Supreme Court Building Supreme Court 1963 - Warren Court
Supreme Court Building & The Warren Supreme Court (1963)  These are the men who banned School Prayer, and Bible reading in our public schools.  Top Row L to R: Byron R. White, William J. Brennan, Potter Stewart, Arthur J. Goldberg.   Seated L to R:   Tom C. Clark, Hugo L. Black, Earl Warren, William O. Douglas, John M. Harian  

Supreme Court Rulings on
School Prayer & Bible Reading 



 Separation of Church and State  

Separation of Church & State



 
Justice Dept. Seal  Today's Justice System view of Moral Relativism & Evolving Constitutional law.


 
 

 
check and balances

 
Three Court Cases




The True Story of How the
Communist got Prayer Removed from Public Schools. 

 
Site Map

 



 
There are three landmark cases that changed the meaning of the First Amendment as it was previously understood and practiced in America. In these three cases a parent of a child in school petitioned the courts to stop the school from exposing their child to prayer in school and reading the Bible in school. ACLU Lawyers used Thomas Jefferson's letter in the argument for the plaintiffs. They argued that the founding fathers wanted a "wall of separation between church and State"; therefore, the government should be neutral to religion in schools, and as a result the Warren Court ruled that their would be no prayer in school or Bible reading. The court's "majority ruling" reasoned that being neutral or not favoring one religion over another was the same as not allowing religious practices in school.   To learn more about Prayer in School Court cases click here .  

Justice Potter Stewart  
Justice Potter Stewart, the one dissenting vote blasted the ruling saying, "It led not to true neutrality with respect to religion, but to the establishment of a religion of secularism."

Secularization
  (sec'u*lar*i*za'tion), n.  1. the social or political process of rejecting all forms of religious faith.  2. the elimination of any religious elements with-in public education and other civic institutions.

True neutrality would not favor one religion over another, but the court's ruling favored atheism over all the religions of the world that believe in God. Atheism has been declared a religion by the U.S. Supreme Court, so the Court did not act neutrality, but instead favoried one religion over another.  A recent national poll indicated 85% of Americans believe in the existence of God, yet the court ruled with the minority, atheist.  If the Court had really been true to its intention of neutrality ; it would have been impartial to the students, by neither forcing non believers to pray, nor prohibiting believers from prayer. The court's actions were not neutral .
After the June 17, 1963 ruling the Wall Street Journal commented that atheism was now "the one belief to which the state's power will extend its protection."
The question arises "Can the Courts change or create law, or alter the Constitution?

As William J. Murray, the student in Murray v. Curlett school prayer case, writes in his book " Let Us Pray ", "The  original First Amendment guarantee to every citizen, of the right to free religious expression without consequence or state interference, was transformed.  This remarkable process, which took many years and many court decisions, turned the First Amendment inside out. "  

Culture War - Cultural War
Cultural War Web Site  
Learn about  the ideas that divide
America.  What are the ideas and where did they come from?


  Last Update Jun. 2015