"Getting Religion Right in Public Schools"

     A friend of mine who teaches in a public high school recently loaned me his December 2011 copy of Kappan Magazine, which is a magazine covering issues related to schooling in the United States. The theme of this particular issue was Religion and the Public Schools, and it featured several very useful articles for public educators attempting to understand the proper role of religion in schools. One of the most helpful articles was "Getting Religion Right in Public Schools" by Charles C. Haynes. Haynes outlines two different "failed models" that schools have employed (and that some still use)—both of which are unconstitutional.

     The first model is what he calls the "sacred public school." In this paradigm, a school district favors one particular form of religious expression (historically, some general form of Protestant Christian faith). This model does not work because it does not respect the rights of free exercise of religion of minority groups in a pluralistic society, and it put the state in a position of endorsing a particular religious viewpoint. Both of these consequences lead to this being unconstitutional. Giving respect and fair treatment to people of other faith backgrounds (or none) guarantees our own continued right to express our faith.     Haynes also describes the opposite—but equally unconstitutional model—the "naked public school." In this model, schools strip themselves of all religious expression and become completely secular. This is problematic for a number of reasons. Chief among them is that students are not agents of the state and have a constitutionally-protected right to the free exercise of their religion. Students have every right to carry a Bible or wear a Christian t-shirt (so long as it otherwise fits with the school's dress code), for example. Students are also free to express their religious convictions at such times and places that are appropriate to the situation and do not infringe upon the rights of others. What's more, to say that religious thought is not important in understanding history and culture is a gross understatement. For a school to deprive students the opportunity to learn about religion would be to mis-educate them.
    The bottom line of Haynes's article is that there is a new model emerging—"a civil school" model—that is religiously neutral. In this model schools are "places where religion and religious conviction are treated with fairness and respect." The bottom line is that "Public schools uphold the First Amendment when they protect the religious liberty rights of students of all faiths or none." I couldn't agree more.