The only answer I know, and I'm not saying I'm in total agreement with this answer, is to conclude that the Founders meant something very different than how contemporary Americans interrupt the 1st Amendment.
It's an old argument, but it is plausible, that the Founders intended nothing more than "Congress (or states, as passed down by the 14th Amendment) shall not say, 'This Church is the Official Church of the Government,' and force people to worship at it." That is a far cry from saying that the 1st Amendment means a teacher can't lead students in prayer. That act may be contrary to how we understand separation of church and state today, but there is no evidence that the Founders ever contemplated a society where public prayers and public displays of piety were banned. Now, my own personal constitutional theory is that the Framers intentionally drafted a malleable document that could change with the times and that they also knew future generations might be, shall we say, a bit more enlightened. For that reason, you can make a perfectly plausible finding under the 1st Amendment that teachers should not be leading students in prayer. And you can also find under the 14th Amendment, even though the Framers of that Amendment said that they didn't intend to do away with segregated schools, that "separate but equal" was a racially flawed legal finding. So, while at the time these amendments were written and ratified, they didn't outlaw certain practices of society, over time, as society has changed, those amendments are perfect shelter for a broader definition of freedom. That doesn't mean, however, that in our struggle to find a more perfect sense of religious inclusion, the rights of some people will not be trampled. When rights are in conflict -- such as person A's right to evangelize and person B's right not to be evangelized -- one right will trump another. Such conflicts should never be easy issues, or else despotism will win. H. -----Original Message----- From: Nick McClure [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2002 3:14 PM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: Religious Freedom I would move to a country where this was allowed. I would join a church mission, and go to a country that is in poverty, and help them. But that doesn't really address what you are trying to get across. The will of God and that of the people do not always coincide. With me, I understand the right of the people to choose and practice what ever faith they want, or not faith at all. And thus I would feel somehow I was misunderstanding Gods will. But again, that probably doesn't answer your question, maybe because I don't think there is an answer. In the US this is not and should not be allowed, unless you give each religion equal time, which you cannot do in a school year, so I am sorry but you will have to find some other way to follow the will of God. At 02:59 PM 1/26/2002 -0800, you wrote: >What if, as a public school teacher, you felt called (an vocation), as in >commanded by God, to be both a public school teacher and evangelist. That if >you were not a public school teacher, and that if you did not read from the >Bible during class, you would be going against God's will? ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
