As of yesterday, the Illinois legislature overrode the governor’s veto of a bill requiring a daily “moment of silence” in the state’s primary and secondary schools. Link.
The bill’s sponsors seems omewhat unclear as to the specific reason such legislation is needed. One sponsor said it was so the kids could hear “birds chirping.” The one thing they are absolutely certain about, however, is that it is NOT intended to mandate prayer.
Whaddya think, folks? Is there anyway to interpret this other than as a victory by those who advocate state mandated school prayer? Will this withstand a court challenge (presuming anyone challenges it)? What do you anticipate would be the basis of a court challenge?
I think - if nothing else - this legislation should not have been passed simply because it is patently silly, unnecessary, and divisive. I do believe, however, that it is a clear pretext for the state sponsorship of religion. I also feel it is simply a crappy piece of legislation. Woefully unspecific (how long is a “moment”?) and lacking any enforcement mechanism.
A sad day for Illinois indeed. And not what I would have expected given Democrat majorities in both houses and a Dem governor.
Personally, I think this is stupid-- too much interference by the legislature in how schools are run. But if most of the people in the state want it, then so be it.
I don’t see how this could be successfully challenged in court, except in specific instances if school administrators try specifically to make it about prayer, and nothing else. A moment of silence is a moment of silence-- the Constitution doesn’t protect citizens from experiencing silence.
I’ve never quite understood the visceral, almost knee-jerk, antipathy to (admittedly stupid) “moments of prayer.” It is not as though the teachers and administrators are going to be able to telepathically broadcast a prayer into the heads of the students. I agree that it is an attempt by the Christian Right to keep some vestige of public worship in public schools, but it is a failed and toothless victory. The overwhelming number of kids are going to be doodling or writing notes mocking other kids or text messaging or rolling their eyes wondering why they have to have this dumb ol’ “moment of silence.” No sectarian prayer can be recited; prayer of any sort would break the silence, and the kids are free to ignore the whole thing as long as they are not talking.
Now, I can see where the use of the word prayer in the language can be disturbing, but it is a dead end. Since it is silent, no one can check that the students are praying, (and the Illinois law does not order that they pray, only that they be quiet). I would think that it would be better to toss the loonies this bone and then tell them they have been given their “prayer” and to sit down and shut up if they come looking for more religion in the schools.
The really amusing thing is that virtually nobody ever prays during the moment of silence anyway, excepting possibly those who are really devout and want to do so. It’s pointless and redundant, but it doesn’t really do any harm, so…
I imagine that an effort to challenge this would be exactlyalong the lines that you’ve outlined: that this “moment of silence” is a disguised attempt to suggest that students pray.
In order to do that successfully, in my view, opponents to the law must develop a factual record. I do not believe the law, on its face, is vulnerable to such a challenge. But if opponents can show that the real use the law is being put to involves subtle (or not-so-subtle) invitations to pray, then there’s a hook for a reviewing court to shoot it down.
There are three or four states that have had moments of silence for several years. (I do not know the language of those laws.) Have any of those states actually tried to take it further?
Oh, come on! It is not the chaplain of the House of Representatives.
One guy I was talking to last night teaches HS physics - figured this would be a good opportunity to introduce the kids to the concept of a nanosecond!
I agree, it is not the end of the world. But it can be so exhausting trying to be a tolerant, live-and-let-live atheist, when confronted by the ceaseless efforts of believers to impose their (im)morality upon everyone.
And it is so disappointing, when our state government is so screwed up they can’t even pass a budget, that they think something this silly and unnecessary is worth a moment of their time debating and enacting. But, governments do plenty of silly and unneccessary things. As a rull should probably just be happy when they restrain themselves from doing something downright harmful!
I agree that nothing further seems to have happened.
But the Dover affair shows eternal vigilance is required:
‘The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.’ Judge John E. Jones III
The only problem I can see (without looking at the legislative history, which in a lot of these cases provides the bases for the strike down) is that it includes that the moment is (first) “an opportunity for silent prayer.”
That’s probably not enough on its own, but if combined with some titbits out of the debates and committee minutes might be brought up in the opposition.
It is what is so stupid about these laws. The proponents seriously don’t care about getting them passed - they want to create controversy - if they keep their mouths shut, and simply call it a moment’s silence for reflection or soemthing like that, it will survive. But they have to include the word prayer, despite the fact that it means it is much more likely it will get struck down.
My theory is that the idea for the bill came from a teacher who once said, “If only these kids could shut up for just. one. moment…”
I actually think it might be a good educational experience for kids to hear what a moment of silence sounds like. What with their iPods and their cell phones and their YouTubes and their whatnot, they probably hardly ever get a moment when they’re not bombarded by external stimulation.
I pretty much agree with this. I don’t see the point, and frankly, as a taxpaying citizen of Illinois, I agree with Dinsdale that the legislature could find better things to do with their time, but whatever…I’m not particularly afraid that it’s going to harm anyone.
If the trained educators thought this was a good idea, they would have instituted it as school policy. After all, there never was a bill that banned moments of silence in classrooms. Why legislators felt they needed to waste their time on this is beyond me.
As a teacher in the Chicago Public Schools, I can assure you that, whether we try to enforce a moment of silence at the beginning of the school day or not, it just isn’t going to happen.
BTW, most of my colleagues were incredulous that the General Assembly passed this steaming pile of crap. It will do nothing to improve the educaton of our students.
I am, depending on where it’s implemented. In the more fundie-dominated schools, I expect you’ll see students and possibly the teacher ostentatiously going through the motions of praying ( and they may or may not bother being silent about it ). And the kids that don’t, get beaten senseless later on, while the teachers look the other way. To me, this looks like a method of seperating the believers from the unbelievers, for later persecution.
As for a countersuit, that’ll depend on if there’s a suitable person who’s willing to be regarded as a monster and put up with death threats and possible assault.
Illinois isn’t exactly known for its fundamentalist enclaves…not enough, I think, to have much power in the state legislature, so I’d be pretty surprised if this were the goal.
