

    Indiana Law Journal Volume 68 Issue 2 Article 3 Spring 1993 The Role of Religious Values in Judicial Decision Making Scott C. Idleman Indiana University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Idleman, Scott C. (1993) "The Role of Religious Values in Judicial Decision Making," Indiana Law Journal: Vol. 68 : Iss. 2 , Article 3. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol68/iss2/3 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Indiana Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Role of Religious Values in Judicial Decision Making SCOTT C. IDLEMAN* [U]nless people believe in the law, unless they attach a universal and ultimate meaning to it, unless they see it and judge it in terms of a transcendent truth, nothing will happen. The law will not work-it will be dead.' INTRODUCTION It is virtually axiomatic today that judges should not advert to religious values when deciding cases,2 unless those cases explicitly involve religion.' In part because of historical and constitutional concerns and in * J.DJM.P.A. Candidate, 1993, Indiana University School of Law at Bloomington; B.S., 1989, Cornell University. 1. HAROLD J. BERMAN, THE INTERACTION OF LAW AND RELIGION 74 (1974). 2. See, e.g., KENT GREENAWALT, RELIGIOUS CONVICTIONS AND POLITICAL CHOICE 239 (1988); Stephen L.
  • From John F. Kennedy's 1960 Campaign Speech to Christian

    From John F. Kennedy's 1960 Campaign Speech to Christian

    NYLS Law Review Vols. 22-63 (1976-2019) Volume 53 Issue 4 Faculty Presentation Day Article 1 January 2008 From John F. Kennedy’s 1960 Campaign Speech to Christian Supremacy: Religion in Modern Presidential Politics Stephen A. Newman New York Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/nyls_law_review Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Legal History Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Stephen A. Newman, From John F. Kennedy’s 1960 Campaign Speech to Christian Supremacy: Religion in Modern Presidential Politics, 53 N.Y.L. SCH. L. REV. 691 (2008-2009). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in NYLS Law Review by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@NYLS. VOLUME 53 | 2008/09 STEPHEN A. NEWMAN From John F. Kennedy’s 1960 Campaign Speech to Christian Supremacy: Religion in Modern Presidential Politics ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Stephen A. Newman is a professor of law at New York Law School. The author would like to thank Joseph Molinari of the New York Law School library for his invaluable assistance in the preparation of this article. 691 At a time when we see around the world the violent consequences of the assumption of religious authority by government, Americans may count themselves fortunate: Our regard for constitutional boundaries has protected us from similar travails, while allowing private religious exercise to flourish. The well-known statement that “[w]e are a religious people,” has proved true.
  • Nonestablishment, Standing, and the Soft Constitution

    Nonestablishment, Standing, and the Soft Constitution

    St. John's Law Review Volume 85 Number 2 Volume 85, Spring 2011, Number 2 Article 2 April 2014 Nonestablishment, Standing, and the Soft Constitution Steven D. Smith Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Smith, Steven D. (2011) "Nonestablishment, Standing, and the Soft Constitution," St. John's Law Review: Vol. 85 : No. 2 , Article 2. Available at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview/vol85/iss2/2 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in St. John's Law Review by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NONESTABLISHMENT, STANDING, AND THE SOFT CONSTITUTION STEVEN D. SMITHt It is not usual for legal scholars working in establishment clause jurisprudence-and it is especially not usual for me-to say nice things about what the Supreme Court has done to the subject. But that is what I mean to do today. I don't want to be too agreeable or cheerful, though, so this time, although commending the Court, I am going to take issue with the commentators. More specifically, I want to praise a recent development that most commentators seem to deplore-namely, the Court's recent practice of using the slightly disreputable doctrine of standing as a device to avoid deciding Establishment Clause cases on the merits. Thus, in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow,' the Court used a dubious "prudential" standing doctrine to avoid deciding whether the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance were unconstitutional.
  • The Morning Prayer in Greek Kindergartens As a Field of Exercising Multiculturalism

    The Morning Prayer in Greek Kindergartens As a Field of Exercising Multiculturalism

    ISSN 2239-978X Journal of Educational and Social Research Vol. 3 (2) May 2013 The Morning Prayer in Greek Kindergartens as a Field of Exercising Multiculturalism Konstantinos Tsioumis Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Argyris Kyridis Aristotle University of Thessaloniki [email protected] Zoe Konstantinidou Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Doi:10.5901/jesr.2013.v3n2p65 Abstract: Religious education has been an issue of social and political debate in many countries but mostly in countries where people from different national, cultural and religious origins live. Religious identity is a core element of a person’s identity that constitutes a crucial right of the person and its personal freedom. Every country and every state should protect the right of its citizens to exercise their religious duties. One of these duties is the prayer. However, some countries that experienced waves of migration during the last years do not have yet adjusted to taking the proper measures in order to overcome the transformation of the cultural composition of the their people. Greece is one of these countries. In Greek schools, every morning, the pupils and the teachers pray according to the ritual of the Greek Orthodox Church. This lead us to the research question of this paper: what happens with pupils whose religious faith is different and how do teachers face this problem? Our research hypothesis is that the way that teachers cope with the issue of the Morning Prayer is an issue of multicultural education, as well. For the purpose of our study we asked from 99 kindergarten teachers to inform us on (a) how they cope with the Morning Prayer and (b) how they treat the presence of children from culturally diverse backgrounds.
  • The Blaine Amendments & Anti-Catholicism

    The Blaine Amendments & Anti-Catholicism

    U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS School Choice The Blaine Amendments & Anti-Catholicism U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Washington, DC 20425 Visit us on the Web: www.usccr.gov On June 1, 2007, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (the “Commission”) conducted a briefing in Washington, D.C. on the status and effect of Blaine Amendments, which are provisions in state constitutions that restrict the use of public funds to support private religious schools. The Commission heard testimony from Anthony R. Picarello, Jr., Vice President and General Counsel of the Becket Fund; K. Hollyn Hollman, General Counsel of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty; Ellen Johnson, President of American Atheists; and Richard D. Komer, Senior Litigation Attorney at the Institute for Justice. Following are biographies of the four panelists, prepared statements by the four panelists, a written statement submitted by the Anti-Defamation League, and the transcript of the proceeding. Table of Contents Panelists’ Biographies ......................................................................................................... 2 Panelists’ Statements .......................................................................................................... 5 Anthony R. Picarello, Jr. ................................................................................................. 5 K. Hollyn Hollman ........................................................................................................ 13 Ellen Johnson ...............................................................................................................
  • The Unexplored Implications of Town of Greece V

    The Unexplored Implications of Town of Greece V

    THE UNEXPLORED IMPLICATIONS OF TOWN OF GREECE V. GALLOWAY Lisa Shaw Roy* ABSTRACT The Establishment Clause doctrine that awaits the next Associate Justice of the United States has the potential to look considerably different than that of the last fifty years. The Court’s recent Establishment Clause decision upholding legislative prayer, Town of Greece v. Galloway, does not herald a sharp doctrinal turn or overruling of precedent. Instead, the Town of Greece opinion reorients the focus of the Establishment Clause, shifting the ground underneath the endorsement test and the other doctrinal approaches that have typified past Establishment Clause decisions. The opinion reads like a rhetorical clearing of the field—an attempt to neutralize the separationist arguments of the past. With only four of the original five Justices in the Town of Greece majority on the Court, Town of Greece may represent little more than a step toward an unfinished project. In coming years, Town of Greece could go the way of its antecedent, Marsh v. Chambers, as a doctrinal island amid the Court’s Establishment Clause doctrine. Given the elevation of a conservative fifth justice to replace the late Justice Scalia, however, this is unlikely. And the decision itself projects more broadly. Town of Greece declares Marsh to be more than an exception to the Court’s existing Establishment Clause jurisprudence. Taken seriously, Town of Greece has much to say about what has gone before and the development of doctrine going forward. This article summarizes some of that rhetoric and its significance as a potential seedbed of new doctrine. As an example * Jamie L.
  • Amending America Exhibit Shows How Changes in the Constitution Affect the Way Our Democracy Works

    Amending America Exhibit Shows How Changes in the Constitution Affect the Way Our Democracy Works

    The first page of the Senate’s markup of the House-passed Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, ratified in 1791. “Article the First” was never ratified. The third and fourth articles were combined by the Senate into what it now the First Amendment. The second article, dealing with the pay of members of Congress, was ratified more than two centuries after it was sent to the states, in 1992. Amending America Exhibit Shows How Changes in the Constitution Affect the Way Our Democracy Works By Christine Blackerby hat if we elected the President of the United WStates by lot—by pulling a ball representing a candidate out of a bowl? A constitutional amendment introduced in Congress in 1846 proposed precisely that. In 1838, one member of Congress shot another, prompting the introduction of an amendment to the Constitution to deny public office to duelers. A citizen wrote to Congress in 1963 to advocate for a constitutional amendment to require that Americans “tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” Anyone who failed in that duty would be sen- tenced to 20 years of hard labor. These are just a few of the more than 11,000 consti- tutional amendments that have been proposed in Con- gress since the Constitution was written in 1787. Some of them were proposed to call attention to an issue, some as satire, some to allow a member of Congress to take a political stand, and some were very serious appeals to resolve pressing problems. Left: A mural by Barry Faulkner in the Rotunda of the National Archives Building depicts James Madison handing a copy of the Constitution to George Washington (far right).
  • Religious Freedom and Laicite: a Comparison of the United States and France T.Jeremy Gunn

    Religious Freedom and Laicite: a Comparison of the United States and France T.Jeremy Gunn

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Brigham Young University Law School BYU Law Review Volume 2004 | Issue 2 Article 5 5-1-2004 Religious Freedom and Laicite: A Comparison of the United States and France T.Jeremy Gunn Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation T.Jeremy Gunn, Religious Freedom and Laicite: A Comparison of the United States and France, 2004 BYU L. Rev. 419 (2004). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2004/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Brigham Young University Law Review at BYU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in BYU Law Review by an authorized editor of BYU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GUN-FIN 7/3/2004 1:32 PM Religious Freedom and Laïcité: A Comparison of the United States and France 1 T. Jeremy Gunn. I. Introduction ........................................................................... 420 II. National Identities and Founding Myths: Laïcité in the French Republic and Religious Freedom in the United States ..... 428 A. Laïcité as a Founding Myth of the French Republic...... 428 B. Religious Freedom as an American Founding Myth...... 430 III. Corrections of Assumptions Underlying the Historical Origins of Laïcité and Religious Freedom ................................... 432 A. The Historical Roots of Laïcité..................................... 432 1. The First Wave: The French Revolution ................. 433 2. The Second Wave: The Third Republic .................
  • Schools: Protestants, Catholics, and Education, 1945-1965

    Schools: Protestants, Catholics, and Education, 1945-1965

    University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law 2007 "Free" Religion and "Captive" Schools: Protestants, Catholics, and Education, 1945-1965 Sarah Barringer Gordon University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Economic History Commons, Education Commons, Educational Sociology Commons, History of Religion Commons, History of Religions of Western Origin Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Legal Commons, Legal Studies Commons, Religion Law Commons, Social Policy Commons, and the United States History Commons Repository Citation Gordon, Sarah Barringer, ""Free" Religion and "Captive" Schools: Protestants, Catholics, and Education, 1945-1965" (2007). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 1032. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1032 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. "FREE" RELIGION AND "CAPTIVE" SCHOOLS: PROTESTANTS, CATHOLICS, AND EDUCATION, 1945-1965 Sarah Barringer Gordon * INTRODUCTION After World War II, Americans rededicated themselves to educa­ tion and religion as keys to a strong and vibrant democracy. Almost immediately, cases involving education captured the attention of the Supreme Court and the American public. A new constitutional law of education unfolded in the decades after the conclusion of the war, and it involved controversial issues of race and religion in public schools. Legal historians have taught us much about how Brown v.
  • Secular State, Religious People— the American Model

    Secular State, Religious People— the American Model

    THE JAMES A. BAKER III INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RICE UNIVERSITY SECULAR STATE, RELIGIOUS PEOPLE— THE AMERICAN MODEL BY WILLIAM MARTIN HARRY AND HAZEL CHAVANNE SENIOR FELLOW IN RELIGION AND PUBLIC POLICY JAMES A. BAKER III INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RICE UNIVERSITY APRIL 2006 Secular State, Religious People—The American Model THIS PAPER WAS ADAPTED FROM PRESENTATIONS MADE BY THE AUTHOR AT THE INAUGURAL CONFERENCE OF THE BONIUK CENTER FOR THE STUDY AND ADVANCEMENT OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE AT RICE UNIVERSITY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2005, AND AS THE HOWARD MAHAN LECTURE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH ALABAMA, MOBILE, FEBRUARY 9, 2006. THE RESEARCH AND VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THESE PAPERS ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL RESEARCHER, AND DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF THE JAMES A. BAKER III INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY, © 2006 BY THE JAMES A. BAKER III INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY OF RICE UNIVERSITY THIS MATERIAL MAY BE QUOTED OR REPRODUCED WITHOUT PRIOR PERMISSION, PROVIDED APPROPRIATE CREDIT IS GIVEN TO THE AUTHOR AND THE JAMES A. BAKER III INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY. 2 Secular State, Religious People—The American Model Introduction Almost everywhere in the world where people are at war, religion plays a role, usually a negative one. In this country, religion contributes to a growing and disturbing polarization. Still, though not perfect in its record of religious tolerance, America has been remarkable in its success at avoiding faith-flavored wars and, overall, at granting freedom to a wide variety of religious expressions and practices over the past two centuries and a little more. That is a notable achievement in human history.
  • T Believe in Him': Religion, Schooling and Children's Rights

    T Believe in Him': Religion, Schooling and Children's Rights

    ‘No offence to God but I don’t believe in Him’: religion, schooling and children’s rights Peter J. Hemming (corresponding author) School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom 1.22 Glamorgan Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, CF10 3WT 02920 870911, [email protected] Twitter handle: @DrPeterJHemming Word count: 7990 1 ‘No offence to God but I don’t believe in Him’: religion, schooling and children’s rights Since the Children Act (2004) in both England and Wales, schools are expected to give due attention to the issue of children’s rights, particularly respect for the views of pupils in matters that affect them, as outlined in Article 12 of the UNCRC. However, one theme that has been relatively unexplored in the literature on children’s rights and education is religion and the role it plays in everyday school life, an issue that has relevance for Article 12, but also Article 14, which refers to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This article approaches the topic of religion, schooling and children’s rights empirically, through a focus on rural church schools. It draws on in-depth qualitative research with pupils and other stakeholders from two case study schools in order to explore the significance of ethos values and experiences of religious practices for debates in this area. Keywords: children’s rights; faith schools; non-religion; prayer; religion; values 2 Introduction The 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), to which the United Kingdom is a signatory, was an important influence on both the English and Welsh versions of the Children Act (2004), enshrining some its key principles into law.