Ours is just one of at least 60 New York City schools that have doubled as rent-free houses of worship — the vast majority of them evangelical Christian churches — in their off-hours. Many have little connection with the school communities. It’s hard to imagine, for example, that the Village Church at Public School 3 in the West Village — a church that runs a Gender Affirming Ministry Endeavor associated with the movement to “cure” gay men and lesbians — is representative of the neighborhood.
I just referenced a teacher in a NYC public school and another recent discussion* also raises issues that touches upon that area while having broad implications nation-wide. Of special concern to me is her comment that religious meetings are not simply speech matters, but have a special component that the First Amendment specifically addresses. I agree and as Justice Stevens recognized in a case involving the group that gives her book it's name, some religious "speech" can have Establishment Clause implications. The tendency of the Supreme Court (or certain justices) to treat religious speech, symbols and association (with the exception of the ministerial exception, perhaps) as if it was just another breed of speech has been taken too far. The author is correct to highlight that parenthetical. Religion is different -- in both directions.
The opening quote is from a NYT article by the guest involved and she cites an appellate ruling that the Supreme Court chose to let stand. Earlier, with Justice Breyer concurring, the USSC struck down a policy that blocked certain religious groups from meeting after school in public schools for early grades. Here, however, actual worship ceremonies were involved. There is some effort in the state legislature to try to find a way around the ruling. As suggested by some of the one star rankings of her book at Amazon, some might like the sectarian group at issue here or in some other case. But, in the words of Justice Souter, "an evangelical service of worship calling children to commit themselves in an act of Christian conversion" is not really proper at a public school.
One problem, which was noted back in the days of James Madison, is that such programs are not likely to be equally available. The lack of time and space as well as will (it is like Jehovah Witnesses -- most churches do not feel it is their mission to knock on doors or speak on street corners) alone is a factor here. Also, concern also arises when very young students, like those in elementary grades, are involved. Will parents know specifically what they are teaching their students? Being informed is important there even if you believe the groups have a right to access. And, there continues to be repeated examples of "neutral" programs that have some sectarian component to them.
The book is on my reading list and a future entry will likely address the matter further. I would add that the point is not to block out all religious voices. This is not the point here. Putting aside discrimination issues, this might require not allowing the Boy Scouts (involving a belief in God) or any number of other groups to show up. The concern is line drawing. The separation of church and state might be something less than a brick wall but there are lines to draw. Not having worship services at public schools is such a line, one that was not drawn by the local ACLU:
“We view this as a victory for the city’s schoolchildren and their families,” Jane Gordon, the senior counsel of the New York City Law Department, said in a statement. She added that the Education Department “was quite properly concerned about having any school in this diverse city identified with one particular religious belief or practice.”Sometimes, local institutions make questionable moves, but here supplying them the discretion to make this choice is sensible. Meanwhile, parents should be on guard of the lessons taught to their children, including those of a religious nature that might not be to their liking.
---
* The show is Gay USA (if started today, it might be GLBTQ USA) and she might seem a bit of a strange guest, but since the mixture of church and state tends to lead to conservative ends (though this need not be the case as shown by some sentiments of our President), the choice makes sense.