Your Influence Counts ... Use It! The SPOTLIGHT by Liberty Lobby

Reprinted from, home of The SPOTLIGHT archive

Banning School Prayer

  • Those of you who think that voting for a member of the new party movement is helping to elect Al Gore or some other liberal should take a look at who voted in favor of banning prayer in school ...
By Fred Lingel

On June 19, a Republican-appointed majority on the Supreme Court voted 6 to 3 to expand prohibitions against religious activity in public schools. That's another way of saying the Republican-dominated court has once again ruled against school prayer.

This ruling confirms precisely what The SPOTLIGHT said in an editorial on May 8: The "conservative Republican" Supreme Court has continued to hold positions that run counter to the desires of not only self-styled "conservatives" but of every local community and state involved.

Thus, the loud argument against voting for a third party candidate because that "will help elect a liberal Democrat who will stack the Supreme Court with a bunch of liberal judges," has been definitively laid to rest for all time.

In 1984 and in 1988 patriots were told that if they supported a third party candidate that it would hurt Ronald Reagan or George Bush and result in a leftist-dominated Supreme Court. In fact, that's exactly what the United States has today, courtesy of Repub licans like Reagan and Bush.

In the controversial Supreme Court ruling, four Republican court appoin tees -- supported by two Democrats -- issued what has been described as a "far reaching" decision that is expected to result in court challenges to local school district policies that allow even simple "moments of silence" in schools.

Two of the "conservative" Republican justices who voted against school prayer were appointed by Ronald Reagan: Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony M. Kennedy. Another, David Souter, was appointed by George Bush. The fourth, John Paul Stevens, was appointed by Gerald Ford. These Republican foes of religious liberty were joined by two Bill Clinton appointees, Steven Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in issuing the ruling.

Three Republican appointees did take the court's "minority" position: Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Other than election year rhetoric, this whole issue is bogus as the purpose of the Supreme Court is to rule on whether or not a contested statute is pursuant to our constitutional law. Decisions such as those regarding religious activity in public schools should be left solely up to the residents of the local communities and the states.

A president who will appoint justices who will in turn return the court to its purpose is the only kind of president to elect.

The SPOTLIGHT's editorial of May 8 summarized it all quite well:

"The next time somebody tells you that America will go down the tubes and that the election of a Republican 'conservative' is necessary to ensure a 'conservative' majority on the Supreme Court, tell them to wake up and smell the coffee brewing at the abortion clinic down on the corner."