home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=90TT1580>
- <title>
- June 18, 1990: Let Us Pray
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
- June 18, 1990 Child Warriors
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- LAW, Page 72
- Let Us Pray
- </hdr>
- <body>
- <p>The court okays religious clubs in public high schools
- </p>
- <p> To Bridget Mergens Mayhew, the idea of forming an
- extracurricular Christian club at Omaha's Westside High School
- five years ago seemed simple enough. "There are a lot of
- pressures on kids," she recalls, "and we just wanted to get
- together and pray." But school authorities turned down her
- plea, fearing it would violate the separation of church and
- state. The refusal touched off a fractious legal battle that
- last week culminated in a spectacular win for Mayhew and her
- friends: a major decision from the U.S. Supreme Court barring
- discrimination against voluntary religious clubs in public high
- schools. The court action was an obvious victory for
- conservative groups who have been trying for more than 25 years
- to reintroduce some sort of prayers into the schools.
- </p>
- <p> By an 8-to-1 vote, the high bench upheld the
- constitutionality of Congress's 1984 Equal Access Act. The
- measure says that no public secondary school receiving federal
- funds may bar student clubs on the basis of their "religious,
- political [or] philosophical" views, if the school permits one
- or more "noncurriculum" groups to meet after school hours.
- </p>
- <p> Decisively coming down on the side of free expression last
- week, the court gave that statute a broad interpretation.
- Justice Sandra Day O'Connor declared that the law's
- equal-access requirement can be triggered by the presence of
- any group, even a chess club, that does not "directly relate
- to the curriculum." She maintained that, just like college
- students to whom the court has previously applied equal-access
- principles, "secondary school students are mature enough and
- are likely to understand that a school does not endorse or
- support student speech that it merely permits on a
- non-discriminatory basis."
- </p>
- <p> Justice John Paul Stevens lambasted the decision in his lone
- dissent. "Can Congress really have intended," he wrote, "to
- issue an order to every public high school in the nation
- stating, in substance, that if you sponsor a chess club, a
- scuba diving club, or a French club--without having formal
- classes in those subjects--you must also open your doors to
- every religious, political, or social organization, no matter
- how controversial or distasteful its views may be? I think
- not." Even Justices Thurgood Marshall and William Brennan, who
- concurred with the majority ruling, expressed serious
- reservations. In order to preserve the separation of church and
- state and counteract peer pressures, the pair insisted, schools
- must "make clear that their recognition of a religious club
- does not reflect their endorsement of the views of the club's
- participants."
- </p>
- <p> Not surprisingly, Mayhew was elated by the court decision.
- "This is a clear statement that school administrators across
- the U.S. must respect the religious beliefs of students and
- allow them to form clubs for prayer and support," she said.
- Much of the country's religious establishment also welcomed the
- ruling. "The court recognized the critical distinction between
- school-sponsored and student-sponsored religion: the former is
- unconstitutional; the latter is not," declared the Baptist
- Joint Committee on Public Affairs, the Christian Legal Society,
- the National Association of Evangelicals and the National
- Council of Churches in a joint statement. But some groups,
- including civil liberties organizations, were much less
- sanguine. Warned Robert Lifton, president of the American
- Jewish Congress: "The decision will open up the nation's public
- high schools to proselytizing by organized student religious
- clubs and will ultimately result in religious divisiveness."
- </p>
- <p> Educators are concerned that last week's decision will cut
- into their authority to control what takes place inside the
- schoolhouse. The ruling, they fear, could place many schools
- in a difficult bind: it could pressure them to open their doors
- to all kinds of advocacy groups--contentious pro-life and
- pro-choice clubs, for example--or force them to prune down
- the range of extracurricular activities and eliminate popular
- groups like drama clubs and community-service clubs. Either
- way, education may not necessarily come out the winner.
- </p>
- <p>By Alain L. Sanders. Reported by Jerome Cramer/Washington.
- </p>
-
- </body>
- </article>
- </text>
-
-