Justin Katz discusses a judge’s decision to declare a 46 year old prayer hanging on the walls in Cranston West unconstitutional. The text of the prayer is as follows:
Our Heavenly Father,
Grant us each day the desire to do our best,
To grow mentally and morally as well as physically,
To be kind and helpful to our classmates and teachers,
To be honest with ourselves as well as with others,
Help us to be good sports and smile when we lose as well as when we win,
Teach us the value of true friendship,
Help us always to conduct ourselves so as to bring credit to Cranston High School West.
Amen
It’s interesting that if you remove ‘Our Heavenly Father’ from the text there’s no religion in this at all. But obviously removing three words from the text does have meaning. According to Katz:
On one hand, atheism is treated as if it were a religious belief in its own right so as to gain standing; the plaintiff, in this case, is “an avowed atheist.” It undoubtedly is such, but the mindset with which the First Amendment is treated in the courts transforms atheism into the default religion of the state by affirming its central principle of negation. A Muslim might understandably “experience feelings of exclusion and ostracism,” as Lagueux says of the young atheist’s response to the prayer, by his school’s endorsement of Christian concepts of God, but an atheist might respond thus to a school’s broad suggestion that a deity exists and may be worth petitioning.
I wonder if the point Katz is trying to make here is that ‘atheism’ is a religion and that it is seeking to dominate public policies at the detriment of all other religions. If your religion is that there is no God and the state declares everyone has a right to profess any kind of religion they so chose, you can make an easy argument that religion should not be a part of the communities’ discourse. Why? Because any mention of a ‘god’ is in direct conflict with the religion (atheism) you espouse.
The concept of separation of church and state continues to become more and more broadly defined each year. If you’re an atheist and reading this, separation of church and state existed at the time In God We Trust was printed on all coins in this country. Were those officials ignorant to the fact that Thomas Jefferson wanted religion completely outside of government? Did they forget? I don’t believe so.
We live in a world where most people are trying very hard not to offend anyone else. We’ve tried to remove racism, sexism, and other isms from everyday parlance. Nothing is wrong with that, but the trade-off has been issues like these popping up. And, in my opinion, as we lose these battles America loses a bit of its soul. Perhaps more than just a bit.
Many people who have fought for freedoms have been inspired by their religious beliefs. Today, such inspiration might be viewed with skepticism and disdain – take one Tim Tebow for example. Many wish he’d just stop talking about God so much, but in response to such criticism he said (paraphrasing) “Are you going to tell your wife you love her only once or are you going to take every opportunity to let her know how much she means to you? That’s how much God means to me.”
I wonder if atheists respect that perspective and I wonder if many would defend it as vociferously as they seek to remove any mention of ‘God’ in government. Who knows, but if the school does decide to appeal this decision I suspect they will lose. Further, I’d place a significant wager on mentions of God being gone by 2030. That would be a tragedy akin to removing the names of black people in history and their contributions. It would be a way to forget and belittle the accomplishments of a particular people because a minority of people think differently.
JS Mill talked about the tyranny of the masses, what about the tyranny of the minority?
