In an article dated August 8, titled “To pray or not to pray in public settings,” Benson Marsh examines the issue of prayer at school events. U student Amy Lozano is quoted as saying “It’s one of the reasons people came to this country, to escape religious persecution.” Marsh concludes the article by asking “whether the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion or whether it guarantees freedom from religion.”
It is true that religious persecution was a pivotal factor in the development of the United States. But when “religious persecution” is invoked, it is often forgotten that the perpetrators of persecution were usually religious people as well. Catholics persecuted Protestants, Protestants persecuted Catholics. Everyone persecuted Anabaptists. The freedom to practice one’s own religion is precisely the same as freedom from someone else’s.
Marsh also mentions, indirectly, that students are permitted to “pray on their own.” This is an important point that many Americans seem to misunderstand. As I understand it, the courts have not ruled against prayer in public places. Students can pray in hallways or at football games or in classrooms (provided there is not a lecture in progress). No one should have a problem with that.
The courts have simply ruled that government entities cannot designate prayer or religious expression as part of their official business. There are loopholes in this as well. For example, a city council meeting can have a regular opening prayer led by a citizen, provided there is equal opportunity for citizens of all religions to offer this prayer.
There are really very few cases where any person is prevented from expressing their religion. People should be more aware of the details of court decisions before they complain that their rights are being trampled.
-Chris WinsteadU. Alumnus