Guest Editorial for March 3, 2005
By Brent Walker
The Virginia House of Delegates-my elected body of representatives-is up to no good. By a vote of 69-27 the House recently passed a state constitutional amendment with sweeping language and dire consequences. Fortunately, wisdom prevailed in the Senate, where a committee soundly rejected the amendment.
The proposed amendment to Article I of the Virginia Constitution is patterned after the federal constitutional amendment that Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., pressed for in the mid-1990s. The Virginia measure provides:
“To secure further the people's right to acknowledge God according to the dictates of conscience, neither the Commonwealth nor its political subdivisions shall establish any official religion, but the people's right to pray and to recognize their religious beliefs, heritage, and traditions on public property, including public schools, shall not be infringed; however, the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions, … shall not compose school prayers, nor require any person to join in prayer or other religious activity” (House Joint Res. No. 537).
The best thing that can be said about this proposed amendment is that it is absolutely unnecessary.
Religious expression by students in the public school abounds. From Bible clubs before and after school, to “See You at the Pole” prayer meetings, to robust discussions among students about religion, to voluntary student prayer anytime, it is obvious that God has not been kicked out of the public schools.
Religious speech in the public square resounds. And, you don't have to strain to hear it. Private citizens speaking in public places proclaim their religious opinions with vigor and the media-from talking heads on television, to talk radio, to cover stories on national news magazines-we can't seem to get enough of it. And, various forms of “civil religion” pervade our public rituals and civic ceremonies, our patriotic songs and slogans, and the speeches of politicians. Our willingness to talk about religion openly belies any claim that we have a “naked public square.”
The worst thing that can be said about the measure is that it is unwise and inconsistent with the First Amendment.
The proponents of this measure do not want to amend the Virginia Constitution to preserve the status quo. Rather, the proposed language would permit government sponsorship of religion. In the public schools, one could hear intercom prayer every morning to a captive audience of students or classroom prayers led by teachers (aren't teachers “people”?) as long as the prayer is not penned by the school board. In terms of public acknowledgements, this amendment does not simply permit public religious speech by private persons, but a full-fledged public endorsement of religion by government. A judge could lead a jury in prayer before trial and a city council could erect a nativity scene in the council chambers. None of these hypotheticals come close to pushing the envelope of what a common sense reading of this language would permit.
Yes, there are some limits in this proposal, but they are insufficient to diminish the mischief. The Commonwealth cannot “establish any official religion,” but as outlined above, government can promote a lot of religion short of such official establishments. The fact that the government cannot “require any person to join in prayer” does not adequately protect religious liberty. The implication here is that a student who does not worship the god of the classroom has the option of being sent out in the hall and branded a second-class citizen or staying in the classroom in violation of conscience. Moreover, the fact that school officials cannot “compose school prayers” would not prevent a teacher from leading in a prayer-such as the Lord's Prayer-that might be suggested by a student. And even these caveats only keep school officials from composing prayers; it does not prohibit prayers in courtrooms or prayers led by other government officials.
History shows that when government decides which prayer to say or which religion to endorse, it exercises control over religion to everyone's detriment. Prayers become a hollow ritual, symbols of faith can be used as political weapons, and religious freedom is sacrificed on the altar of majority rule.
I for one stand with those old-fashioned Virginians-like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Baptist John Leland-who understood the importance of church-state separation in ensuring religious liberty; I stand against those modern-day political prayer pushers in the Virginia House who think they know better. Thankfully, members of the Virginia Senate do, too.
Special to the Herald
Brent Walker is executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty.