In [ __ ] We Trust

This past Sunday in the Austin American Statesman, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, Ken Herman enlightens us on his views in regards to U.S. District Court Judge Fred Biery (San Antonio) and his recent decision to settle a case in regards to the existence of prayer in a Texas public school.  Biery, appointed by Pres. Bill Clinton in 1994, has been criticized for his decision by many GOP politicians including Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich, which of course shines a light on this case during a presidential election year.

Under the settlement, Herman explains: “Medina Valley school employees cannot join students in prayer circles or invite people to pray, and religious symbols are barred from display on school grounds.”  Any efforts to offer prayers at events such as football games or during graduation ceremonies must be introduced as “student remarks”.

The case, filed last May, involves an agnostic high school senior, whose parents filed a lawsuit requesting that organized prayer no longer be allowed in public schools, particularly the upcoming Medina Valley High School graduation ceremony.  Judge Biery ruled in favor of the family by issuing a temporary order barring students from asking audience members to join in prayer or to bow their heads.  In early June, a day before the graduation ceremony, the ruling was overturned by Gov. Rick Perry and Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.  As a result, the valedictorian indeed led the crowd in prayer during the graduation ceremony.

As stated in the title of his article, Herman believes that the "Judge brings us back to the real issue in [this] school prayer case”.  Ironically, the author believes that the "real issue" is not the right to pray but the right to limit government’s ability to force religious practice upon those who choose not to participate.  According to Herman, “there is nothing wrong with the school prayer discussions spilling over into our political discourse, which remains the best place for us to argue about things like this.  But sometimes things go too far…Looks like this is one of those times.”  

I agree that the settlement went too far and I believe that it is not necessarily the court’s responsibility to decide how we pray (or don't pray), however I disagree about the “real issue”.  I believe that the "real issue" truly is about prayer and religion.  My belief stems from the fact that conservatives who say they want to minimize the size of government, like Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich, continue to express that when it comes to religion, reducing the size of government does not apply.  It looks like "the right" will continue to fight to make the issue of religious practices of the majority a political issue.  

As someone who classifies themselves as a Christian, I am pleased that this country was founded on such wonderful, historical values of Christian love, forgiveness and equality but we should never substitute religious values for Constitutional rights which unfortunately I think is exactly what has happened in this case.  I just hope that cases such as this are continuously challenged and brought to the forefront so that our Constitution at some point will become a practice and not just a theory.