University of Delaware
Office of Public Relations
The Messenger
Vol. 6, No. 1/1996
Sorting out the politics of prayer in public schools

     In her quiet office in the English department's annex, soft-
spoken Joan Del Fattore, professor of English, seems like the
last person to jump into the fray surrounding the role of
religion in public schools.
     But, as an observer, she is highly involved in the issue,
spending much of her time in Washington, D.C., tracking court
cases, watching legislation, following the activities of special
interest groups and interviewing the outspoken proponents of both
sides of the debate.
     The results of her work will be published in a book,
tentatively titled First Caesar in the Prayer Business: The
Politics of Religion in American Public Schools, to be completed
next spring.
     The issues the book will examine are as fascinating as they
are complex.
     For example, there's the pending case of a high school Bible
club that wants to stipulate that its officers be practicing
Christians-an action the school has ruled discriminatory. Club
member Emily Hsu and her parents are suing the school.
     There's the case of the prayer opponent who sued a school
because his own rabbi had been selected to give the invocation at
a school commencement. He didn't oppose the rabbi's religion; he
opposed any clergy being involved in a public school ceremony. In
that case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a school cannot
invite clergy to pray at public ceremonies.
     Rather than ending the debate, the ruling led to more
questions. If not clergy, then can a student lead an invocation?
If a valedictorian is speaking and decides to include a prayer,
does the state have the right to interfere?
     Is it legal for a school to let the senior class vote on
whether or not it wants prayer included at graduation? If the
class wants prayer, which student should say the prayer?
     It's when issues like these hit home that most people start
examining their stand on religion in public schools, Del Fattore
says.
     "A vast majority of Americans, well over 70 percent, say
that they want school prayer," she explains, "but, when asked in
detail who they want to write school prayer and who they want to
say it-if the answer is not representative of their own
religion-people will change their minds and say they don't want
it.
     "Many people will say, 'I want prayer in schools, but don't
tell my kids what words to say.'
     "For every person who says, 'Why not tolerate a few minutes
of prayer?,' there is someone from another faith who says, 'I
don't want my child hearing your religion's prayers in school.'"
     One of the reasons people tend to feel so strongly about
religion in public schools is the role of special interest
groups, Del Fattore says.
     Such groups are not above circulating misinformation if it
helps their cause, she says.
     For example, Del Fattore is quick to note that many people
misinterpret the 1960s school prayer decision. The legislation,
she says, does not rule out individualized prayer or religious-
based student groups in schools. It does prohibit evangelizing-
pushing any kind of religious beliefs at those who do not want
them-and it does prohibit public schools from endorsing one
religion over another.
     "Right now, during non-instructional time in any school,
students can go in a room in the school and pray. That is the
action of private citizens and not something the state is
endorsing," Del Fattore says.
     And, she adds, "A child can read religious material at
school-the Bible or the Book of Mormon, for example. Again, that
is the act of an individual and not something the state is
endorsing.
     "The law does say the state can't influence a child's choice
of religion, so if a teacher were to say the best thing to read
is the Talmud, that's an endorsement and not allowed," she
explains.
     "When people say the legislation makes it impossible for a
little child to bow his head in prayer in a public school, it
simply isn't true," she says, emphatically. "But, the fact that
this is a common opinion points to the influence of special
interest groups who find it to their benefit to keep people
stirred up about the issue.
     "Special interest groups don't want to calm people down.
Then, people drop off the cause," she says.
     "One of the points of the book is to inform readers of the
influence that special interest groups across the ideological
spectrum play in the issue of religion in public schools," she
says. "Most federal lawsuits on the issue are defended by
interest groups on both sides.
     "It's not unusual for a special interest group to actively
seek people to represent in federal court, especially those whose
cases will help advance the group's cause."
     Another thing many people don't realize is the role special
interest groups play in drafting federal legislation.
     "Lots of legislation is written by special interest groups,"
Del Fattore says. "It's a taxpayer-saving thing. Very few
legislators have legal staff with expertise in all areas, so they
often get the constitutional lawyers of a special interest group
to help out."
     So, with strong special interest groups out there pushing
both sides of the issue, who does Del Fattore think is right?
     "The reality is that both sides have some points," she says,
adding it's important to remember that there is great diversity
within both the pro- and anti-religion movements.
     "The whole pro-prayer community is not of one mind. There
are wide gradations within it, and that's very healthy," she
says. "There is a range of thought on the other side as well."
     And, while the far left and far right are easy to recognize,
most Americans fall somewhere in the center, she says.
     "The center includes people who are both conservative
evangelicals and some very liberal separationists. Most of those
in the middle agree that individual students have full First
Amendment rights. Many prayer advocates in the middle only want
their own kids to be able to pray."
     Proponents and opponents alike can come together at times,
she notes, such as last year, when groups as diverse as the
National Association of Evangelicals and the American Civil
Liberties Union met to prepare The Joint Statement on Current
Law.
     The statement, sent to every school district in the country,
has a preface explaining that the groups who put it together all
want to change the current law-in different ways-but agree it is
important to put the facts in front of the people.
     In conclusion, Del Fattore notes, "federal court rulings
since the Supreme Court prayer cases in the early 1960s make it
pretty clear that government-sponsored, government-led religious
activities in public schools are unconstitutional.
     "Although individual situations may differ in details, there
are two fundamental responses to that state of affairs: Proposals
for a constitutional amendment to override the Supreme Court's
previous decisions and attempts to promote student-sponsored,
student-led school prayer.
     "Although we're talking about a school-based activity, it
involves basic constitutional rights and is therefore not going
to be decided by educators but by the courts and the Congress.
The resulting impact on the education system and on school
climate can only be speculated upon.
     "Would a return of school prayer be divisive among students?
Would it promote a watered-down civil religion that would compete
with sectarian faiths? Would it reduce crime and disorder in the
schools by promoting such traditional values as reverence and
respect? Or, will it make little difference to the vast majority
of students either way?
     "Proponents of all those views are impassioned and positive
of the rightness of their positions," Del Fattore concludes.
                                                  -Beth Thomas