This week, the school board in Carlisle, PA voted to allow teachers to meet with students in the "Meet You at the Pole" campaign, where students meet at the flagpole to pray (it passed 8-1). To me, this seems like a no-brainer. What is the problem with this?
Well, the one person that voted against this did so because he thought it would lend itself to a government establishment of religion. He wondered how this would affect the students if they saw their teacher going out to the flagpole to pray. Maybe, their religion is different from a teacher's religion. Maybe the student believes in no religion. Either way, why should it bother the student how someone practices their faith. (As a sidenote, isn't it interesting how these atheists do not want someone else to 'force' their religion on them, yet they want to push their beliefs on others.)
Anyway, after doing a little bit of reading, I found out that these prayers at the flagpole are not audible prayers. The students meet and pray silently, which would allow people of any religion to come together and offer up their prayers without offending anyone else (I am not speaking to the idea of ecumenical prayers, I am just addressing the issue of a teacher and prayer). How could this possibly be an establishment of religion when the teacher never has to say what religion he/she adheres to?
But, where do we draw the line? Do we tell teachers that they cannot go to church, because an atheist student (or parent) may see that teacher walking into a church that they do not agree with? Do we get offended if they go to a church of a different religion? Can we tell them to stop praying in restaurants, just in case they may be seen by a student? This is utter foolishness.
The Constitution gives us freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. These complainers need to read many of the documents written by the founding fathers. They need to read many of the state constitutions. The founders had a tremendous faith in God and wanted him to be an integral part of the lives of those who served the people. However, they were smart enough not to condone a state-sponsored religion. They never said our leaders should not be religious.
No comments:
Post a Comment