Baranski 1

Alec Baranski
Writing 121
Professor Villarreal
30 October 2014
The Fight for God
Religion in Schools has proven to be a very controversial matter as of lately. Even though
teaching about religion is allowed in public schools, there are still many questions that are being
asked in order to provide a basis of what is appropriate for school, and what is inappropriate. The
first amendment to the United States Constitution says that congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof' (Constitution)
which implies that you have the choice of exercising your own religion, no matter what it may
be. However, this poses an interesting argument within the public schools of America because
we have such a diverse population with thousands of different religious groups. While many
people do believe in a God and go to church religiously, many people do not do this-- and they
find religion in schools to be offensive. Such things that are controversial in school include
organized prayer, wearing religious garments like crosses or yarmulkes, and bible studies.
The people in favor of the ban on organized prayer in colleges make the claim that the 1st
Amendment makes it unconstitutional. In order to make this claim, one must analyze the text of
the amendment and the history behind the original intent of the Constitutions framers. The text
of the amendment contains the following concerning religion, Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (Constitution).
This amendment should rightfully be interpreted as meaning that Congress does not have the

Baranski 2

power to regulate the religious institutions or prevent anyone from practicing their own religion.
This does not mean that the federal government cannot contain religion within itself. The
infamous concept of the separation of church and state fails to be explicitly stated in the
Constitution. A petition written by political leaders of various communities stated that, The 1st
Amendment was intended to keep government out of religion, and not to keep God out of
government (Gostino). It does not make much sense to have a majority of expert elected leaders
who do not understand the laws that founded the institutions in which they work.
The history surrounding the founding of the nation and the people who came to live there
reveals the true interpretation of this amendment and the framers original intent behind its
writing. According to the Anglican Communion Magazine, in the early 16th century, the King of
England, Henry VIII decided that he would like to have direct control over the Church of
England and declared himself and his monarchy almost equal to God. He took control over the
Protestants living in England and forced them to follow his direction concerning religion
(Anglican Communion). This angered some of the people being persecuted and they
subsequently fled to the Americas. After the American Revolution, the framers of the
Constitution were hoping to avoid a resurgence of tyranny in America. Therefore, it would make
sense that they thought that prohibiting the government from interfering with religion might help
to prevent a repeat of what had happened in England. The 1st Amendment explicitly states their
intent to do this. However, believing that they also intended to keep religion out of the
government requires a more liberal adjustment of the words of the 1st Amendment. The church
was an integral part of forming earlier American governments.
The opponents who believe that religion holds no place in government have become too
narrowly focused on complaining about the current issues. The truth remains that the spread of

Baranski 3

religion throughout the government extends further than prayer in public schools. Examples of
these include the traditional prayer that opens each session of the Supreme Court and Congress
and the religious content included in a vast number of State mottoes and seals. These include
Arizonas God Enriches, Ohios With God, All Things Are Possible, and the words printed
on our nations currency, In God We Trust. (Graham). The presence of these institutions of
religion in the government signals to all of us that the original intent of the 1st Amendment did
not include the incorporation of religion into government as one of its restrictions. If the founders
of the nation had intended for it to be understood in that manner, then these types of traditions
would not have been established. Assuming that they intended for prayer in schools to be banned
would be to assume that no one has been cognizant enough over the past two hundred years of
the Constitution to notice that the large number of religious elements that the government
contains should be removed. Claiming that the founding fathers and the rest of the U.S. have
simply been ignorant creates a serious accusation.
The second issue appropriate in the discussion of maintaining the right to organized
prayer in universities involves defining an American adult not only as those who have surpassed
the age of eighteen, but also as people who have freedoms entitled to them. They have the choice
to choose in almost every aspect of their lives. College students have these rights as well. They
have the right to abstain from anything declared voluntary. An argument can be made that
anything organized and called voluntary could be construed as coercive to participation. It seems
that those who refuse to accept that they can abstain from voluntary activities have forgotten that
being American carries with it the embodiment of one thinking for themselves and acting for
their benefit. They instead choose to believe that they will somehow become overexposed to

Baranski 4

religion, such as they might become exposed to asbestos poisoning, and subsequently have their
ability to think for themselves drained from them.

Those who established this country and founded the principles that have brought it to the
height of democracy would argue that the American government has been strictly forbidden from
interfering in religious affairs, but at the same time has the duty to associate itself with the image
that the people project, including their religious affiliations. It has the duty to uphold itself so that
it may protect the people and in doing so it has the freedom to choose to call on a higher being to
assist it in upholding democracy. Not having the ability to stand up in the Supreme Court, this
argument instead should lend itself to influencing the people of America to a level where they
can exercise their freedom to choose and to ultimately modify the Constitution into something
more specific to perpetuating the traditions of prayer and religious support in institutions of
learning and military excellence.

Baranski 5

Works Cited
Jaschik, S. 2006. The Great Divide in Religious Studies. Inside Higher Ed.
http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/11/20/religion
"Anglican Communion." Encyclopdia Britannica. 2004. Encyclopdia Britannica Online.
<http://search.eb.com/eb/article?eu=117343>.
Gostino, Jeda. "Conservative Spotlight: Save the Ten Commandments Project | Human
Events." Human Events. N.p., 9 June 2010. Web.
http://humanevents.com/2004/01/08/conservative-spotlight-save-the-ten-commandmentsproject/
"Constitution of the United States." Encyclopdia Britannica. 2004. Encyclopdia Britannica
Online. http://search.eb.com/eb/article?eu=127112
"U.S. Constitutional Amendments - FindLaw." Findlaw. N.p., 10 Apr. 2014. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.
<http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendments.html>.
Graham, James. "With God All Things Are Possible." Liberty Magazine. N.p., Mar. 2009. Web.
30 Oct. 2014. <http://www.libertymagazine.org/article/with-god-all-things-are-possible>.