The American Constitution declares that there will be no establishment of national religion in America. This is for the benefit of all religious and non-religious people. When a State Religion is established it can mean trouble for those who do not follow it (which is how many Americans came to be here in the first place, way back when).
Directed prayer in public places establishes religion because it instructs subordinates to pray in the manner dictated by the director's religion.
In the example of prayer in public schools, if there was a "Prayer Moment" of some sort every morning, it is forcing the schoolchildren to imitate the Christian method of prayer or risk being ostracized. Students of other religions are not encouraged to face Mecca, for example, which is necessary for Muslim prayer. Atheist students would need to pretend to pray or else be subverting the will of their teacher and fellow students, with whatever consequences might follow.
Individual prayer, however, is not outlawed in this country and is considered a good thing. There are no atheists who would want individual students to be punished for being caught praying in school, and there's nothing stopping a student from praying at any time, day or night, of their own violition. The objection is to a mandatory lead prayer, which establishes the will of the school and those in power and shows the students who is in the majority and who is not, which can be psychologically harmful and could lead to lots of conflict and persecution.
The founding fathers were smart enough to dissuade this sort of thing and we would be smart to uphold it. If parents want their children to be lead in prayer, they can take their children to churches, Sunday Schools, and religious schools, where their presence is voluntary and not mandated by law.
edit to add: It's interesting how a question can ask for someone to explain their point of view, and the answer gets downgraded by someone who doesn't share it. Did this not describe the atheist point of view? Or can you just not bear to see it articulated?
Bob Baylock : It's also interesting how the Religious Right tends to confuse "Freedom of Expression" with "Mandatory Compliance with Christian Values". Again, noone wants to restrict expressions of faith, only the imposition of those rituals by authority figures such as teachers, employers, judges government officials, etc. Freedom should mean I can refrain from prayer without fear of retribution by the authority figure who is ordering me to do it. You would feel the same if your boss, for example, was leading your workplace in a Satanist Ritual that you found offensive, but feared for your job if you refused to participate. The fact that you can't imagine the danger of such a practice shows a profound lack of empathy.
Comments
Good answer - on the nose
by prustage on June 24th, 2006
One of the most bizarre creations of the Left is the idea that religious expression must be censored in order to comply with the First Amendment; when it is clearly the purpose of the First Amendment to protect such expression.
by Anonymous on June 30th, 2006
Kabuki, are you a lawyer because your explanation is skewed! Separation between church & state is a legal fiction created by a U.S. Supreme Court justice, who clearly was inept in understanding God's Word. Our country was founded under God.
by Answers101 on July 1st, 2006
Absolutely correct! Answers: Thomas Jefferson himself coined the phrase, "wall of separation between Church and State."
by AntigoneRising on October 10th, 2006
excellent, thoughtful, well articulated response
by LynfromNM on October 11th, 2006
Our country wasn't founded "under God". That phrase was added to the Pledge in the 1950s, spearheaded by the Catholic Knights of Columbus.
by eternal0void on September 15th, 2007
Establishing a National Religion would require an Act of Congress.
by Bee on September 10th, 2009
Establishing a national religion would require a new constitution or possibly a new nation altogether.
by Rufus_T_Firefly on September 10th, 2009
Right. Not sure why people make the connection between somebody praying in public and an Act of Congress.
by Bee on September 10th, 2009
It's not the praying in public that is unconstitutional, it's forcing of religion into everyone's daily life, whether they choose to believe in a deity or not. A government that serves everyone equally should be religion-neutral.
by Rufus_T_Firefly on September 10th, 2009
Actually an Act of Congress, followed by the Acts of at least 39 of the State Legislatures, is all that is required to establish a National Religion.
.
That is the basic legal requirement for amending the U.S. Constitution. As listed in the U.S. Constitution (so no "new constitution" required).
by eternal0void on September 13th, 2009
Fortunately, the chances of that actually happening are slim to none.
by Rufus_T_Firefly on September 13th, 2009
Agreed, Rufus! A lot of Americans still embrace the values expressed by the founders.
by LynfromNM on September 13th, 2009
Answers101. you're wrong about the founding of America. The Constitution of the United States of America guarantees the the freedom to worship in whatever manner you choose. Maybe you should re-read it a little more carefully.
.
While you're at it, read the Treaty of Tripoli, too! In exact words, John Adams in Article 11 states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
The vote that put this treaty into effect was only the third recorded unanimous vote of 339 votes taken. The treaty was printed in the Philadelphia Gazette and two New York papers, with no evidence of any public dissent.
.
I'm pretty sure that President John Adams had a better understanding of how our government was founded than you do.
by Rufus_T_Firefly on September 13th, 2009
by Denise_C8996 on January 27th, 2011
The Establishment clause, and supreme court, stated that the government cannot "promote or inhibit" religion. So that does not "protect" religion in schools. SO, lizvelrene, kudos to you.
by dragonofhope on January 27th, 2011