Re: question

--- "burgytwo@juno.com" <burgytwo@juno.com> wrote:

> To David & Bill: Help me out here. Regardless of Jones' rationale (which I
> also do not entirely share), it seems to me that the First Amendment, along
> with the 14th, does bar any church-state alliance. And should. But I may be
> missing something. Tell me one or two examples where a church-state alliance
> ought to be permitted.

Does the 14th amendment apply the Bill of Rights to the states? I believe it
does. That brings up an interesting conundrum, because the 10th amendment says
that any power not explicltly given to the Congress, nor prohibited to the
states is reserved for the states and the people thereof. That amounts to a
conflict in my book. Perhaps the Supreme Court will have to sort it out
eventually.

I don't argue in favor of a church-state alliance. I do think it ought to be
okay for religious organizations like the Salvation Army to receive money from
the government for relief efforts, but that doesn't amount to a church-state
alliance. My concern is that in their efforts to keep religion out of the
public square, especially in education, the government will give students the
impression that religion is irrelevant. I think it's very difficult to say
nothing about religion without giving the impression that it's irrelevant.

>
> Reasonable people differ on these issues, I know. I am familiar with the
> SCOTUS decision that said a gov't could not compose a prayer (to a
> nonspecific god) which was to be mandated upon public school children. The
> ramifications of this decision are still being worked out, of course. For
> instance, a prayer to a god by a valedictorian at commencement does not
> seem, to me, to be prohibited by the amendments, although some courts (I
> understand) have ruled otherwise. Of course, a prayer by a school official
> is something else.
>
> Specific examples of what you guys have in mind would help. Bill worries
> that some school administrators haven't got it right yet. In this, they are
> like most of the rest of us.

A few years ago public universities in Missouri (I believe) interpreted the
first amendment to mean that they couldn't allow religious groups to use school
facilities. That issue was litigated and the court ruled that the schools'
interpretation was wrong. When I was a graduate student at Purdue I served on a
committee that approved student use of University facilities. One of the
University rules was that no proselytization was to take place. We asked the
University to define proselytization and they refused to do so, so we basically
let anyone use University facilities. In both instances the mere allowing of a
religious group to use facilities does not constitute an endorsement, and
certainly is not equivalent to Congress passing a law respecting the
establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof.
>
Several years ago some Christian student groups organized prayer vigils around
the flagpole in front of the school, and some schools tried to prevent the
practice. Again, the fact that some students on their own decide to exercise
their right of free association does not constitute endorsement of religion by
the school. It seems to me the most the school can and ought to do in such a
cricumstance is to announce that the students involved are exercising their
right to free association, that the school is neither encouraging nor
discouraging it, and that all students are free to participate or not as they
see fit.

Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
248.652.4148 (home) 248.821.8156 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Thu Jun 1 22:47:36 2006