Rosamaria Mancini Political Science 111 Issue: Prayer in School

Consensus among individual groups in society is a difficult task to accomplish. A state of equilibrium is impossible in a society which is filled with diverse people and diverse ways of life. Disagreements often derive from cultural conflicts involving social, ethical and religious values. The issue of prayer in school has been one of several issues which has caused an enormous amount of controversy. The controversy exists among the individuals who are involved in the public school system, as well as those who intend to protect the rights of the First Amendment. The role of the public institution learning, is to supply students with knowledge. Through the submission of knowledge, attitudes and values undergo change. Should the filtration of religious beliefs, be an acceptable part of the knowledge distributed at the graduation ceremonies of public institutions? No, according to the Supreme Court. In 1992, the Supreme Court ruled that prayer at any public school graduation was unacceptable, because it violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. In Providence, Rhode Island Principal Lee, of a public high school invited several members of the clergy to give benedictions at the school=s graduation ceremony. The parents of a student named Deborah Weisman, were outraged by the idea that a member of the clergy would be preaching to a diverse group of students on their graduation day. The Weismans= went to court to protest, but were denied the motion for a temporary restraining order, which would prohibit school officials from including prayers in ceremony. The Weismans= did attend the ceremony, and specific prayers were recited. Later, the Weismans= brought the issue to higher courts and were eventually heard in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court agreed with the Weismans=, stating that the inclusion of prayers as part of the graduation ceremony violated the Establishment Clause. This being because it conveyed a message of the government=s endorsement of religion. The Supreme Court went on to explain the coercive pressure which exists with any religious exercise. Even though the students were not required to attend the graduation ceremony, the ceremony is considered Ain a fair and real sense obligatory.@ The justices went on to explain how significant the graduation ceremony is to most citizens and to infringe upon any citizen a specific belief is unfair and unjust. Simply the court agreed that the inclusion of any religious act in a graduation ceremony violates the Constitution. Although the Supreme Court reached a decision in this case, consensus again was unachievable among all Americans. The Supreme Court justified these actions by stating that the decision was not an anti-religious act, rather it was necessary in order to preserve the rights of all citizens.