School Sanctioned Prayer Passes House
April 30th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Rep. Charlie Howard’s so-called freedom of religious expression in public schools bill passed this afternoon, facing a somewhat tamer reception in the House this time around. Still opponents did put up a fight, offering up a number of (failed) amendments that would have cleaned up the bill’s blatant attempt at allowing a religious majority to cram their theology down the throats of a captive school audience.
Howard opposed all the amendments, painting a picture of a bill so carefully constructed by constitutional experts, that any change, even those “nice-sounding” ones, he said, would open the legislation up to lawsuits.
The bill, according to Howard, “does not give any students any rights or freedom that they don’t have today. It is a neutral bill. It does not add anything to the law.” The policy would only help school districts avoid expensive lawsuits for suppressing student religious expression, he said.
The bill requires schools to set up “limited public forums” – such as sports events, assemblies, and opening announcements – during which student leaders may express a religious or secular viewpoint. Opponents expressed concern that students of a minority religion in the school would be compelled to participate in religious activities of the majority.
Supporters of the bill cast themselves as champions of little girls whose teachers won’t let them talk about Jesus on Easter, when other kids are talking about chocolate eggs and bunnies. Opponents of the bill agree that students’ First Amendment rights allow them to express religious beliefs in the classroom or for homework assignments, but don’t think that’s a good idea at an obligatory, official school event.
“I believe the intent of the author is to facilitate imposing certain religious values on students regardless of their own faith systems,” said Rep. Lon Burnam (D-Fort Worth).
Some speculate that supporters attempted to limit debate on the bill last week because they feared defeat, especially after one amendment prohibiting speech that discriminates on the basis of sexual preference had already tainted the legislation.
Perhaps postponing debate until today was an effective strategy, as the bill passed easily 110-33. The governor issued a statement in support of the bill; what the Senate does with this controversial piece of legislation remains to be seen.
