.

National AU Links

National AU Home
Press Releses
Church & State Magazine
About Americans United
Resources
Legal Information
Legislative Update
Churches & Politics
Religion & Public Schools
Religious Right Research
Faith Communities
AU Chapters
Ways To Support AU

Churches And Partisan Politics: Recipe For Division

Links of Interest
The Constitutional Principal
T. Peter's Separation Page

---

House Bill 376 - Bad for Religious Freedom & Bad for Science

This past November2009 the Massachusetts Chapter of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State wrote to Senator Robert A. O’Leary and Representative Martha M. Walz, chairmen of the joint committee on education in the Massachusetts State Legislature, asking them to oppose HB 376. According to Ronal Madnick, President of the Massachusetts Chapter of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State (AU), the AU supports the right of students to voluntarily express their religious beliefs. This bill, however, requires the schools to create a limited public forum for student speech at all school events and class assignments. It thus allows students to practice and profess their religion in the classroom and at official school functions, where children of different religious beliefs are a captive audience.

HB 376 does not clarify the law; it introduces more confusion and contradictions. It would likely lead to violations of the free speech and establishment clauses of the U.S. Constitution. The bill makes no distinction between elementary schools, junior high schools, and high schools. The bill is unnecessary. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Massachusetts Constitution already guarantees the right of students to engage in voluntary, student-initiated religious expression. Other laws and court cases clearly establish that students can organize prayer groups, religious clubs, and similar gatherings, and that these groups must have the same access to school facilities as other noncurricular student groups.

It is clear that students are afforded First Amendment protections while in school. This bill, however, tries to transform every classroom, assignment, and school function into a place for them to proselytize classmates, but does so in a way that will most likely violate both the Establishment Clause and the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. Courts have never considered a law like this, and because the Supreme Court is especially diligent with students’ rights, it is far from certain that merely declaring something to be a “limited public forum” and disclaiming any school role in the student speech would be enough to make it so. This untested law is inviting litigation.

Anti-Evolution Legislation?

House Bill HB376, will "encourage the discussion of creationism in public school science classes". That's what a cosponsor of the bill, Representative Elizabeth Poirier (R-14th Bristol), told the Cape Cod Times (October 7, 2009). The bill, received a hearing on October 6, 2009 and with bipartisan support is expected to pass favorably through the Joint Committee on Education." Evolution is in fact not mentioned in the bill, but it could be understood to force biology teachers to give equal credit to students who, when asked questions about evolution, answer with religious views about creation. It would allow students to bring not only bring up creationism in the classroom, but insist that the teacher devote time to it. The National Center for Science Education has urged the bill be opposed in its present form.

---

AMERICANS UNITED URGES MASSACHUSETTS COUNTY TO
CUT TIES WITH SECTARIAN DRUG COUNSELING PROGRAM

Americans United for Separation of Church & State is urging Bristol County to discontinue its support of a religious group's drug treatment program for former prisoners. Massachusetts should not be funding a religious conversion program.

According to media reports, Bristol County purchased a house for $375,000 and the county's sheriff granted it to Teen Challenge to operate a drug recovery program for ex-inmates. Teen Challenge's drug treatment program is based entirely on religious principles. The group's Web site states that it "believes in the faith model and concentrates on focusing attention on God and His will for those that enter the program." "Massachusetts taxpayers should not be forced to support Teen Challenge's religious mission," says Ron Madnick, president of Americans United's Massachusetts Chapter. "The county's aid to this religious conversion program is contrary to the constitutional principle of church-state separation. The county should stop supporting Teen Challenge's religious work."

The national office of Americans United sent a letter on May 2 to county officials and the sheriff noting the unconstitutional nature of providing a building to Teen Challenge for a religion-based drug treatment program. "There can be no doubt that Teen Challenge's programming is permeated by religion and that Teen Challenge attempts to convert program participants to a particular version of Christianity," wrote Americans United attorneys Alex Luchenitser and Dena Sher. "There can also be no doubt that providing a building - free of charge - to house Teen Challenge's religious-indoctrination program is a type of government assistance" that violates the First Amendment principle of church-state separation. Americans United's letter explains that Bristol County's support of Teen Challenge violates not only the First Amendment, but also the Massachusetts Constitution, which includes a provision barring "the use of public money or property" for religious groups or causes.

---

 

The Dover PA Evolution/Creationism Trial In the decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover, Judge John E. Jones III concluded, "The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents." For more see: The National Center for Science Education collection of information on Kitzmiller v. Dover at: http://www.ncseweb.org/kitzmiller Judge Jones's decision in the case (PDF), at: http://coop.www.uscourts.gov/pamd/kitzmiller_342.pdf Federal Court Ruling On 'Under God' In Pledge Shows Respect For Religious Diversity Public Schools Should Not Require Students To Affirm Belief In God In Order To Express Patriotism. The insertion of "under God" into the Pledge in 1954 was in dirct conflict with the First Amendment. The Pledge should be restored as originally written. There can be no freedom of religion without freedom from government promoted religion. Supreme Court Ducks Controversy Over Ten Commandments The Supreme Court decisions on display of religious symbols by government reaffirms the important principle that the state may not promote religion. This is a mixed verdict, but on balance it's a win for separation of religion and government. See also: Why The Ten Commandments Shouldn't Be Posted In Government Buildings Supreme Court Ducks Controversy Over Pledge Of Allegiance On June 14th the Supreme Court dismissed, on technical grounds, a legal challenge to the use of "under God" in public school recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance. It ignored the first Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,..." which Congress blatantly violated in 1954 when it added "under God" to the Pledge.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Check out the latest at our Winchester MA affiliate. .There can be no freedom of religion without freedom from government promoted religion . .