Jewish Organizations Among Those Opposing Reagan’ Proposal for Voluntary Prayers in Schools

Jewish organizations have joined the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Christian organizations in opposing President Reagan’s proposal for a constitutional amendment to permit voluntary prayers in public schools.

At a press conference here, opponents of the proposal, citing the need to maintain the constitutional separation of church and state, said that prayers cannot be voluntary when mandated by a school system since a child who did not want to participate would be subject to ridicule from classmates, or forced by peer pressure to take part in whatever ceremony was held.

“The Jewish community, in particular, is acutely aware of government-imposed religion,” Marc Pearl, Washington representative of the American Jewish Congress, said at the press conference last Thursday which was held on Capital Hill. “It is for that reason that many of our ancestors fled Europe.”

The press conference was held just an hour after Reagan, in a national prayer day ceremony in the White House Rose. Garden, announced his support for a constitutional amendment to permit voluntary proyers in public schools. But he gave no details of the bill the Administration will submit to Congress.

“No one will ever convince me that a moment of voluntary prayer will harm a child or threaten a school or state,” Reagan told some 100 religious leaders attending the ceremony. “But I think it can strengthen our faith in the Creator who alone has the power to bless America.”

FOCUS OF THE OPPOSITION

Pearl said he was attending the press conference also as the representative of six organizations representing some 60 national and more than 100 local groups which had signed a statement critical of the Reagan-sponsored amendment.

The organizations which signed the statement were the AJCongress, the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council, the Synagogue Council of America, the National Coalition for Public Education and Religious Liberty (PEARL), the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, and the National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. The statement was issued by Howard Squadron, president of the AJCongress, who is serving as spokesman for the coalition.

The joint statement stressed that the separation of church and state “prohibits” public schools “from fostering religious practices or beliefs” and “experience teaches us that efforts to introduce religious practices into public schools generate the very interreligious tension and conflict that the First Amendment was designed to prevent.”

The statement noted that “twenty years of experience” since the Supreme Court decision on prayer “shows that those decisions have not undermined America’s religious faith. On the contrary, they have stood as a reminder and symbol of the freedom of conscience that is America’s proudest tradition — a freedom that has itself protected and fostered religious faith.”

WARNS PRAYERS WILL BE TRIVIALIZED

Continuing, the statement said: “It is impossible to devise a prayer that is acceptable to all groups and that any effort to do so trivializes prayer by robbing it of depth and meaning. It is because of this trivialization that we are convinced that daily rote recitation of school — sponsored prayer contributes nothing to the advancement of religion. On the other hand, in a diverse and pluralistic society, prayer which does contain depth and meaning for some will inevitably be offensive to many others.”

Speakers at the press conference, who represented the ACLU and religious organizations, denied that voluntary prayer was not allowed when the Supreme Court in 1962 declared classroom prayers unconstitutional. “It is faulty thought to assume that the Supreme Court can take God out of the classroom or that Congress can put it back in declared Gary Ross, of the Seventh Day Adventists.

Mary Cooper, of the National Council of Churches, stressed that any child is free to pray silently now whenever he or she wants to in school. She and others stressed that they did not object to prayer but to organized praying in the classroom. The place for this type of prayer is in the home or the church and synagogue, they stressed.

John Baker, general counsel of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, said he was “appalled” by what he called “the politicizing” of prayer. He said “involving government in prayer would trivialize and secularize prayer.”

Charles Bergstrom, of the Lutheran Council, said: “This is not a Christian nation and most of us would not want it to be.” He faulted the President for failing to meet with representatives of mainline churches and instead seeking advice from “religious entertainers” and religious political groups.

David Landau, legislative counsel of the ACLU noted that “it is difficult to imagine any proposal which is more diametrically opposed to the President’s theme of keeping the government off the backs of the people” than the school prayer amendment.

Representatives of the National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW) and B’nai B’rith Women also attended the press conference and both groups condemned the proposed constitutional amendment.

CROSS-SECTION OF OPPONENTS NOTED

In a message to Reagan, Dorothy Binstock, president of B’nai B’rith Women, stated that “the lines between places of worship or meditation and schools have been clearly drawn by the Constitution and upheld by the Supreme Court and we are disappointed that you lend your support to efforts to blur that distinction.”

Shirley Leviton, NCJW president, in a statement, noted that many of the people who opposed school prayer “represent a crosssection of religious beliefs and are committed to the practice of religion in the solace of prayer. We are, however, convinced that officially sanctioned prayer in the public schools would place children under enormous pressure, thus negating the ‘voluntary’ aspect of a ruling such as that being proposed.”