Church and State, State Is Wrong Dept. 0
The four-college district will pay $90,000 in legal fees to students Kandy Kyriacou and Ojoma Omaga, who were threatened with suspension after they prayed in class and after Kyriacou prayed with a sick instructor in the teacher’s office. The district also agreed to rescind its written warnings to the students, sent in late 2007 and early 2008.
My two or three regular readers know that I have strong beliefs about the separation of church and state. The first amendment not only prohibits the government from favoring or promoting religion, it also protects the free exercise of it. The religion clause of the first amendment cuts both ways.
The Constitution says,
According to the report excerpted above, the letter of discipline sent to the students said, in part, that the students
“may not engage in behavior that is disruptive to the teaching and learning process during class lecture and lab or in the offices of the faculty.”
The story does not say that the praying in class was in any way disruptive to the class; the fact of the settlement leads me to think that it was not. Had it been, it would be the disruption that was actionable, not the praying itself. I cannot see how voluntarily praying in a private office could be disruptive, unless accompanied by other behavior, such as shouting, screaming, or wall-pounding. If that were the case, it would be the shouting, screaming, or wall-pounding that was disruptive.
Furthermore, the settlement agreement contains this telling paragraph:
Click the picture for a larger image. Click here to see the full agreement.
The community college district is a public agency. For a public agency to act as if the mere act of praying, absent any other intrusive or inappropriate behavior, is disruptive in and of itself seems to me to be clearly “prohibiting the free exercise” of religion.
The college probably did well to cut and run.
