CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION 

U.S. Government: Separating Church and State 

World History: Religious Tolerance and Persecution in the Roman Empire 

U.S. Government: Should Government Aid Students Attending Parochial Schools?  

Shortly before the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, an evangelical Baptist preacher named "Swearing Jack" Waller attempted to lead a prayer meeting without a license from the colonial government of Virginia. Because he was violating Virginia's religion laws, "Swearing Jack" was jerked off his platform by sheriff's men who proceeded to beat his head against the ground. The sheriff then lashed him 20 times with a horsewhip.

At this time, the Church of England (also known as the Anglican Church) was the established religion of Virginia. This meant that the Anglican Church was the only officially recognized church in the colony. Virginia taxpayers supported this church through a religion tax. Only Anglican clergymen could lawfully conduct marriages. Non-Anglicans had to get permission (a license) from the colonial government to preach.

Although the Anglican Church was the sole established church in all five Southern colonies, other protestant Christian churches became established in the towns of the Northern colonies of New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Hampshire. Each town chose by majority vote one Protestant church to be supported by taxpayers. In these colonies, one church usually predominated. For example, in Massachusetts almost all towns selected the Congregational Church since the majority of people living in the colony belonged to that faith. 

Thus, on the eve of the Revolutionary War, nine of the 13 colonies supported official religions with public taxes. Moreover, in these colonies, the government dictated "correct" religious belief and methods of worship. Religious dissenters, like "Swearing Jack," were discriminated against, disqualified from holding public office, exiled, fined, jailed, beaten, mutilated, and sometimes even executed.  Only Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware did not have a system linking church and state. After the Revolution, leaders like Jefferson and Madison worked to ensure freedom of religion for all citizens of the new nation.

During the Revolutionary War, all Southern states ended the Anglican Church's monopoly on religion, but they continued to financially support Christian churches in general. Virginia, however, moved to separate church and state after the Revolution.

A year after Thomas Jefferson drafted the Declaration of Independence, he wrote a bill on religious freedom for his home state of Virginia.  In writing these documents, Jefferson was strongly influenced by the 17th century English philosopher John Locke. In 1689, Locke had argued that "the church itself is a thing absolutely separate and distinct from the commonwealth [government]."  Taking this idea from Locke, Jefferson proposed that Virginia end all tax support of religion and recognize the natural right of all persons to believe as they wish.

Jefferson introduced his bill to the Virginia Assembly in 1779, but state lawmakers did not consider the matter of church and state until after the Revolutionary War. In 1784, another Virginia patriot, Patrick Henry, proposed making Christianity the established religion of Virginia. After failing to get the General Assembly to pass this proposal, Henry submitted another religion bill that called for a tax supporting all Christian churches in the state.  Henry felt this would improve public morals, which he thought had declined during the Revolution.

Under Henry's bill, taxpayers could designate their tax payment to go to the Christian church of their choice.  Henry's bill probably would have passed had not Jefferson's ally, James Madison, persuaded the General Assembly to delay voting until the following year (Jefferson was in Paris as U.S. ambassador to France).

During spring and summer of 1785, Madison worked to sway public opinion against Henry's religious tax bill. In a widely circulated petition against the bill, Madison declared that it was the natural right of all persons, even atheists, to be left to their own private views of religion. He argued that throughout history "superstition, bigotry, and persecution" have accompanied the union of religion and government. He also asserted that Christianity did not need the support of government to flourish.

Baptists and other evangelical religious groups in Virginia also circulated petitions against the religious tax bill.  They viewed this bill forcing government into church affairs and threatening religious liberty. Overwhelmed by the negative public response to Henry's bill, the General Assembly did not even bring it up for a vote. Instead, Madison reintroduced Jefferson's bill, which called for severing all ties between the state of Virginia and religion.  Jefferson's "Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom" was passed on January 19, 1786. This was the first time that a government anywhere in the world had acted to legally separate religion from the state.

As written in 1787, the U.S. Constitution did not mention religion except to prohibit any religious requirement for holding federal office. When the first Congress met in 1789, Madison proposed a series of amendments to the Constitution guaranteeing the rights of Americans. The opening words of the First Amendment declared that, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. . . ."  The First and other nine amendments, called the Bill of Rights, were ratified in 1791 as part of the Constitution.

The Bill of Rights originally only limited acts of the federal government. Thus, the First Amendment's prohibition against laws "respecting an establishment of religion" did not affect what states could do. Consequently, seven states (including newly admitted Vermont) continued to assess taxes in support of Christian churches. State laws also frequently required public officeholders to be Christians, denied the vote to non-Christians, and enforced the Christian Sabbath.

When Thomas Jefferson became president in 1801, he tried to maintain a strict separation between government and religion in federal matters. He was criticized for refusing to proclaim a national day of prayer and thanksgiving as presidents George Washington and John Adams had done before him. Jefferson wrote a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, to explain his views on religion. In this letter, he quoted the First Amendment's clause prohibiting Congress from passing laws establishing religion.  Jefferson then remarked that this establishment clause built "a wall of separation between Church and State."

Gradually, all states followed the lead of Virginia in ending religion taxes. Massachusetts in 1833 was the last of the original 13 states to do this. But some states still involved themselves with religion. For instance, several states made recitation of the Lord's Prayer and devotional Bible readings mandatory in public schools.

Not until the 20th century did the U.S. Supreme Court apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states. The Supreme Court has ruled that the 14th Amendment (ratified in 1868) requires states to guarantee fundamental rights such as the First Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of religion. This means that states, like the federal government, can "make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

In 1947, the Supreme Court attempted to define the "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment.  Justice Hugo Black, writing for the court, held:

The Supreme Court still struggles today over exactly where to draw the line separating church and state.  On the one hand, the Supreme Court has struck down state laws providing for organized prayer in the public schools. But the court has also upheld laws that exempt churches from paying taxes.

1. How were Baptists and other dissenting religious groups discriminated against during colonial times?
   
   
2. In what ways did John Locke, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison agree on separating church and state?
   
   
3. How do Justices Black and Rehnquist differ over the meaning of the establishment clause in the First Amendment? Whom do you agree with? Why?

Levy, Leonard. The Establishment Clause, Religion and the First Amendment. Chapel Hill, N. C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1994.

Stanton, Evans M. "What Wall?" National Review. Jan. 23, 1995:56+.
 
 

A. Form small groups to discuss the following laws and government acts concerning church and state.  Each student should keep a record of his or her opinions on each.

Do you agree or disagree that:

2. Churches should be exempt from paying taxes?

3. Federal aid should be granted to religious colleges, charities, and hospitals for secular (non-religious)
    purposes?

4. States should be allowed to require prayers or other religious exercises in the public schools?

5. The president should be allowed to proclaim a national day of prayer?

6. Cities should be allowed to permit churches to place nativity scenes in public parks at Christmas time?

Partial Separatist: Federal and state governments should be permitted to grant aid to religions for only certain secular purposes (such as teaching remedial reading and math).

Absolute Separatist: Neither federal nor state governments should become involved with religion in any way.

D. Finally, each student should write a persuasive letter to one of the article's historical figures who differs with the student's position on separating church and state. Establishers should write to "Swearing Jack" Waller. Accommodators should write to James Madison. Partial Separatists should write to Thomas Jefferson. Absolute Separatists should write to Patrick Henry.

The purpose of the letter is to try to convince the historic figure to agree with the student's position. 
 

Today, the area of the ancient Roman empire holds more than 25 separate nations. At its peak, the Roman empire reached north to Britain and south halfway up the Nile River. Rome controlled all the land surrounding the Mediterranean, making the large sea, in effect, a "Roman lake." Its conquered peoples represented many different cultures and spoke a multitude of languages, such as Greek, Celtic, Aramaic, Egyptian, Numidian, Berber, and Phoenician. Each had its own religion, which it held sacred. 

Rome won its empire by force. But to control such a vast empire, it needed to win the cooperation of its subject peoples. It did this in various ways. Instead of punishing conquered nations, Rome often treated them as allies, encouraging them to take part in the glory and wealth of building the empire. To the more primitive peoples in Gaul (France), Britain, and Spain, Rome offered an advanced civilization with a written language (Latin), a legal system, and well-run cities. The people in the eastern part of the empire—Greece, Asia Minor, Middle East, and Egypt—had already been deeply influenced by Greek civilization. Rome recognized and honored this civilization, allowing Greek to continue as the language of educated people in this part of the empire. To all its subject peoples, Rome granted religious toleration as long as they also honored Roman gods. 

The Roman religion included many major and minor gods headed by the sky god, Jupiter. In Roman belief, a sort of contract existed between the people and their gods. In exchange for the Romans practicing the required religious rituals, the gods would ensure prosperity, health, and military success. 

Like the Romans, almost all the conquered peoples were polytheistic. They worshiped their own gods, who they thought protected them. Since they believed other peoples had their own gods, they found it relatively easy to take part in festivals celebrating Roman gods. It was simply a matter of paying respect to the Romans. 

In return, the Romans built temples and made animal sacrifices for the conquered peoples' gods. In fact, at various times other peoples' gods became wildly popular among Romans. The Romans actually identified the Greek gods with their own. Jupiter and Zeus, for example, were viewed as the same god. When Greco-Roman gods didn't meet their needs, many Romans joined mystery cults from the east. The cult of Isis, an Egyptian goddess, swept the empire at the beginning of the first century. The cult of Mithras, the Persian sun god, proved particularly popular to soldiers (and useful to the empire because it idealized courage). 

The Romans generally tolerated these cults, but there were exceptions. Crowds celebrating Dionysus, a Greek god associated with wine and drunkenness, grew so frenzied that Rome suppressed the cult for a while. But within a few years, Rome relented and allowed it as long as no more than five worshiped at any one time. When a priest from the cult of Isis seduced an innocent Roman woman, Roman Emperor Tiberius ordered the temple destroyed and its priests executed. But the next emperor once again permitted the cult. 

The religions that Rome had the most problems with were monotheistic—Judaism and Christianity. Because these religions believed there was just one god, they prohibited worshiping other gods. Their members refused to make offerings to Roman gods or take part in Roman religious festivals, which Rome considered a matter of showing loyalty. These religions tested Roman tolerance. 

In 63 B.C., the Romans conquered Judea, the land of the Jews. Rome immediately recognized it had a problem because the Jews refused to pay homage to Roman gods. Rome gave in and exempted Jews from this requirement. Rome did this in part because the Jews had helped Roman general Julius Caesar win an important battle several years earlier. Soon Rome recognized Judaism as a legal religion, allowing Jews to worship freely. 

But Rome viewed the Jews with suspicion and persecuted them on several occasions. One of the most serious conflicts between Rome and the Jews began in Judea in A.D. 66 when Nero was emperor. The Roman governor of Judea unwisely decided to confiscate a large sum of money from the treasury of the Great Temple in Jerusalem. He claimed he was collecting taxes owed the emperor. Rioting broke out, which Roman soldiers ruthlessly suppressed. This, in turn, enraged a nationalistic group of Jewish revolutionaries, called Zealots, who massacred the Romans in Jerusalem and attacked Roman troops elsewhere in the Roman province.

Nero sent three legions to put down the rebellion. By summer of the year 68, Rome had restored its control over most of the province. Two years later, the Romans retook Jerusalem and destroyed the Great Temple, the center of the Jewish religion. Fighting continued for a few more years until the Zealot fortress at Masada fell. 

Following this revolt, Rome tried to prevent further uprisings by expelling Jews to different parts of the empire. But Jews rose in two more unsuccessful rebellions. The first took place in 115–116 in several Mideast cities. The second took place in Jerusalem in 131 when Emperor Hadrian announced he would build a shrine to Jupiter on the site of the destroyed Great Temple. After crushing these challenges to their authority, the Romans dispersed Jews throughout the empire. But Judaism remained a legal religion and Jews continued to enjoy religious privileges. 

Rome had good reasons to tolerate the Jewish religion. First, it was a well-established religion with a long history. Most important, Rome wanted to keep the people of Judea from revolting. Neither of these reasons applied to Christianity. This new offshoot of the Jewish religion had little support at first among the people of Judea. In fact, many Jews would have been pleased if Rome had suppressed it. 

Yet when Rome first became aware of Christianity around A.D. 30, it did nothing to stop it. Thinking this sect might weaken the always bothersome Jewish religion, Emperor Tiberius asked the Senate to legalize the Christian faith and declare Christ a Roman god. But the Senate refused. Instead, it pronounced Christianity to be an "illegal superstition," a crime under Roman law. 

Although Christianity was now officially illegal, Tiberius still hoped this new religious sect would further his goal of pacifying the empire. As a result, he ordered Roman officials not to interfere with the new religion, a policy that lasted about 30 years until the time of Nero. 

On the night of July 18, A.D. 64, a fire began in the area of the Circus Maximus, the great arena in Rome for chariot races and games. The fire spread quickly and for six days consumed much of the city, including Emperor Nero's palace. 

Immediately, the rumor spread that Nero himself had caused the great fire to clear space for a new palace. He was also accused of playing the lyre (a stringed instrument like a small harp) while watching the spectacular conflagration. Although he probably did play the lyre at some point while watching the fire, he was almost certainly not responsible for it. Nevertheless, the suffering people of Rome believed him guilty. 

Fearful that Roman mobs would turn on him, Nero cast about for a scapegoat to blame for the fire. He pointed to an unpopular small religious minority, the Christians. 

Christians made an easy target for scapegoating. The common people of Rome believed rumors about Christians. Some thought Christians practiced cannibalism because the sacrament of the Eucharist called for believers to symbolically eat the flesh and blood of Christ. Others believed that Christians practiced incest because they preached loving their brothers and sisters. Many believed Christians hated humanity because they kept secrets and withdrew from normal social life. Many pagans feared that the gods would become angry and punish the Roman people since Christians refused to participate in the old religious rituals. These fears and rumors helped Nero shift public opinion to blaming the Christians rather than him for the great fire. 

Since the Christian religion was still illegal, it was easy to order mass arrests, trials, and executions. The Christian martyrs suffered horrible deaths. Roman historian Tacitus described Nero's methods of execution: 

Dressed in wild animal skins, they were torn to pieces by dogs, or crucified, or made into torches to be ignited after dark as substitutes for daylight. Nero provided his Gardens for the spectacle, and exhibited displays in the Circus, at which he mingled with the crowd—or stood in a chariot dressed as a charioteer. 

For many years, Christians lived with the uncertainty that another persecution could erupt at any time. In 110, Emperor Trajan attempted to reach a compromise between the growing Christian minority and Roman pagans who demanded that the illegal religious sect be destroyed. Although Trajan authorized arresting Christians, he prohibited general searches to seek them out and ordered Roman officials not to actively interfere with Christian gatherings. 

For more than 100 years, Christians preached and practiced their faith openly with little obstruction from Roman officials anywhere in the empire. Rome's excellent system of roads helped Christians spread the gospel throughout the empire. And the Christians' openness to people from all groups and classes helped them gain many converts. 

But in 250, Emperor Decius attempted to revive the Roman pagan religion and persecute Christians. Many Christians perished, but when Gallienus became emperor, he halted the persecution.  Gallienus then went one step further by recognizing Christianity as a legal religion for the first time.  By stopping the oppression of this minority religion, Gallienus hoped to bring religious peace to the empire. 

For almost 40 years, the legalized Christian Church flourished in the Roman empire. Then, in 297, Emperor Diocletian initiated one last terrible Christian persecution. 

Diocletian had come to power at a time of crisis. Prices of goods were climbing rapidly, German tribes threatened the western part of the empire, and the Persian empire was attacking in the east. 

Diocletian moved boldly. He set price controls. He doubled the size of the army. To govern the empire more easily, he broke it into two parts—the Greek-speaking east and the Latin-speaking west. 

Suspicious of the loyalty of Christians to the Roman state, Diocletian started persecuting them. He demanded that all Christian soldiers resign from the Roman army. He forbade gatherings for Christian worship and ordered the destruction of churches and sacred writings. Christian members of the government were tortured and executed. 

Other edicts followed when Christian uprisings took place in the eastern parts of the empire where Christianity was strongest. Bishops and priests were arrested, tortured, and martyred. In 304, Rome decreed that all Christians sacrifice to the pagan gods or face death. 

Following Diocletian's retirement in 305, a civil war broke out to determine his successor. It raged on for almost a decade. Even so, the persecution of Christians continued. Galerius, Diocletian's handpicked successor, hated Christians and organized a war of extermination against them in the eastern empire. Christians were mutilated, burned alive, and crucified. Hundreds of Christian men, women, and children were forced to labor in government mines. Crowds in Roman arenas shouted, "Let there be no Christians!" 

Galerius grew disheartened when he saw that his efforts had failed to stamp out the Christian religion. Dying of cancer that was literally rotting his body, Galerius suspended the persecution in 311. He then pleaded for Christians to pray for his health. But he died, and the oppression resumed. 

Constantine, who was fighting for control of the western empire, had a vision that he would win an important battle if he fought under the sign of the cross. He quickly had artisans mark his soldiers shields with crosses and sent them into battle. When they won, Constantine became a strong supporter of Christianity. 

Constantine emerged from the civil war as the new emperor. In 313, he proclaimed that every person was free "to follow the religion which he chooses."  Under Constantine, Christianity rapidly became the dominant religion.

In 395, Emperor Theodosius made Christianity Rome's new state religion. Christians, who had so long been on the defensive, turned to attacking the pagan religion. They closed temples and banned sacrifices to pagan gods. They even transformed some pagan celebrations into Christian ones. For example, the church changed the birthday of the sun god on the 25th of December into the celebration of the birth of Christ. 

1. In what ways were Romans tolerant of religions? 
   
   
2. Why did the Romans single out Christians to persecute from time to time? 
   
   
3. The founders of the United States prohibited making any religion the official state religion. Do you think such a prohibition would have helped the Roman empire? Explain. 

Grant, Michael. Nero, Emperor in Revolt. New York: American Heritage Press, 1970. 

Sordi, Marta. The Christians and the Roman Empire. Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Press, 1986. 
 
 

Unlike ancient Rome, the U.S. Constitution prevents government involvement in religious affairs. This has allowed many different religions to flourish in America free from persecution. In this writing activity, students find and report on a religion in their community. Each student should: 

1. Research and make a list of at least five different religions in the community. (Explain how you found out that each religion exists in your community.) 
   
   
2. Make a report on one religion from your list. It should not be a religion that you are familiar with. Your report should include information on the religion's basic beliefs, practices, its founders, holidays, and how it developed. Conclude your report with a paragraph on why religious toleration is an important value in American society. 

After all class members present their reports, the class should count how many religions it discovered in the community. Debrief by holding a discussion on why religious toleration is important.
 

When members of the first Congress wrote in the First Amendment that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," they had two important things in mind. First, they wanted to prevent the government from forcing anyone to support a religion or to worship in a certain way. Just as important, writers of the First Amendment also wanted to keep government from meddling in the affairs of churches.

Because the First Amendment forbids "an establishment of religion," courts have ruled that federal and state governments may not directly aid religion. But court interpretations have not always been consistent when it comes to indirect aid. Today, the law remains unclear about the constitutionality of some government aid to students attending religious schools.

In 1947, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment's establishment of religion clause did not allow federal and state governments to "pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another."  [Everson v. Board of Education.] But the Supreme Court has gone on to rule that some forms of government aid to religious schools do not violate the establishment clause. These include government-funded bus transportation and non-religious textbooks for students enrolled in parochial (religious) schools.

In 1971, the Supreme Court decided that it violated the establishment clause for a state to help pay salaries of Catholic school instructors who taught secular (non-religious) subjects like math and science.  In this case, Lemon v. Kurtzman, the court reasoned that, when the state paid the salaries, the Catholic Church could use the savings to pay for its purely religious purposes.  Thus, the state ended up aiding a religion.

In the Lemon case, the Supreme Court formulated guidelines for determining when an act of government violated the establishment clause. According to the so-called "Lemon test," any government act involving religion must meet all three of the following requirements to be constitutional under the First Amendment:

2. The main effect of the government act must neither advance nor inhibit religion.

3. The result of the government act must not excessively entangle government with the affairs of religion.

Title I of the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act provided federal funds for remedial teaching of educationally deprived children from low-income families. This funding was made available to help students in both public and private schools, including those operated by religions. To satisfy the First Amendment's establishment clause, Congress required that all funds go to public school systems, which would then be responsible for remedial instruction in both public and parochial schools.
Starting in 1966, New York City set up remedial reading, math, and other services at parochial schools. About 20,000 disadvantaged students, most enrolled in Catholic schools, were served by the federal Title I program.

All Title I teachers and other educational professionals worked for public schools and volunteered for extra duty and pay at parochial schools. Teachers were told not to include any religious instruction in their teaching even though they would be working in parochial schools. They were to avoid all unnecessary contact with the regular parochial school staff. The public school system supplied all teaching materials. Even religious symbols were removed from Title I classrooms. Finally, Title I teachers were monitored by public school supervisors, who conducted at least one unannounced classroom visit per month. The purpose of this monitoring was to ensure that the federally funded remedial teaching did not aid religion.

Twelve years after the Title I program began in New York City parochial schools, a group of taxpayers filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming that the use of tax money for this purpose violated the First Amendment's establishment clause. The case, Aguilar v. Felton, reached the Supreme Court in 1985.  The court ruled, 5–4, that New York's Title I remedial program in parochial schools failed to pass the third part of the Lemon test and therefore was an establishment of religion.

Writing for the majority, Justice William Brennan stated that the need to monitor public school remedial teachers to make sure no religious instruction was taking place "inevitably results in the excessive entanglement of church and state. . . ."  He concluded that the required teacher monitoring resulted in a continuing governmental intrusion into the operation of religious schools. Writing in dissent, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor argued that there was no reason to even have such a monitoring system. In her opinion, professional public school teachers would hardly start teaching religion simply because they were working for an hour or so in parochial school classrooms.

To try to satisfy the Supreme Court's decision in the Aguilar case, the New York City Board of Education provided remedial instruction to parochial students in classrooms separated from their schools.  Most often, this involved marching students to a mobile instructional vehicle parked outside the school. Aside from the inconvenience of moving students (especially small children in bad weather), the price of leasing classrooms cost New York about $15 million per year ($100 million for all school districts in the nation). This money was deducted from the city's Title I funds, which were earmarked for remedial teaching.

Since 1985 when the Aguilar case was decided, several Supreme Court decisions put into question the basic assumptions that Justice Brennan used in writing his majority opinion. One case decided in 1993 concluded that a sign-language interpreter paid with public funds could assist a deaf student in his classes at a religious school. The court ruled that in this situation there was no need to monitor the interpreter.  [Zobrest v. Cataline Foothills School District.]

In 1995, 10 years after the Aguilar decision, the New York Board of Education, parents of parochial students, and others tried to reopen the case. These petitioners contended that the Aguilar decision made remedial education for parochial students too costly. They also argued that in light of recent Supreme Court decisions, the 1985 Aguilar ruling was "no longer good law." The taxpayer opponents, however, argued that placing Title I teachers back into parochial schools would likely result in them aiding the religious mission of those schools.

The Supreme Court followed an unusual procedure to reconsider the Aguilar decision and in June 1997 overturned it. Writing for the 5–4 majority, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor agreed with the New York School Board and parents that recent Supreme Court decisions made it clear that there was no need for the state to closely monitor Title I teachers working in parochial schools. Without this state intrusion going on, the issue of "excessive entanglement of church and state," on which the Aguilar case was based, almost disappeared.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice David Souter argued that the government-funded remedial instructors, whether teaching inside or outside parochial schools, enabled those schools to use more of their funds for religious purposes. This was, in his opinion, government aid to advance religion and a violation of the First Amendment's establishment clause. [Agostini v. Felton.] 

The closeness of the Aguilar and Agostini cases indicates that the issue of government aid to parochial school students remains far from settled.

1. What two concerns did the framers of the First Amendment have in mind when they prohibited laws "respecting an establishment of religion"?
   
   
2. What is the Lemon test? Do you think it should be used? Why or why not?
   
   
3. Why did Justice Brennan conclude that New York City's Title I program in the parochial schools was an "excessive entanglement of church and state" in violation of the First Amendment? Do you agree? Explain.
   
   
4. Do you agree or disagree with the dissenting opinion of Justice Souter in the Agostini decision? Why?
   
   
5. Do you think it is a good idea for tax dollars to be spent at parochial schools? Why or why not?

Freedom Forum First Amendment Center. http://www.fac.org [for Supreme Court decisions and articles analyzing First Amendment issues.]

Kasindorf, Martin. "Church Schools, Public Teachers." Newsday. April 13, 1997: A06.
 
 

Divide the class into five groups, each representing the U.S. Supreme Court. Each court will discuss a different question concerning aid to parochial school students and rule on its constitutionality.

1. The justices of each court should first review the Lemon test.

2. Each court should use the Lemon test to discuss and decide on an answer to one of the following constitutional questions:

b. May a blind student use a federal vocational education
    grant to attend a religious college to become a pastor?

c. May parents be granted a government voucher to help
    pay tuition for their children at the school of their
    choice including any religious school?

d. May parents of parochial school students be allowed
    to claim a tax deduction for the cost of Bibles and
    other religious educational materials?

e. May federal education funds be used to pay parochial
    school instructors to teach after-school remedial
    classes?

Return to CRF Publications