PDA

View Full Version : Prayer at VMI unlawful



thedrifter
04-29-03, 05:58 PM
Tuesday, April 29, 2003
Court of appeals upholds prior ruling
Judges: Prayer at VMI unlawful

The practice "sends the unequivocal message that VMI ... endorses religious expressions," one appeals judge wrote.

By MATT CHITTUM
THE ROANOKE TIMES

A three-judge panel of the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a lower court decision that Virginia Military Institute's supper prayer violates the First Amendment tenet of separation of church and state.

"Put simply, VMI's prayer exacts an unconstitutional toll on the consciences of religious objectors," Judge Robert King of West Virginia wrote in the opinion issued Monday. Judges Clyde Hamilton and Morton Greenberg also heard the case.

The prayer practice "sends the unequivocal message that VMI, as an institution, endorses religious expressions embodied in the prayer," King wrote. "The prayer takes a particular view of religion, one that is monotheistic, patriarchal, and indebted to Judeo-Christian values and conventions of worship."

Attorney General Jerry Kilgore, whose office represents VMI, said in a statement that he will seek review of the matter by the full 4th Circuit.

"Like singing 'God Bless America' and saying 'God Bless this Honorable Court,' these prayers are part of the fabric of our country and are beyond the scope of what the Framers intended to prohibit by the First Amendment," Kilgore said.

The prayers, which have been said before the late meal off and on throughout VMI's history, were reinstituted by since-retired Superintendent Josiah Bunting III in 1995. Bunting directed the VMI chaplain to write a different nondenominational prayer for each night of the week at the start of dinner, which freshmen are required to attend. All cadets present were required to stand for the prayers, which were directed to " Almighty God" or "Heavenly Father," but were not required to say the prayers or bow their heads.

The constitutionality of the prayers was challenged by cadets Neil Mellen of Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif., and Paul Knick of Woodbridge, Va., represented by the Virginia Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union. Mellen and Knick have both since graduated. Bunting was named as the defendant in the case.

U.S. District Judge Norman Moon, sitting in Lynchburg, struck down the prayers as unconstitutional in January 2002, but Kilgore quickly appealed the case to the 4th Circuit. The prayers have not been said since Moon's ruling.

VMI had argued that the prayers were nonsectarian, that no one was required to actually pray, and that only a small percentage of cadets were required to actually attend dinner in the mess hall.

Furthermore, VMI said, court precedents in school prayer cases should not apply in their case because those cases dealt with public school children, not college-age adults.

The 4th Circuit panel rejected those arguments, saying "cadets are plainly coerced into participating in a religious exercise."

Though adults, "in VMI's system, they are uniquely susceptible to coercion," the opinion said. "The technical 'voluntariness' of the prayer does not save it from constitutional infirmities" because "the communal dining experience ... is undoubtedly experienced as obligatory."

The court limited the effect of its opinion to VMI, however, so similar practices at the federal service academies may not have to change.

"We are not called upon to address whether, or to what extent, the military may incorporate religious practices into its ceremonies," the panel said in a footnote. "The Virginia General Assembly, not the Department of Defense, controls VMI."

The court made its decision based on the same standards applied in almost all separation of church and state cases : the coercion test and the three-pronged Lemon test. Under the Lemon test, established by the Supreme Court in the case of Lemon v. Kurtzman, the prayer would have to have a secular purpose, the primary effect of it must neither advance nor inhibit religion, and the prayer must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.

The panel found VMI failed the last two prongs of the Lemon test.

Said ACLU attorney Rebecca Glenberg, who argued the case for Mellen and Knick: "The 4th Circuit demonstrated that even though VMI is a unique institution in many ways, it is still subject to the requirements of the First Amendment."



Sempers,

Roger

firstsgtmike
04-29-03, 06:19 PM
I'm still waiting for some idiot to prosecte those Columbine students huddled under their desks as the shooter was spraying the area.

Some of them were praying.