University of Baltimore Law Forum Volume 15 Article 2 Number 1 Fall, 1984

1984 The omeM nt of Silence in Public Schools: Valid Educational Activity or Attempt to Breach the Church-State Wall? James A. Helfman

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf Part of the Religion Law Commons

Recommended Citation Helfman, James A. (1984) "The omeM nt of Silence in Public Schools: Valid Educational Activity or Attempt to Breach the Church- State Wall?," University of Baltimore Law Forum: Vol. 15 : No. 1 , Article 2. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf/vol15/iss1/2

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Forum by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Motnent of Silence in Public Schools: Valid Educational Activity or AtteIllpt to Breach the Church---State Wall?

by James A. Helfman

roponents of school real­ from constitutional formulation to the The right to worship as one pleased at­ ize that a constitutional amend­ present day, and to analyze the evolution tracted displaced settlers from all nations P ment is needed to get specific of case law with specific regard to the who were determined to exercise this prayer into the nation's public schools,1 growing controversy surrounding the right upon arrival in the New World.l1 and such an amendment is strongly sup­ in public schools. This Unfortunately, however, some of the ported by nationalleaders.2 What is not subject and the issues surrounding it are groups which fled to this country to es­ clear, however, is the status of the of great concern to this writer, not just cape the religious persecution of Europe "moment of silence" in public schools. because of my years as a public school tried to force their particular religious On April 2, 1984, the Supreme Court teacher but because of my firm belief that beliefs upon other colonists. 12 Laws heard oral argument in the case of Wal­ are the province of religious in­ authorizing the collection of tax monies lace v. Jaffree,3 dealing with the constitu­ stitutions and family, not the business of to support the government-favored tionality of an statute calling school boards.7 churches were allowed, and religious for moment of silence in Alabama pub­ A full understanding of the Establish­ bigotry and intolerance were widespread, lic schools.4 Hopefully, the Court will ment Clause requires an examination of particularly towards non-Christian issue a definitive ruling on the applica­ the historical development of American religions .13 bility of the three-prong Establishment religious philosophy during the forma­ It is remarkable that the term "relig_ Clause testS as it applies to the burgeoning tive years of our republic.s There were ion" is not defined anywhere in the Con­ moment of silence movement.6 many evils that forced our ancestors to stitution. Indeed, the only reference to a It is the purpose of this article to in­ flee their European homeland,9 and free­ Supreme Being is in the date of the Con­ vestigate the historical foundations of the dom of religion was a major factor in the stitution itself, i.e., "in the year of our Establishment Clause as it has evolved rapid settlement of the New W orld.10 Lord."14 This lack of Constitutional de------C@) SCHOOL

6-The Law Forum/Fall, 1984 finition has been a concern to courts and Church and State. "19 definitive ruling regarding prayers in commentators throughout the years, This definitional statement was repeated public schools, and by ruling against a since the Establishment Clause lends it­ the following year in McCollum v. Board state prayer t