Religion in education has become a hotly contested debate in my community in the last year. In fact, the district in which I teach and live, Sumner County, is currently entangled in a lawsuit with the ACLU over administrative decisions that allowed for religious involvement in school affairs. After reading articles over controversies in Illinois and Texas it’s clear that states across the country are challenged with balancing protection of religious freedom with individual rights to demonstrate religious beliefs in public schools. When reading on this particular topic, I always find myself conflicted, sorting through the facts, my feelings and my values. I am a Christian and love living in a country that protects my freedom to worship as my conscience and spirit dictate, but I have serious misgivings about religious involvement in public education.
While both of the cases in Illinois and Texas seem perfectly benign to the casual observer, I can understand why some proponents of the venerated “separation of church and state” have become so adamant regarding grey areas such as the “moment of silence” or the teaching of “intelligent design” in a public biology classroom. If school is compulsory, then it should be an environment where any student from any cultural or religious background can experience a sense of belonging as part of a community of learners. So while, personally, the “moment of silence” doesn’t not present an affront to my belief system, I could see how a student from an atheist background might feel ostracized by the awkward pause. And, although I believe in “intelligent design,” I, like St. Thomas of Aquinas happen to believe that scientific reason and faith are not mutually exclusive. I don’t believe I need to undermine the feasibility of a scientifically supported theory in order to assert my beliefs. While some may view the difference between “examining strengths and weaknesses” in scientific theory and “examining the empirical evidence” for each theory as mere semantics, the language we choose to express our learning objectives can possess powerful connotations. Both cases seem to revolve around the tendency of public educators to blur the line between religion and state mandated education.
It seems this debate inevitably leads proponents on both sides of the argument back to our nation’s history and the intent of our founding fathers regarding the church and state. Freedom from state establishment of religion was clearly the intention of the constitutional framers when they wrote that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” However, anti-religion advocates often speak of the “separation of church and state” as synonymous with the first amendment when, in fact, there is no mention of this separation in the constitution. The “wall of separation between church and state” was a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association during his presidency in 1802. In the letter he so aptly stated, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” Although Jefferson was an advocate of personal choice and even suspended national days of fasting and other religious observances during his presidency, I don’t believe that his intention was to protect the state from religious involvement, but, instead, to assure the Danbury Association and the American people that the state would not be allowed to mandate religious practices as it had in Europe. In fact, evidence of church involvement in the founding of our nation is undeniable. Our buildings and money are imprinted with the words “In God We Trust.” Our presidents have all been sworn in with their right hands on the Bible stating “So help me God.” The Declaration of Independence mentions God four times. Surely our nation’s founders were more concerned with the state’s involvement in the church than the church’s influence on the state.
However, just as the constitution is a living document that has changed and grown over time, so should our attitudes regarding how best to truly protect religious freedom in our nation. While historical context does provide a more accurate interpretation of such principles, we must make decisions in light of our current reality. We live in a pluralistic, multicultural society in which all citizens are guaranteed the right to their own belief systems. We may not personally believe that a salute to the flag constitutes idolatry, but the majority of Americans have come to respect a citizens first amendment rights over regimented reverence to a national symbol. I believe we have come to view the principles set forth in our unique constitution as more patriotic than any show of nationalism. While a “moment of silence,” mention of Creationism, or a baccalaureate service may seem harmless to me, I have to be willing to look at the issue from another perspective. As has already been clearly demonstrated in our community, there is a slippery slope from a mandated moment of reflection to school condoned dissemination of the Bible. While some cases may seem more clear cut, we always need to thoughtfully consider what is in the best interest of all students, not just a majority.
No comments:
Post a Comment