An Answer to Our Prayers
By Shawn Healy
The latest chapter in the saga involving the efforts of Illinois state legislators to insert prayer into public school classrooms took a turn back in time as the House voted to return to the former status quo, allowing school districts to adopt moments of silent reflection that may include prayer, but doing away with the state mandate requiring such practices at the start of the school day. The legislation passed by an overwhelming margin of 72-31, with 33 legislators changing their vote since last fall when both the House and the Senate voted to override Gov. Blagojevich's veto. This group was bi-partisan in nature, 18 Democrats and 15 Republicans, including the House Minority Leader Tom Cross.
The mandate invited criticism across the spectrum, from school boards, to administrators, to teachers, even the students themselves. One lawsuit threatened to topple the law on constitutional grounds, though this effort apparently failed as of Monday. The bill moves now to the Senate, but prospects of success are dimmer here as Sen. Kimberly Lightford, an original sponsor of the law, has assumed a similar position on the reversal bill, a sign she may use parliamentary tactics to ensure its death upon arrival. Her recent defense of the Silent Prayer and Student Reflection Act underlines this Machiavellian tendency: "No one's giving them a Bible, no one's asking them to quote Scripture. No one's coming over the loud system saying, 'Bow your heads in prayer,' as lawmakers do at the beginning of each legislative day."
As Charles Haynes wrote last October, the legislation is probably not in violation of the religious liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment, but this does not make it a sound policy. Blagojevich thought it violated the First Amendment and used it as the rationale for his initial veto, but policymakers are arguably coming to the latter conclusion. Rep. Dan Burke captured these sentiments best in explaining away his flip-flop: "I was never passionate about it. If you could enforce it, that would be one thing... But what's the point of it? How in the world would you ever get compliance?"
So this circular contest continues, and those impacted by the law must be wondering, "Don't these folks in Springfield have something better to do than hold a debate over what to do at the start of the school day?"
For a complete narrative, from beginning to end, on the evolution of this legal battle, please visit the following former posts:
Is Silence a Lemon?
Silence in the Courtroom.
Courting Our Annual Culture War.
Strike One...
Loose Ends.
Finally, moving to an entirely different topic, click here to listen to our latest podcast on the 2008 presidential election as we weigh in on the results of the March 4 "Critical Tuesday" contests.
The mandate invited criticism across the spectrum, from school boards, to administrators, to teachers, even the students themselves. One lawsuit threatened to topple the law on constitutional grounds, though this effort apparently failed as of Monday. The bill moves now to the Senate, but prospects of success are dimmer here as Sen. Kimberly Lightford, an original sponsor of the law, has assumed a similar position on the reversal bill, a sign she may use parliamentary tactics to ensure its death upon arrival. Her recent defense of the Silent Prayer and Student Reflection Act underlines this Machiavellian tendency: "No one's giving them a Bible, no one's asking them to quote Scripture. No one's coming over the loud system saying, 'Bow your heads in prayer,' as lawmakers do at the beginning of each legislative day."
As Charles Haynes wrote last October, the legislation is probably not in violation of the religious liberties guaranteed by the First Amendment, but this does not make it a sound policy. Blagojevich thought it violated the First Amendment and used it as the rationale for his initial veto, but policymakers are arguably coming to the latter conclusion. Rep. Dan Burke captured these sentiments best in explaining away his flip-flop: "I was never passionate about it. If you could enforce it, that would be one thing... But what's the point of it? How in the world would you ever get compliance?"
So this circular contest continues, and those impacted by the law must be wondering, "Don't these folks in Springfield have something better to do than hold a debate over what to do at the start of the school day?"
For a complete narrative, from beginning to end, on the evolution of this legal battle, please visit the following former posts:
Is Silence a Lemon?
Silence in the Courtroom.
Courting Our Annual Culture War.
Strike One...
Loose Ends.
Finally, moving to an entirely different topic, click here to listen to our latest podcast on the 2008 presidential election as we weigh in on the results of the March 4 "Critical Tuesday" contests.
1 Comments:
Thanks for the update. I was unaware of the move to reconsider.
Post a Comment
<< Home