No Prayer in Public Schools: Have We Tolerated This Long Enough?

Two questions: If the First Amendment to the Constitution built a wall of separation between church and state such that the government cannot endorse or favor religion in any of its forms, how could the same Congress that wrote the First Amendment create an office of chaplain for Congress paid for by taxpayer dollars and then have this chaplain open each day of Congress with prayers in the name of Jesus?

If it is constitutional for Congress to open a day with prayer, and that specifically Christian prayer, why then is it unconstitutional for schools to open a day with prayer, and that not a specifically Christian prayer?

The United States Supreme Court recently ruled on a case involving a public school coach praying on the football field after a game with many of his players joining him. It allowed him to do this, citing his First Amendment rights.

Others citing that same First Amendment thought the court was wrong, something about a separation of church and state.

They said, as a Chicago newspaper noted, “60 years of precedent-setting battles to maintain a separation of church and state” that should have made it clear of the unconstitutionality of prayer in public schools.

But they fail to note that there were 173 years of precedent starting from the very beginning of our nation and before where prayer in public schools was considered not only fitting and proper but necessary for the success of the educational enterprise. When the court ruled then to remove prayer from the public schools, it wasn’t maintaining a separation of church and state, it was creating it—at least by modern definition. That ruling had no precedent to base it on.

You have to assume that the people who wrote the First Amendment understood what they meant by it, and they still created the office of chaplain for Congress at taxpayer expense and insisted that this person pray to start the day for them.

Since the High Court removed prayer from our public schools, God was removed as well. Our children are receiving an education that essentially says there is no God to speak of and that need not concern them.

This is not a position of neutrality toward religion. Actually, that is impossible.

There are not three options in the area of religion: pro, con, or neutral. There are only two—pro or con.

Our Founders were pro. They realized that God created human beings equal, and He gave them unalienable rights. Without God, you don’t have equality and you don’t have unalienable rights.

If our country is founded on a belief in God, then it is not unconstitutional to acknowledge this and God in our public schools. You may say that some kids don’t believe this or are of other religions. But this is why they have the rights they do in this country, and why countries that don’t believe in God or who believe in other religions have less rights than we do here.

This is why the United States is unique. And we need to teach this uniqueness, not pretend that we somehow have all kinds of rights for no apparent reason other than our Constitution. The Constitution didn’t give us these rights; it defined them. {eoa}

Larry A. Craig went to school to go into the ministry (Moody Bible Institute, Mundelein College, Loyola University M.A. biblical studies) but spent his career in the meat business. He has since retired, so he writes on politics and religion, both separately and jointly. He has written two books: The Importance of Healing and The Importance of the Lord’s Prayer. He is working on a commentary on the Gospel of Matthew and hopes to publish a book of his articles on politics and one of his articles on the Bible. He teaches the Gospel of Matthew in a weekly Zoom Bible class and emails out his articles on politics and religion. He can be reached at [email protected], and you can read his political blog at poligion1.blogspot.com.