Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Findings #6 (Divvy) (Religion in Public Schools (Fuller (The Purpose of…

- - - - "Religion and public education are perhaps the two most pervasive facets of American life. The Supreme Court has consistently interpreted the First Amendment to mean that these two areas should not intersect." (Fuller 87)
        
        They are making these separate which is different considering how religion has contributed a lot to society.
      - “A definition too broad excludes much of what is necessary to a viable society and leads to anarchy; a definition too narrow constrains the conscience of one person while establishing the religion of another.”(Fuller, 1994, p. 87)
    - - In effect, Jefferson sought to resolve the problem through eradicating the divisiveness of the sects by distilling them to their essence. (Fuller, 1994, 92)
      - “public educational system was seen as a way to instill and develop those characteristics necessary to perpetuate and advance a democratic society.” (Fuller, 1994, p. 89)
      - The primary concern is no longer whether sectarianism is too divisive or how to best promote civic virtue. Today’s issue is whether or not a public school’s activity “establishes religion” or prohibits the free exercise of religion. (Fuller, 1994, 93)
      - “Jefferson reasoned that "[b]y bringing the sects together, and mixing them with the mass of other students, we shall soften their asperities, liberalize and neutralize their prejudices and make the general religion a religion of peace, reason, and moral” (Fuller, 1994, p. 92)
    - - Classroom Curriculum
        
        Thus, whether a view is religious may depend on how history has defined that view (Fuller, 1994, 98)
        
        “Yet, if religion is to be taught, what religious morals, or whose religious tenets are necessary to the overall cohesion of society?” (Fuller 91)
        
        The author makes a great point here. Many people believe there should be some sort of religious basis in public schools but who is to say what religion will be the basis, and which morals should be placed with emphasis?
        
        The Sixth Circuit rejected the district court’s suggestion that the school district should balance the “offensive” material with material which correlates with the parents’ views. (Fuller, 1994, 100)
      - Bible Reading
        
        Thus, if reading the Bible is constitutional and studying morals is constitutional, one can only conclude that what is unconstitutional about these exercises is the use of the Bible to promote morals. (Fuller, 1994, 104)
        
        “One might use the Declaration of Independence in order to promote morals. Yet, Jefferson, in this great writing, assumes that inalienable rights are endowed by a ‘creator’.” (fuller 104).
        
        This suggestion and quote goes to show that from the beginning there was little to no separation between government and religion, making it hard now to justify the separation between religion and education. By looking back on the men who built our country, time and time again we see that their views and ideas are backed by a religious power
      - School Prayer
        
        “The Court states that graduation is "one of life's most significant occasions"108 and that the students are susceptible to the psychological coercion inherent in maintaining respectful silence. Yet, the Court, apparently, believes that proscribing prayer at a graduation ceremony does not send a message to these students that creeds which engage in prayer are not to be tolerated.” (Fuller, 1994, p. 105-106)
        
        “In Lee v. Weisman105 the Court held that graduation prayers directed by state officials violated the Establishment Clause. The majority found that the government involvement in religion was pervasive and that the students were forced to submit to subtle coercive pressure. 106 The Court displayed the type of thinking which leads one to believe that the Court either draws its definition of religion too narrowly or fails to define religion at all.” (Fuller, 1994, p. 105
        
        “The Court concludes that "[t]he explanation lies in the lesson of history that was and is the inspiration for the Establishment Clause, the lesson that in the hands of government what might begin as a tolerant expression of religious views may end in a policy to indoctrinate and coerce." (Fuller, 1994, p. 106)
      - Incorporation Doctrine
        
        “Historical references provide evidences that the Establishment Clause has not been interpreted to preclude religion from all aspects of public life. For example, in Bradfield v. Roberts122 the Supreme Court held that a federal government contract with the Catholic Sisters of Charity to run a hospital did not violate the Establishment Clause.” (Fuller, 1994, p. 108)
        
        “it cannot reasonably be argued that the ratifiers expected the Establishment Clause to mean that religion and the public classroom must be completely bifurcated, especially given the pervading notion that religion was necessary to the advancement of civil society.” (Fuller, 1994, p. 109)
        
        “The question remains, why does modern society interpret the Establishment Clause to require absolute separation of religion and the classroom? While analyzing modern thought as reflected in case law, one must look beyond the Establishment Clause application to the Establishment Clause interpretation and how and why that differs with historical perspectives.” (Fuller, 1994, p. 109)
        
        “The Court failed to adequately address what constitutes religion. The court indicated that religion is that sphere of life which cannot be proved and therefore requires one to walk by faith.” (Fuller 102).
        
        Personally, this definition of religion is to vague to be expected to follow. Some people may say that a theory of evolution or how the world was created is religion because there is no definitive proof of any theory. It is a belief based on evidence that people choose to believe, just like religions such as Christianity. There cannot be a huge emphasis on the separation between religion and science when religion cannot be properly defined.
    - - “Clark explained, "[ w ]hen government, ... allies itself with one particular form of religion the inevitable result is that it incurs 'the hatred, disrespect and even contempt of those who held contrary beliefs. (Fuller, 1994, p. 111)
    - - “In failing to provide a concrete definition of the terms "religion" and "secular," the courts are free to conclude that in public schools a person may not teach evidence substantiating the traditionally religious view of a Supreme Creator, but one may teach a world-view that excludes the existence of a Supreme Creator or an after-life.” (Fuller, 1994, p. 114)