# Grrr, TIL about Bible Belters flagrantly violating the Establishment Clause with open school prayer! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 7, 2017, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399 "2017-06-07T23:14:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/41 "2017-06-10T15:10:06Z")
If you follow [The Friendly Atheist](http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/), you’ll see that this kind of thing is hardly uncommon. And while there aren’t christians firebombing houses, with any public sign or symbol disagreeing with the Truth of Christianity, you darn well better expect it to be quickly vandalized. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/42 "2017-06-10T16:29:23Z")
Ugh. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/43 "2017-06-10T22:03:16Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > If you follow [The Friendly Atheist](http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/), you’ll see that this kind of thing is hardly uncommon. And while there aren’t christians firebombing houses, with any public sign or symbol disagreeing with the Truth of Christianity, you darn well better expect it to be quickly vandalized. The Christians aren’t firebombong houses because they are too busy setting fire to mosques. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/44 "2017-06-11T14:53:33Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > The details matter when it comes to the legality of prayer on school property. Neither students nor faculty are required to check their religious freedoms at the door as they enter the school house. See [Tinker v. Des Moines ICSD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Independent_Community_School_District) > > If the gathering is outside of normal class hours but during time in which the school grounds are open to the students then student led organized prayer is constitutional. … as long as it isn’t mandatory or compulsory, of course. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/45 "2017-06-11T14:58:18Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Do you genuinely not see the blatant sarcasm in that post? > > (bolding mine) > > That is spectacular. Yes, it IS. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/46 "2017-06-11T15:48:45Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > … as long as it isn’t mandatory or compulsory, of course. But even that cedes too much ground. The Texas football game prayers were student led, outside of school hours, not compulsory, but still found unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/47 "2017-06-11T18:23:32Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > But even that cedes too much ground. The Texas football game prayers were student led, outside of school hours, not compulsory, but still found unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision. I assume there are more details as otherwise, that would be abridging those student’s rights to their own freedom of religion. My guess would be that it was deemed to seem compulosry. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/48 "2017-06-11T18:37:32Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > But even that cedes too much ground. The Texas football game prayers were student led, outside of school hours, not compulsory, but still found unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision. I am not persuaded that a school-sponsored football game, in which the facilities are maintained by the school, the coaches are paid by the school, and the school provides awards (letters, etc.) to participants while dictating that certain grades must be maintained to permit participation really counts as “outside of school hours.” ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/49 "2017-06-11T19:34:59Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I assume there are more details as otherwise, that would be abridging those student’s rights to their own freedom of religion. > > My guess would be that it was deemed to seem compulosry. Well, it was high school football in Texas. That \*is \*mandatory, isn’t it? 😃 Indeed, whether the event is mandatory and would result in a captive audience for the religious conduct does seem to be a significant factor that courts have considered in deciding if a particular intersection of religion and public school activities is constitutional. But it is not an entirely deterministic factor. Graduation ceremonies have been deemed another potential mandatory event and details matter. The school inviting outside adults (minister, rabbi, imam, or whoever) to give a prayer has been deemed unconstitutional as a violation of the Establishment Clause. The idea that attendance is theoretically voluntary was deemed an inadequate justification to permit school sponsored prayer at a graduation as attendance at one’s graduation is not really “voluntary”. See [Lee v Weisman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_v._Weisman) from 1992 where Justice Kennedy wrote: > [@Justice Kennedy from Lee v. Weisman](#): > > To say a teenage student has a real choice not to attend her high school graduation is formalistic in the extreme. True, Deborah could elect not to attend commencement without renouncing her diploma; but we shall not allow the case to turn on this point. Everyone knows that, in our society and in our culture, high school graduation is one of life’s most significant occasions. A school rule which excuses attendance is beside the point. Attendance may not be required by official decree, yet it is apparent that a student is not free to absent herself from the graduation exercise in any real sense of the term “voluntary,” for absence would require forfeiture of those intangible benefits which have motivated the student through youth and all her high school years However student initiated speech of a religious nature may be permissible during a graduation event. An 11th Circuit case, Adler v. Duval County School Board from 1997 [ultimately upheld](https://www.au.org/our-work/legal/lawsuits/adler-v-duval-county-school-board) a prayer provided by a student during a graduation ceremony. The SCOTUS sent the case back to the appeals court to reconsider in light of the _Santa Fe_ decision we have discussed in this thread. In 2001 the 11th Circuit upheld the earlier ruling permitting the prayer and SCOTUS denied further appeal letting that ruling stand. So the school is not permitted to organize an invocation, but if the valedictorian is traditionally permitted to give a speech and one year the valedictorian chooses to offer a prayer as a part of that speech then that would seem to be on sound constitutional footing. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/50 "2017-06-11T22:40:43Z")
I don’t believe the bar is that high, “mandatory” or “compulsory”. It would appear that if it seems to be implicitly endorsed by the school authorities, that is enough. Which is as it should be. They should not tip their hands as to which religion they prefer, if indeed any at all. ETA: From the majority opinion: “Regardless of the listener’s support for, or objection to, the message, an objective Santa Fe High School student will unquestionably perceive the inevitable pregame prayer as stamped with her school’s seal of approval.” ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/51 "2017-06-11T22:46:41Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > I am not persuaded that a school-sponsored football game, in which the facilities are maintained by the school, the coaches are paid by the school, and the school provides awards (letters, etc.) to participants while dictating that certain grades must be maintained to permit participation really counts as “outside of school hours.” I think it’s outside school hours if you can skip it and not be considered a truant. ETA: Or, in the case of a teacher like my wife, as violating your contract–which specifies school hours down to the minute. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/52 "2017-06-12T01:28:20Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > But even that cedes too much ground. The Texas football game prayers were student led, outside of school hours, not compulsory, but still found unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision. And I’m fine with that too. 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/53 "2017-06-12T02:02:24Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > Graduation ceremonies have been deemed another potential mandatory event and details matter. The school inviting outside adults (minister, rabbi, imam, or whoever) to give a prayer has been deemed unconstitutional as a violation of the Establishment Clause. The idea that attendance is theoretically voluntary was deemed an inadequate justification to permit school sponsored prayer at a graduation as attendance at one’s graduation is not really “voluntary”. That’s just saying that is wasn’t actually voluntary, though. So it still fits. That said, I do find myself realizing that there is another aspect that I forgot about before. The school can’t be seen as endorsing any particular religion, either. Still, I’d say that the ultimate reason for that is that it creates a sense that agreeing with them is compulsory. I mean, that’s the underlying issue. All the constitution says is that Congress shall not make any law establishing a religion. This has been extended to any government actor who acts in that sort of role, which includes school faculty, since they make rules. It doesn’t say anything about them having to hide their religion from anyone. Not being able to endorse a religion is just about the idea that you are a state actor coercing students, and thus infringing on their religious freedom. What I know is that I was perfectly legally allowed to get together with some of my band mates and pray the Lord’s Prayer before going out on the field. It was completely optional, and literally everyone took it as optional. Hence there must be something else that made it seem compulsory in the Texas case. Something that made it seem like the school was endorsing a religion, instead of just students doing it on their own. ---
**Author:** ![Balance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ccd318/32.png) [@Balance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balance)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/54 "2017-06-12T02:36:15Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Hence there must be something else that made it seem compulsory in the Texas case. Something that made it seem like the school was endorsing a religion, instead of just students doing it on their own. I haven’t read the specific ruling in the case, but I can certainly think of elements that would suggest an improper appearance of endorsement. [ul] [li]The event is sponsored by the school and/or organized by school staff in their capacity as agents of the school.[/li][li]The event is centered on a group associated with and endorsed by the school.[/li][li]The organizers of the event schedule time in the event for the religious observance.[/li][li]The person uses school-provided or school-controlled resources (e.g., the PA system) to perform the observance.[/li][/ul] In less formal terms–it’s a school event, everyone knows it’s a school event, and school employees expected, intended, and enabled someone to lead a prayer. The fact that the school, or employees of the school managing a school event, devoted time and/or resources to a prayer makes it appear that governmental authority figures consider the prayer a good thing. (I.e., it constitutes an implicit endorsement.) So, yes, a group of band students (or football players, or just random spectators) forming a huddle in the stands or on the sidelines and praying does not raise Constitutional concerns. The school is not providing them with anything to encourage or support the activity. They can even invite, say, the band director to join them–but it would be improper the other way around, because the director is a governmental authority figure. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/55 "2017-06-12T15:37:01Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > That said, I do find myself realizing that there is another aspect that I forgot about before. The school can’t be seen as endorsing any particular religion, either. Still, I’d say that the ultimate reason for that is that it creates a sense that agreeing with them is compulsory. > > I mean, that’s the underlying issue. All the constitution says is that Congress shall not make any law establishing a religion. This has been extended to any government actor who acts in that sort of role, which includes school faculty, since they make rules. It doesn’t say anything about them having to hide their religion from anyone. > > Not being able to endorse a religion is just about the idea that you are a state actor coercing students, and thus infringing on their religious freedom. This sounds like constitutional originalism, which is certainly a going concern (even after the death of Antonin Scalia, its most ardent advocate). But it’s far from the only approach to judicial review. Look at how far the Commerce Clause has been bent beyond recognition, for just one example. I mean, sure: if we are going to interpret the U.S. Constitution the way we would a contemporary legal contract between businesses, then you (and the originalists) are right. But the progressive approach I prefer is to treat the text as a starting point, a general framework, and then apply a modern set of principles to reasoning out the problem or dispute before you. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/56 "2017-06-12T17:47:59Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > … > That said, I do find myself realizing that there is another aspect that I forgot about before. The school can’t be seen as endorsing any particular religion, either. Still, I’d say that the ultimate reason for that is that it creates a sense that agreeing with them is compulsory. > > I mean, that’s the underlying issue. All the constitution says is that Congress shall not make any law establishing a religion. This has been extended to any government actor who acts in that sort of role, which includes school faculty, since they make rules. It doesn’t say anything about them having to hide their religion from anyone. … And not endorsing any particular religion extends to not favoring one over another. In the _Santa Fe_ case one of the several problematic issues the court noticed is that the school had advised the invited ministers to provide a non-denominational prayer. By doing so the court stated the school was preferring non-nondenominationalism over any particular denomination. In the _Santa Fe_ case this was used as further proof that the prayer was impermissibly sponsored by the school since the school was in some way limiting or choosing what not to include in the prayer. So _if_ a prayer is going to be a part of a school event in one of the limited permissible ways then the school cannot limit the contents of that prayer. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 1:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/57 "2017-06-13T13:06:01Z")
[The latest news](http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2017/06/10/missouri-school-board-tells-preaching-administrator-to-retire-a-month-early/) on this front. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/58 "2017-06-13T23:52:05Z")
That was the story that spurred this woman to say on Facebook that at her school no one complained. ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 8:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/59 "2017-06-15T08:59:08Z")
> [@gytalf2000](#): > > Ya know, a really conservative fundamentalist christian would object to having a prayer led by a girl, period. I was raised in the Church of Christ, and they really hammered this concept into us. Only guys could lead prayer, unless it was an all-female group. The whole “women should not have authority over men” thing. It never took on me, though… Well, /some/ really conservative fundamentalist Christians. None of the **conservative** Christians I’ve known. None of the **fundamentalist** Christians I’ve known (using those words in their technical sense), and none of the “conservative fundamentalist” Christians I’ve known. Some of the “conservative fundamentalist” Christians I’ve known (in the loosest possible sense of the words) would object to female leadership, either explicitly or just feel uncomfortable with it, but even those didn’t have a problem with prayer leadership (a delegated task), or with speaking to mixed groups. Those would be minority positions (and certainly reactionary rather than conservative). ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [June 15, 2017, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399/60 "2017-06-15T15:07:42Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > I’m not super keen on those things either, but they are pretty minor compared to the local preacher being your school bus driver who then gets out and leads the entire school, including all staff, in a prayer around the flag(!) right before school starts. That sounds terrible. A **school bus driver**! What _is_ the world coming to when the lower classes see fit to ape their betters ? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/grrr-til-about-bible-belters-flagrantly-violating-the-establishment-clause-with-open-school-prayer/788399.md?page=4)