Perhaps my best work was this thesis written during my Junior year of high school. As the amount of research increased, so did my anger level. How could the United States of America let this happen?

Bitburg American High School

LET AMERICA PRAY

A paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

LAC 501: Advanced Placement Language and Composition

Ted M. Otero IV

Bitburg, Germany

October 24, 1998

Unbelievably, the United States Supreme Court carelessly snatched constitutional rights away from United States citizens, rudely cast the nation down into an era of immoral turmoil, and blatantly rebuked the Founding Fathers; the unprecedented Supreme Court ruling on the 1962 case Engel v. Vitale outlawed formal prayer in schools. In the last thirty-five years since the Supreme Court's elimination of prayer in public schools, a devastating decline in this country's morality has become horribly prevalent. Aside from these results, the ruling itself has proved to be anti-democratic as well as unconstitutional. The United States is grounded in the basis of prayer and "higher authorities," as were the intentions of the Founding Fathers themselves. Formal prayer should make a return to classrooms of the United States' public schools because of the national morality decline evident in its absence, the unconstitutional and undemocratic factors of its removal from the schools, and its position as the basis of the country's values.

Looking at the aftereffects of the 1962 Supreme Court ruling that forbade public school faculty members from leading formal prayers, it becomes painfully evident that the ruling signaled the beginning of an age littered with immorality. Putting things in perspective, North Carolinian Senator Jesse A. Helms describes an awful and frightening reality in his comment which appeared in Congressional Digest, edited by Sarah Orrick.

You can stand on the Capitol steps and almost throw a rock into neighborhoods where you cannot walk at night because of the violence that takes place nightly. As members of Congress, we pass great big expensive crime bills--but they do no good. Then we go home and say, boy, we really took care of it this time. There is not going to be any more crime because we are going to kill it with money. (Orrick, p. 18)

Even more frightening than the narrow vision of reality is the wider perspective provided by statistics. Senator Mark Hatfield of Oregon briefly stated his opinion about school prayer in the January 1995 issue of Congressional Digest, edited by Orrick. "I do not see any great crises about the right of prayer in public schools... I do not see the necessity for this Senate to take any action on the subject of school prayer." (Orrick, p. 19) William J. Murray and Richard D. Land, on the other hand, prove that there is a large problem that does need addressing as they summarize the morality decline in their article "Why Not Prayer in School?"

In the three decades since this landmark case, the nation has lost its moral center. Violent crime has increased from 16.1 to 75.8 incidents per 10,000 population. Juvenile violent crime arrest rates have increased from 13.7 to 40 per 10,000 population. Teen pregnancy has almost tripled from 15.3 to 43.5 per 1000 teenage girls. Almost half of these pregnancies end in abortion. For a startling 28 percent of all live births in America today, the mothers are unwed. The teenage suicide rate has increased 400 percent since 1963. (Murray and Land, p. 1)

Obviously, this evidence can be associated with the court's removal of school prayer.

Insisting on facts and experimentation, however, many experts doubt the connection between the two. Perhaps if one considers reality as a controlled experiment, the evidence will prove not only valid, but quite convincing. In this on-going experiment, most school procedures have remained the same, with the variable being school prayer itself. When the variable of prayer was removed, moral change became vividly apparent. For instance, William E. Dannemeyer comments on ethics before and after the landmark ruling in a chapter in Charles P. Cozic’s book, Education in America.

Up until 1962, these [Judeo-Christian] values were unquestioned as a positive influence in public education. Kids were taught to recognize the moral and historical value of their inalienable rights....Big Government, high crime, illiterate kids, and dysfunctional families are ultimately a result of moral negligence and a denial of a creator. We have allowed moral values and a creator to be kicked out of public schools, and because most kids attend public school, we are paying a high price. (Cozic, p. 209)

In addition to the ethical decline, scholastic decline is also a result of prayer removal. Based on the College Board's Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) which began in 1926, a scale was devised in 1941 to compare overall scores from year to year. Dannemeyer also analyzes this factor in Cozic’s book, Education in America. "Notice the dramatic decline in scores at the time of the initial Court decision prohibiting State-sponsored prayers. A high of 980 in 1963 down to the 1986 level of 905." (Cozic, pp. 206-207)

Besides the effects of the ruling, the actual case itself was essentially against standard procedures. Tracing the Supreme Court rulings back to its founding in 1789, one will find every case ruling justified by official government documents (including the Constitution) or by precedent cases. One discrepancy, however, can be noted during the early sixties, when three Supreme Court Case rulings provided only a misinterpretation of the First Amendment as justification for the decisions. According to Orrick in Congressional Digest, these cases were Engel v. Vitale, Abington Township School District v. Schempp, and Murray v. Curtlett. (Orrick, p. 6) Cozic also describes the first landmark case in more detail in Congressional Digest. "The Supreme Court ruled... that a prayer written... for recitation in public schools was unconstitutional, even though it was undenominational." (Orrick, p. 6)

The second two rulings eliminated recitation of the Lord's prayer, recitation of Bible readings, and the posting of the Ten Commandments. Justifying these cases proved nearly impossible, so the Supreme Court cruelly twisted the Constitution and its amendments to suit its ruling. Supporting the Supreme Court's decisions, Marc D. Stern falsely describes the Constitution in his article "Religion in the Public Schools," which was published in Congress Monthly. "The Constitution insists that schools are religious free zones... It allows full scope to... the separation of church and state." (Stern, p. 3) U.S. Senator Helms, on the other hand, clarifies Stern's and the Judicial Branch's crucial mistake.

They talk incessantly about separation of church and state even though it is not even in the Constitution. The First Amendment... does not say anything about the separation of church and state... The Constitution protects students' rights to free speech, whether religious or not. (Orrick, p. 20)

George Washington, perhaps the most respected and well-known of the Founding Fathers, spoke about the admittance of Thanksgiving as a national holiday. This quote appeared in M. Stanton Evan’s article "What Wall?" which was published in National Review. "It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor." (Evans, p. 4) A democracy is often defined as government by the people, implying that the will of the majority is to be followed. Thomas Jefferson describes the basis of the United States government in a letter to Colonel Carrington. "The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right." (Reference Library) Polls taken during the 1962 ruling clearly showed that well over seventy percent of the population were against the removal of prayer from the school systems.

After looking at the decision's consequences and the trial's fallacies, a look at the intentions of the Founding Fathers would seem in order. The United States of America has a history crowded with religious intent, history, insinuations, and figures. Evans wrote a stunning conclusion supporting the religious intent of the Founding Fathers in an article appearing in National Review.

In point of fact, America's constitutional settlement--up to and including the First Amendment--was the work of people who believed in God, and who expressed their faith as a matter of course in public prayer and other governmental practice. (Evans, p.6)

Perhaps the greatest example of America's religious heritage is Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Independence, the nation's most important document (second only to the Constitution). It is said to capture the essence of the American spirit. Not only does this writing accept the existence of God, it also declares that He grants us inalienable rights. But, more examples exist. Even the United States currency bears the phrase "In God We Trust." Moreover, America’s national anthem, entitled "Star-Spangled Banner," which was adopted by the Founding Fathers suggests "In God is our trust" as a national motto. Furthermore, America's pledge of allegiance states that the country is actually "...One nation, under God, indivisible..." Several government buildings, including that of the Supreme Court, post the Ten Commandments and bear biblical engravings. The first school books, endorsed by the government and in use for several decades, included a Bible verse for each letter of the alphabet. Better yet, forty-seven out of the fifty states in the country accept a higher authority (deity) in their state constitutions.

Basically, the United States was founded on the common acceptance of a deity or higher authority. President Bill Clinton recognizes the Founding Fathers' intentions in his memorandum to the Secretary of Education and the Attorney General. "Our nation's founders knew that religion helps to give our people the character without which a democracy cannot survive." (Clinton, p. 1) Public schools, an extension of state governments, should therefore have a sound basis of religion as well.

Many factors point out that the removal of formal prayer from schools by the United States Supreme Court was a mistake. This ruling went against many things that the entire nation balanced on, many things that Americans stood for, and many things that the Founding Fathers firmly believed in and intended. The ruling itself was corrupt to say the least, with democracy as well as precedents ignored. Several devastating results of the ruling are enough to denounce the decision by themselves: The decline in national morality and the decline in national education are but two of many sad states of affairs. For over a century, prayer in schools was the dominant bedrock of an intended religion in American society. After 1962, this religious link was removed, as was a large chunk of America’s national heritage, condemning the nation to an era of immorality.

Bibliography

Buckley Jr., Wm. F. "Are States' Constitutions Unconstitutional?" <National Review,> 25 Sept. 1995, reprinted in <NewsBank, Inc. CD-ROM,> 1995.

Clinton, William J. "Religion-Free School?" Liberty, Nov. 1995, pp. 20-22, reprinted in Social Issues Resource Series: Religion, vol. 4, art. no. 35.

Cozic, Charles P., ed. Education in America. San Diego: Greenhaven Press Inc., 1992.

Doerr, Edd. "Church and State: Freedom of Religion, Freedom from Religion." Humanist, May 1993, pp. 31-33, reprinted in Social Issues Resource Series: Religion, vol. 4, art. no. 42.

Evans, M. Stanton. "What Wall?" National Review, 23 Jan. 1995.

Gest, Ted. "The Supreme Court: A Reluctant Referee." U.S. News & World Report, 26 Sept. 1994, p. 84.

Hancock, LynNell, and Pat Wingert. "Silence in the Classroom." Newsweek, 3 Oct. 1994, p. 48.

McConnell, Michael. "Freedom from Religion?" American Enterprise, Jan. 1993, pp. 34-43, reprinted in Social Issues Resource Series: Religion, vol. 4, art. no. 42.

"Reference Library for Windows" Microsoft Bookshelf CD-ROM. Creative Labs, Inc., 1991.

Murray, William J. and Richard D. Land. "Why Not Prayer in School?" <The World and I,> June 1995, reprinted in <NewsBank, Inc. CD-ROM> 1995.

Orrick, Sarah, ed. "Prayer in Public Schools: Pros and Cons." Congressional Digest, Jan. 1995, pp. 1-32.

Stern, Marc D. "Religion in the Public Schools." <Congress Monthly>, July 1995, 6-8. Reproduced in <SIRS Researcher CD-ROM> (Boca Raton, FL: SIRS 1996), <Religion 1995>, art. no. 120.

Witham, Larry, and Shirley Reed Blash. "Grassroots Groups Lobby for Freedom of Prayer." <Insight on the News,> 3 July 1995, reprinted in <NewsBank, Inc. CD-ROM> 1995.