Re: question

I can't qualify as a constitutional scholar, but I recall a mention by
someone that the First Amendment is a prohibition against an established
church that has been made into a right. This rings true with me. I
understand that in Virginia at the time of the Revolution, one had to go
to an Episcopalian clergyman to be married, for only they had the right
to perform the ceremony. Jefferson opposed this. I also understand that
years later in Massachusetts the congregation and the city government
were the same group.

As to prayer, I recall a prohibition against silent prayer in the school
cafeteria someplace about 1954. Apparently the expectation by one board
was that the constitutional requirement was freedom FROM religion, not OF
religion. This was a change from earlier, for when I graduated from
public high school we had a baccalaureate service in the school
auditorium with prayer by my grandfather, Rev. N. J. Witmer, and a sermon
by an active pastor.
Dave

On Thu, 1 Jun 2006 19:46:58 -0700 (PDT) Bill Hamilton
<williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com> writes:
>
>
> --- "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 23:57:28 2006