- Emergency c-section on dead mother saves baby following I-55 wreck (05/15/16)19
- Big drug haul made during Cape Girardeau bust (05/17/16)11
- Police charge Perryville man with statutory rape of two underage girls (05/17/16)
- Teen shot outside apartment off Lorimier Street (05/20/16)39
- Body found Thursday at Ranney Park in Cape (05/20/16)10
- Bollinger County deputies bust man on meth-for-sex sting (05/20/16)2
- Area farmer pleads guilty to fraud (05/18/16)1
- Perryville man accused of grabbing woman around throat, pulling out her hair (05/18/16)1
- Charleston man accused of fatally shooting Cape teen (05/22/16)24
- Vandals ravage historic Shivelbine house before demolition (05/18/16)25
Legal critique regarding prayer - opposing view
To the editor:
I appreciate Todd Diebold's critique of Lee v. Weisman. However, I disagree with his conclusion that the court's opinion was flawed.
There are two questions: 1. Is it obstructing the rights of a member of a religious group (or an atheist or agnostic) to have a public school participate in a prayer for a god or a religion that he or she does not believe in? 2. Is it infringing the rights of a member of the group that the prayer was going to represent to deny the public prayer?
I disagree with Diebold's argument that the answer to question No. 2 is yes and that the answer to question No. 1 is no. I have often heard arguments that members of other religious groups can pray quietly to themselves. However, the argument runs both ways. If the member of a minority religious group can choose to pray to himself, then the members of the majority religious group could likewise pray to themselves.
I believe a single prayer to a god that many people do not believe in is an establishment of religion. Praying silently is still a religious practice, and that right is not infringed upon. As long as there are tests, there will always be prayer in public schools.