
By: Robin Murray-o'hair
Re: Re: Yes, USA TODAY, There are Atheists

YES, USA TODAY, THERE ARE ATHEISTS OUT THERE

A "USA TODAY" Editorial Debate Manages to Exclude Any Mention of
Atheists or State-Church Separation In a Debate Over School
Prayer

by Conrad F. Goeringer

   In an editorial debate appearing in the Thursday, April 27, 1995
issue of USA TODAY, writers skillfully managed to make no mention
of Atheism and adroitly avoided phrases such as "state/church
separation."  The portion of the debate titled "Our View"
consisted of noting that some religious groups have "joined in an
effort to clear up such misinformation" about the prayer issue,
such as the statement that "Courts have declared the schools
religion-free zones."

   The section titled "Opposing View" was written by Jay Sekulow,
chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice, a legal
advocacy group organized by TV evangelist Pat Robertson.  The
ACLJ was founded to do courtroom battle on behalf of Christian
evangelical social issues, such as returning prayer and Bible
recitation to the public schools.

   While appearing to oppose prayer in the schools, USA TODAY
said that "Teaching about the history of religion, comparative
religion, the Bible as literature, and the religious background
of the abolition, women's rights and civil rights movements is
'both permissible and desirable.'" USA TODAY quoted liberally
from a document titled "Religion in the Public Schools: a Joint
Statement of Current Law" which was drafted by several religious
groups ostensibly opposed to mandatory prayer, including the
National Association of Evangelicals, National Council of
Churches and the American Jewish Congress. But It Started With an
Atheist... The furor over "returning god to the classroom" has
its roots in the famous 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case of MURRAY v.
CURLETT which outlawed mandatory prayer in public school
classrooms.  The case transformed an Atheist woman, Madalyn
Murray O'Hair, from a Baltimore social and child care activist
professional into "the most hated woman in America" according to
Life Magazine and other media.  O'Hair went on to found the
Society of Separationists (SOS) and American Atheists.  That
organization, now headquartered in Austin Texas has members
throughout the country, publishes books and magazines, maintains
a computer bulletin board and information service, and works to
advance Atheist philosophy and defend state/church separation and
the First Amendment.

   One gathers from the tone of the USA TODAY editorial that it
is religious organizations which are "leading the charge" against
a small minority whining for the return of school prayer. But
religious groups like the Christian Coalition, or their political
arms such as Jay Sekulow's ACLJ, are part of a vast movement of
churches and evangelical groups who -- along with conservative
elements in the government -- want to re-instate religious ritual
back into the schools, often under the guise of "voluntary
prayer." In his portion of the USA TODAY debate, Sekulow
insisted, "No one is suggesting that one religion be given
preference over another.  No one is suggesting that a school or
state endorse any kind of religious belief."

   But in fact, school prayer -- according to its opponents and
numerous court findings -- does just that.

   The fact that the prayer is organized in any way by school
authorities, especially as part of the "official" school day,
renders that prayer ritual something more than just "a group of
kids getting together to pray." And USA TODAY, trying to dispel
what it claims are "myths" designed to promote school prayer,
said "simply wrong" to the idea that "Courts have declared the
schools religion-free zones." True, kids can pray individually or
in groups on their own time between classes, before or after
school, at home and in other places.  But the schools should
indeed be "religion free" when official school business (such as
instruction) is being conducted; and school-sponsored events
should be religion-free as well.

   Although Atheists usually defend the notion of church/state
separation as something which benefits them, the First Amendment
also has had the curious effect of protecting persons with
unpopular religious beliefs from the peer pressure and harassment
that takes place when they refuse to participate in somebody
else's religious ritual or prayer.  A Jewish student, for
instance, should not be compelled to recite a Baptist prayer; a
Muslim youngster should be not compelled to listen to bible
verse. Neither should be accosted in hallways, libraries, lunch
rooms, or play grounds by prosyletizing Christians.

   Likewise, a student who has no religious belief should not be
mandated to participate in any religious ceremony or recitation.

   Ironically, it was Jay Sekulow of the Robinson-funded ACLJ,
who used the phrase "separation of church and state," which he
claimed to support.

  Often, the best way to undermine a principle is to insist that
you really support it, while actively working against it.  Church
and state cannot be separate -- in any sense of the word -- if
prayer is orchestrated in public school classrooms.

   With prayer, and in our pluralistic society, there would
inevitably be the squabbles and in-fighting which has typified
religious history -- WHOSE prayer shall be recited?  WHICH holy
book shall be read?  Would there be a drawing, with, say a Roman
Catholic prayer on Mondays and the Muslims getting the Wednesday
slot?  Or, how about a "non-sectarian prayer" one which manages
to not offend ALL religions?  Is such a prayer possible?    And
what happens when unpopular religious groups -- Moonies,
Scientologists, Satanists -- want THEIR prayers and writings
publicized over the school PA system?

   Or how about the infamous "moment of silence" -- how would
this event be presented to the students?  What purpose will be
they told that this ritual serves?  And would it remain simply a
"moment of silence," or begin to evolve into something more
substantive and sectarian?

   Religionists, in fact, have always had difficulty in agreeing
to school prayer.  Before the 1963 Supreme Court case, prayer was
not a universal feature in all schools; in fact, the majority of
states either did not mandate prayer or left it as a "local
option."  Where it was mandated, it caused numerous problems.

   Atheists point out that prayer simply does not belong in
public schools; that Atheist children will be insulted,
ostracized, even physically injured when they do not participate
and resist peer-pressure.

   In anticipation of the upcoming July 4 deadline for a
Constitutional Amendment to re-instate prayer ritual, American
Atheists has launched the "Problem With Prayer Project," which
would include collections of writings by Atheist students,
teachers and others affected by the prayer issue.

                              Other Problems

   Though mandatory prayer ritual may be opposed by some of the
groups mentioned in the USA TODAY editorial, there are problems
with "teaching religion" as history, or presenting the Bible as
"literature," or trying to present a "religious" dimension to
social movements.

   These have been cited in numerous attempts to "sneak prayer in
through the back door" of the schools.  A case last week in a
Utah school district involved the showing of a blatantly
religious film, "Where Jesus Walked" as part of a "social
studies" curriculum.  One school source tried to maintain that
the film was "really" meant to show the architecture of that part
of the world in biblical times, although the term "architecture"
was never mentioned in the film.

  There are problems with exactly HOW religion would be
presented, even in a comparative religions class.  And would
non-religious figures in history be given equal weight in
discussions of abolitionist, feminist or other social movements?
These are questions that worry Atheists.

   The elimination of Atheists from the school prayer debate not
only serves to rewrite the history of this important First
Amendment issue, but conjures a climate wherein religion is
"acceptable" to all in American life and American public
institutions, so long as religious leaders can agree on the
details.

   It isn't.

   Religious proselytizing of any kind should be kept out of the
public schools -- whether in the form of prayer, a "moment of
silence", or biased, covert indoctrination presented under a thin
veneer as "history".

                             --30--

 * WCE 2.0/2394 * Dial-THE-Atheist (512) 458-5731

