Follow The Stir

Right To Pray Amendment Protects As Much as Right Not To Pray

by Nadia Jones on August 10, 2012 at 10:22 PM

911: South Lawn Moment of Silence, 09/18/2001.We should congratulate Missouri and any other states that have taken action to protect our religious freedoms by amending the Missouri Constitution.  The newly passed amendment now makes it permissible for students to  “read a Bible in study hall" or for individuals "to pray briefly before a City Council meeting." 

But here’s the main reason why I think the right to pray amendment is  good law. So long as the right to pray also includes the right not to pray, it does not pose a threat to anyone's religious freedoms or freedom to be free from religion guaranteed in our federal constitution. This amendment will not require anyone to participate in prayer, but at the same time, it won't restrict the right to pray. Furthermore, Missouri’s right to pray amendment will allow students the right to refuse to participate in any school activities that he or she feels is contrary to his religious beliefs. 

From a personal viewpoint, I think we should do more to allow individuals the right to pray, meditate, or do whatever it is that they need to in order to connect with their faith or express their individual beliefs. I think what opponents worry about is that right to pray will result in disruptive, intrusive, or overbearing conduct by those individuals that choose to exercise their right. Fortunately, there are other measures in place to prevent disruption from taking place.

Also, I think we have too many institutions limiting our abilities to express ourselves and our beliefs under the guise of separation of church and state. Same-sex marriage, for example. Amendments like this is one step in the right direction of allowing people to express their own views.  

Prayer in schools has been a hot topic since the early 20th century and most recently in 2000 when individuals filed suits disputing whether "under God" could be said during the pledge of allegiance.  It shouldn't.  Missouri’s right to pray ultimately does not infringe on rights and is not much different than the moment of silence laws permitted in schools passed by some states 20 and 30 years ago.  Most of those laws have survived legal challenges.  Moments of silence in schools and public places, like in front of the White House pictured above, is something we should protect both on the sate and federal level.  

 

This post is part of a weekly conversation with our Moms Matter 2012 political bloggers. To see the original question and what the other writers have to say, see Do States Need Right to Pray Amendments?


Image via U.S. National Archives/Flickr

Filed Under: education

Comments

24
  • wamom223
    --

    wamom223

    August 10, 2012 at 10:35 PM

    I agreed with this article until your remark about the pledge of Allegiance.  This country is a Christian country tolerant of all religion's whether you like it or not.  It was founded by Christian's and it is defended by Christian's.  If you don't want to say 'under God' during the pledge I have no problem with that but we should not take it out to appease such a small population of our country.  This law will also give religious freedom's to all religion's and I don't see how that could be a bad thing.  I think the more you are exposed to other religion's the less intimidating and scary they are.  My grandmother was scared to death of the Wiccan's doing ritual's at the park near her house.    I  asked her what  the harmwould be in talking to those people and asking what they were doing.  Well once my grandmother found out they were there doing blessing's for the plant life and she found out how much they new about the plants it was like she'd found her soul mates.  Grandma didn't become a Wiccan but she gives them a smile and a wave whenever she sees them now.


  • Meg...
    -- Facebook comment from

    Meg LeRoy Schlagenhauf

    August 10, 2012 at 11:13 PM

    This is not a Christian country.  We have no national religion.  And if you look at the original text of the Pledge of Allegiance (which was written by a minister who was a Christian socialist, btw) "under God" was NOT in it.  That was added in the 1950s, as was the "In God We Trust" motto on our money.


  • Trish...
    -- Facebook comment from

    Trish Roddy

    August 10, 2012 at 11:34 PM
    whether or not this is a christian country ON ONE should feel bullied into not being proud of their own religion. which is the approach many schools take today. your not allowed to pledge to your country anymore because of a couple of words in the pledge. heres an idea if your kid doesnt believe in god or has a different religion just dont say under god, skip those two words not the whole pledge. your not allowed to sing christmas carols or have a bible. i just feel that people are taking the religious stance too far and this freedom to pray or freedom not to pray is a great law and should be enforced in all states. GOD BLESS AMERICA
  • wamom223
    --

    wamom223

    August 10, 2012 at 11:45 PM

    I am sorry Meg but I think you are mistaken.  Of the facts listed you are correct but we have been and always will be a Christian country.  The Bill of Rights is a list of rights our founding father's believed we had as rights given to us by God or our Creator.  It was Thomas Jefferson himself one of the writer's of our greatest documents that believed the Bill of Rights was a divine document.  There are people out there disputing this and even saying there was an atheist among the group, and maybe there was.  It doesn't change the facts that believer's in God out weigh the non-believer's of this country.  We  have never had an atheist President and I doubt we ever will.  I could be wrong since it is a matter of opinion.  I believe we are one of the best countries on earth because of our tolerance of different religion's.  Prior to the 1950's every member of Congress got a Congressional Bible, for over a hundred years.  Can you explain how the words "endowed by their creator" in the first paragraph of the constitution if we weren't a Judeo/Christian society.


  • Cel7777
    --

    Cel7777

    August 11, 2012 at 12:18 AM

    Most of our founding father's are believed to have practiced Deism, not Christianity.  Deists believe in a "creator" but not in the Bibilical sense, they think the creator largely remains uninvolved in the day-to-day lives of people. Thomas Jefferson even rewrote the story of Jesus as told in the New Testament and compiled his own gospel version known as The Jefferson Bible, which eliminated all miracles attributed to Jesus and ended with his burial. The Jeffersonian gospel account contained no resurrection, a twist to the life of Jesus that was considered scandalous to Christians but perfectly sensible to Jefferson's Deistic mind.


  • Lilianne
    -- Nonmember comment from

    Lilianne

    August 11, 2012 at 12:33 AM
    If you feel the need to pray in public, do it quietly to yourself...It doesn't need to be a public display or spectacle. People of all religions already have religious freedom in this country, this amendment is unnecessary.
  • autod...
    --

    autodidact

    August 11, 2012 at 5:16 AM
    Wacom, you don't even seem to know the history of the pledge. "under god" doesn't belong in there, it was added more than fifty years after it was written. The actual pledge is:
    I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.


    Christianity isn't the only religion with a creation myth, you know. "Creator" is not specific to Christianity.
  • EmmaF...
    --

    EmmaFromEire

    August 11, 2012 at 7:31 AM

    Well, given that the majority attitude is ''it's alright to pray, so long as you're christian'' maybe something DOES need to be done!


  • bills...
    --

    billsfan1104

    August 11, 2012 at 8:28 AM
    Lilianne, whats considered a spectacle? Because according to people like you, and bowing of the head any form of praise to God is somehow infringing on your rights.
    Its not freedom from religion. Its freedom from the government making a religion that forces you to follow. Thats it. It seems to me thatany of the non religious take it to far where.they dont want to see it at all.
  • KWnav...
    --

    KWnavywife

    August 11, 2012 at 8:43 AM

    What really gets me about this is that they have to pass a law that will allow students to read their BIBLE in study hall....really? And you are worried about not infringing on other's rights not to do so?  Not allowing a person to read their holy book anywhere is infringing on their Constitutional right to freedom of religion. This country has long confused freedom of religion with freedom from religion.  My child should have the right to read her Bible if she wants to just like yours has the right to choose not to.


1-10 of 24 comments

To leave a comment, log in as a CafeMom member:

Log In

OR, use our non-member comment form: