Should A Moment Of Silence Be Legal In Public Schools Essays

Should a moment of silence be legal in public schools? Matchmaker.com: Sign up now for a free trial. Date Smarter! Should a moment of silence be legal in public schools? In 1962 the Supreme Court decided that public schools did not have the power to authorize school prayer. This decision made public school in the U.S. more atheistic than many European nations. For example, crosses still hang on the classroom walls in Poland, and the Ten Commandments are displayed in Hungary. There are prayers held at the beginning of legislative and judicial sessions and every President has mentioned a divine power in his inaugural speech. In keeping with a spirit of religious freedom as stated in the First Amendment, there is no reason why students should not be allowed to have a moment of silence during the school day when they can pray or do as they choose. The case Engel v. Vitale in 1962 decided that school prayer is unconstitutional. With this case, it was pointed out that the students were to "voluntarily" recite the following prayer: "Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and our country." The court ruled that this rule was unconstitutional according to the First Amendment's "establishment clause," which states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." In response to the Engel v.Vitale case some schools adopted a "moment of silence." In 1963, another case was brought before the court dealing with school prayer, Abington School District v. Schempp. The Schempp family challenged a law in Pennsylvania requiring the students to say ten verses of the Bible before school. These readings from the Bible were declared unconstitutional. Members of the board felt reading the Bible would give the children more moral values. The Schempp family strongly disagreed. Members of Congress attempted to find a compromise. From this effort came the adoption of the moment of silence, which is guaranteed by the First Amendment's "Free Exercise" clause. Six states now permit silent moments-Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Alabama. Silent prayer was ruled constitutional in 1985 as long as it had no religious intent or purpose. (Newsweek, October 3, 1994) Prayer has been banned in schools for thirty-three years. The moment of silence has been ruled constitutional, however. Every student fills a moment of silence in a different way: through song, a prayer, or a memory.

Socrates and Thoreau essays

Socrates and Thoreau essays The main difference between Socrates and Thoreau was the their views on the relationship between people and government. Socrates believed that the people are work for the government. They are supposed to obey the orders of the government and serve the government to the best of their abilities. On the contrary, Thoreau believed that the people shouldnt do everything the government says. He thought that the government did only bad things such as slavery and wars, and that people didnt need government. Socrates believed that the government made peoples lives better, more ordered, and civilized; Thoreau thought the government took things away from the people. In my opinion, both of these philosophies worked under the special circumstances that Socrates and Thoreau were in; however, neither would work in todays American society. Socrates lived under the democratic Athenian government, which was the first democratic society in the history of mankind. In order for this new system to work, the people fully supported the government and did everything for the good of the society. Socrates philosophies fit these circumstances perfectly. In todays society, Socrates philosophies would be viewed as ridiculous ideas. Because of all the scientific and economic developments, people no longer just focus on making a living and nothing else. People have time to read newspapers, find out about what the government is doing, and think about whether the things that are going on are right. In another word, nobody would just blindly follow the government. When they feel that the government is doing something to the detriment of the people, they would make their voices heard and try to get it corrected. Also, people nowadays are not doing whats best for the society. They usually do whats best for them. People no longer feel obl igated to obey the government and do whats best for the society. ...