CHICAGO – A federal judge ruled Wednesday that the state law requiring a moment of silence in public schools across Illinois is unconstitutional, saying it crosses the line separating church and state.”The statute is a subtle effort to force students at impressionable ages to contemplate religion,” U.S. District Judge Robert W. Gettleman said in his ruling.The ruling came in a lawsuit designed to bar schools from enforcing the Illinois Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act. It was filed by talk show host Rob Sherman, an outspoken atheist, and his daughter, Dawn, a student at Buffalo Grove High School in suburban Chicago.
I hate moments of silence. They say it’s not coerced prayer because nobody is forcing kids to pray, but the same goes for CHURCH. Nobody forces you to pray in church either. You stand in silence, and you know everyone else is praying, but you aren’t forced to pray. So what’s the difference? Moments of silence include mandatory attendance. Unlike Church, you can’t opt out. You can’t go to the bathroom. You can’t come to school when it’s over. You MUST attend, as a child, away from your parents’ protection, and be reminded every day that although you aren’t praying, EVERYONE else is (at least it appears that way). It’s pure peer pressure, and it’s totally intentional.Prayer is allowed in public school by federal law. Anyone can pray at any time (as long as they don’t force or coerce others to do so, or disturb classes), and they DO. Prayer groups can meet before or after classes and they DO. The only problem is that kids are opting out of going, so they need to force kids into it. They need to push other people’s kids — the kids who DON’T want to go to the volunteer events, to be in a situation where prayer is obvious and pressured, like church, only mandatory. And it’s only target is the kids who don’t want to pray in the first place. Congrats to Rob Sherman on his victory for children.
Dave,
Excellent points. Well written. Now it should be noted that for a lot of young people, church isn’t optional. But you make very good points there.
Rob Sherman rocks again.
Is it not obvious to most people that attempts like this are just incremental steps towards forced school prayer / marketing?
The next step would be to have the evangelical churches order their kids to pray loudly during that time. Then everyone becomes used to it, then it becomes the norm, then it becomes expected, and by then coercion has been going on for a while.
Great post Dave…
It shows how AA would deny the constitutional rights of all children because one child is “offended”…
More proof of forcing the views of non-believers on believers…
It’s a moment of silence. It allows those children who would like time to pray, the opportunity. What about their rights? Should they take the first 5 minutes of their class and pray ignoring the teacher? You admit it is their constitutional right to pray…so exactly when are they suppose to do it?
The law says nothing about all kids being forced to remain in the class and participate.
http://tinyurl.com/czcub5
I thought all kids were born as atheists…if that’s true, and they are raised in an atheist home, then please explain how a moment of silence will take them down the path of religion…
Should we outlaw ALL moments of silence?
If it’s unconstitutional in public schools, then I’m sure it was unconstitutional when they had a moment of silence at Virginia Tech…
You also didn’t mention that the ” Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act” was sponsored by a democrat and voted for by NObama…hey, but as is typical, we don’t want the opportunity to review all of the facts…
Once might actually be allowed to think for themselves…
http://tinyurl.com/d3y3qa
Congratulations and a huge thank to Rob Sherman!
… and Dawn Sherman!
I am an atheist mom in Texas where the moment of silence is a daily ritual after the pledge. The moment of silence does not bother me. I observed how it was handled in the school and most kids do not pray…they stare at their friends, giggle, look around the room, etc. The teacher is often taking roll, going through stacks of papers or getting ready for the day. Yes, it is a symbolic gesture but I have bigger fights.
Example:
My daughter’s second grade teacher decided to put a funky torture instrument (the cross) over her desk. Nobody said a word. I confronted the teacher, told her that the religious symbol repulsed me, and she took it down. Problem solved. Anyhow, just my two-cents…Great site, btw.
We wouldn’t have so much of our time wasted with stupid questions like this if Don’t Breedm’s mother had had an abortion.
Great post, Dave. I’m forwarding it to friends.
Phreedm (big surprise!) misses the point.
The government does not restrict anyone’s right to pray nor restrict a stalking horse for prayer such as a moment of silence. What the court decision affirms is government neutrality in religion; neither promoting it or harming it. Whether or not a student is “forced” to participate isn’t the main issue. The main issue is that it is an unconstitutional activity when pushed by government.
And phreedm, it IS important if even one child is offended; at least, that is, if there is a constitutional right (like freedom of religion) involved.
Some people (like phreedm?) just don’t understand that, under the American Constitution, rights do not belong to any group regardless of whether they are a majority or not. The sole and only possessor of these rights is the individual. Infringe on one person’s rights and all peoples’ are endangered.
The Founding Fathers were well aware of the danger from “the violence of majority faction” (we’re more familiar with the term de Tocqueville used, “the tyranny of the majority”). That’s why they made those rights inalienable.
Pointing out that a democrat sponsored the bill and that Obama voted for it are red herrings. Apparently you think that’s important but wrong is wrong no matter who votes for it. To think otherwise is to be a tribalist, not a rational thinker.
I want equal time:
Now, for a “moment of secular reflection”.
Ron Barrier summed up the moment of silence issue well, I thought. I’ll try to paraphrase him.
“The moment of silence suggests that when Christian kids get to school, they’re not prepared. Apparently they’re in a daze, and they need the government to set aside some time every class day so they can collect themselves.”
Well it was funnier when he said it. lol
I would also say beware of anyone who wants you to be quiet on a regular basis, just because they tell you to. It seems to go against free speech, among other liberties.
If only there were some way that these poor poor souls could pray at home … then they wouldn’t need to pray at school. There must be some way out of this mind numbing dilemma!
You’re right What. I don’t have the answer either. I guess we will have to wait for someone to come up with the solution. Such a difficult question.
Those poor kids not being able to pray at school. Jeez, I just wish I could think of a way that they could pray at home or maybe at church or on the bus or outside or something. But I don’t think that would be the solution. Gosh I’m perplexed.
Preedm, perhaps the Messiah could help? You should pray on that.
OMFG, I would think phredumdum would fear manditory moments of silence more than most, I could just see him in the middle of some book burning party making a speech on the election of a non American, muslim president, when out of the blue a moment of silence is demanded and pow! his head explodes
Lets make a deal here, if kids agree not to pray in school then we can agree not to think in church. Wait, isnt that how it works already?
Way to go Robbie! You’d think the Buffalo Grove school district would know better than to oppose Rob Sherman. Maybe there was just too much of an age gap between Ricky and Dawn so the school system forgot.
I think there aught to more than enough moments for prayer starved children to get their fill of silent moments. Don’t they get to start the day off right while brushing their teeth? How about on the school bus? Bus drivers would surely appreciate it, even if it were only the Christian kids that were quiet.
Do they eat lunch at school? Clearly the True Christians would always start by saying grace in an obvious way. Why not just continue quietly, through the meal? It’s actually safer that way, as I have actually seen once. Something to do with the bad design of the esophagus and trachea, of course.
Then there are so many opportunities to pray in the normal class day – after pop quizzes are announced, in discussions on penalties for late homework, waiting out in the hall, etc.
Based on the evidence, one can only assume that our village Christian was praying hard during all those classes that challenged his presumptions. He never heard a word.
So many excellent comments, great points, including Dave’s topic. Hard to know where to start, but Joe Z. said:
“Now it should be noted that for a lot of young people, church isn’t optional.”
Very true, and as a victim of that injustice, I would like to testify, that those children get plenty of time to pray whether they like it or not, without letting the brainwash creep into the schoolroom.
Phreedumb almost had a point:
“I thought all kids were born as atheists…if that’s true, and they are raised in an atheist home, then please explain how a moment of silence will take them down the path of religion”
All children are born free from any misconception, other than mommy and daddy know everything. Religion happens to those children as a result of the arrogant abuse of that power by the parents. No atheist child is endangered by a moment of silence, they view it for what it is, a waste of time. Our concern is for the rest of the children that are having their world undone by organized religious agenda. Yes, we do care.
In conclusion, I would like to remind everyone of the fundamentalist Islamic culture which, at certain times each day must throw down their rug and pray toward Mecca to Allah. We may as a society see ourselves as advanced beyond that, but, issues like this bring the cave drawings right back home.
NeoWolfe
neowolfe,
Thanks. Yes I’ve heard the idea that we’re actually saying that having a moment of silence around our Atheistic kids will make them religious somehow. They emphasize that it won’t, so we shouldn’t worry about them having a moment of silence around our kids.
Of course if their kids have to hear about evolution, they complain. If their kids have to hear about Islam or Atheism or homosexuality…the list goes on…they complain.
We know it won’t convert people instantly to hear about these things. But we also know that a public school can be a pressure-cooker of social situations that run deep across the psyche of a young person. When the authority in question brings out religion and spreads it around the room in an organized manner like this, it causes some young people to cower to religion. That’s just wrong. Adults too.
I think that if they had a real god, they wouldn’t bother with the dozen or so different efforts like this one to try to get religion into schools. They’d just produce their god and end all debate over it.
The moment of silence is just a scam meant to keep US quiet while THEY pray. They feel like our silence is their victory, their control over us for a few minutes. I say take that opportunity to speak out against religion. Out-loud too, because hey, if they’re going to shut up, we can just take the floor uninterrupted! Seriously, tell them.
It’s a rare child that can stand up to peer pressure, if they do, it’s not just a “moment” of pressure but all day at school and during extracurricular activities and in the neighborhood if they’re city kids
Joe Z. said:
“The moment of silence is just a scam meant to keep US quiet while THEY pray”
I know Joe, I’m not a fool, I was just countering Phreedumbs assertion that a moment of silence was harmless. A moment of silence IS harmless as long is that is all it is. If in reality it is a moment when a student is pressured in any way to engage in prayer, that’s a new ballgame. Then it’s religion being taught in school. If something I said or left out led you to believe I felt otherwise, consider yourself updated. My position is, NO RELIGION IN SCHOOLS. Call me communist, but I believe all religious schools should be closed as well.
NeoWolfe
neowolfe – I didn’t mean that least part was aimed at you… I think we agree well on this issue.
[quote="...but I believe all religious schools should be closed as well."]
I agree. I do not oppose private, secular education, however, I do oppose religion using education under the disguise of promoting their agenda and propaganda.
Institutions such as the Catholic church are well known for their wealth, yet their schools charge such high rates for tuition. If they were as charitable as they claim, they would operate these schools free of charge using the vast amount of wealth they have accumulated over the years and would leave Christian and catholic dogma out of the curriculum. Of course, the clever catholic solution is to make the schools and the source of their funding the problem of the local diocese.
Doesn’t providing a high quality education because you see a need for an alternative to certain failing public schools at free or very modest costs seem more noble than charging sky high rates so that you can incorporate your religious values into young minds?
http://wineandexcrement.com/atheists-demand-an-end-to-all-silence-in-public-schools/302/
*chuckle*
Wande
To each his/her own but I didn’t think that piece was funny at all. It was such a juvenile attempt at humor that my reaction to it was to feel an empathetic embarrassment for its author. The author would be well advised to read installments of The Onion for a couple years before making such an attempt at parody again.
What – I delivered your message to the author of the article. He thanks you for your ad hominem argument, and, of course, for the empathy you offer.
He also wants to point out that overstated disdain, much like imitation, is a quite sincere form of flattery.
Additionally, he invites you to visit the other articles posted at http://www.WineAndExcrement.com and hopes that they, too, meet with your disapproval.
Wande
It wasn’t and ad hominem argument. If, for example, I would have said the author was a juvenile and therefore one should not find his work funny that would have been an ad hominem argument. But I was making no argument at all. What I did is called criticism. I find the author’s work characteristic of a juvenile. If you like I will list for you what I find juvenile about it thereby creating an argument yet still not an ad hominem one.
He says: “You have been awarded the certificate of Last Word. This certificate entitles you to … the last word! You may present it to friends, colleagues – even disinterested strangers – as evidence of your proud stance against an anonymous article on the Internet. Whenever you feel down about yourself, you would do well to take out the certificate, examine it … even caress it, if need be.
Congratulations on your Last Word certificate.”
Damn, wande – snarky enough?
You be the one who posted the link to the ‘anonymous article’ in the first place. (And I agree with What that the piece wasn’t all that amusing)
Now you be sure to pass that along, chuckle head.
Tarma and What,
I found wande’s link to be “John Stewart”ish in nature, and somewhat clever. When Stewart and Colbert make fun of religion you laugh your ass off, but, when the butt of the joke is us, your sense of humor is gone. Lighten up.
NeoWolfe
Now that’s funny!
Don’t including me in your us.
What said: “If you like I will list for you what I find juvenile about it thereby creating an argument yet still not an ad hominem one.”
The author didn’t much give a crap, but I’d be interested in your blow-by-blow analysis.
(Sorry for the dual personas here, but the person for whom I’ve been speaking can’t access this site directly.)
What requested:
“Don’t including me in your us.”
I actually never did. I was talking about free thinkers being the butt of a friendly joke. Everyone already knows you don’t fit in that definition. And skinheads never will. Sorry.
NeoWolfe