Prayer in Public Schools Essay Example for Free

Prayer in Public Schools EssayIn the audition named Banning Prayer in Public Schools Has Led to Americas Demise by Gary Bergel, the argument is made that by removing prayer and any form of ghostlike considerateness has caused America to plummet from righteous living, prosperity and success within the last quarter century. He countrys that from around June 25, 1962, when 39 billion schoolchilds were forbidden to pray in school, Americas moral decline began to accelerate more rapidly. Bergel supports his claim by stating the main reasons behind the U. S. Supreme Court ruling and by issuing nigh religious tidbits. Even though Bergel lists many facts and names some general ideas, he has an extremely weak argument for the simple reason of the claims and warrants not being back up with factual or personal evidence.The opposing article that I strike chosen is titled Argument against School Prayer by Adam Frucci. Frucci first-class honours degree starts out by saying that the article is not intended to bash God, or Christianity. But its purpose is to argue all forms of religion in schools, juicy school in particular. He states that high school is a place where you begin to separate from your parents and begin to form your own ideas. Keeping this in mind, its the despotic worst place to start forcing values and beliefs on you.He further states that religion will never be non-discriminatory it can never totally embroil everyone. There will al ways be someone who doesnt fit in simply because of a personal belief, and high school is not the place to pioneer isolationism and criticism on any level outside of an academic level. Again, I like this article but it is somewhat biased because of the writers status of a student in a catholic high school. I get the feeling that he is really bitter near having the catholic beliefs forced on himbut aboveboard he, or his parents, chose for him to attend the school so he might as well adapt, learn, and become stron ger from the situation. Both of the arguments are weak in their own ways and strong in others, and I will attempt to acknowledge most of their faults.Beginning with Bergels argument of the demoralization of the US as a result of the remotion of prayer from public schools, I get the since that he is very adamant about getting his views across regardless of analyzing the other side of the story. The entire establish is just the ranting and ravings of a bitter Christian. No support is given to his main thoughts anywhere throughout the paper. In all of his main thoughts, he spouts some statistics and information about different factors that have influenced the topic, however there is no substantial evidence of factual data, but rather only his own opinion. In the first section of the essay, he mentions that there has been a decline in family and morality. How does one evaluate a decline in something so abstract and so subjective? It is clear that from here on out, he is making general assumptions based solely on his beliefs. Bergel goes on to argue that removing prayer from school creates the temporal system beyond the power of God.This is a faulty argument for the simple Christian fact that if God is all powerful, how can anything be created beyond Gods power. If anything, remotion of prayer will keep children from experiencing God in more than a church setting. He also argues that in doing so, religion in being unornamented from the lips and minds of children. Its not restraining a child from totally expressing or acting religiously, its simply preventing prayer to be forced on those who arent believers. Its, in essence, protecting the first amendment rights of those affect and moreover, is a gross exaggeration of the case in hand in addition to the fact that religion cant be totally taken from some one.At a doom in the article, he mentions the Engle vs. Vitale Supreme Court case. The whole ruling has nothing to do with keeping kids from education the rel igion, its concerned with children who arent believers of Christianity not being forced to participate in something that they dont believe in. Bergel seems to forget that the basic principle of separation of church and state is that the US isnt a professed catholic state therefore it cant just allow the use of one religion over another in any public arena.The Engle vs. Vitale ruling doesnt eliminate the learning of religion, it simply doesnt allow institutions to force the practice of Christianity on kids of other faiths. In general, his discerning appears to be based on passionate fervor rather than rational thought and analysis of the Engle vs. Vitale ruling and its surrounding issues. He never pinpoints the issues and examines them within his analysis. He never presents an argument against the opposition but rather rants and raves about what he believes to be right thus stacking the evidence and therefore making it seem as if anything that is in opposition to his beliefs are wro ng. In addition, he never mentions anything about his main idea of prayer in school prayer, thus committing a red herring.In Fruccis article concerning the argument for the removal of school prayer, it has both right-hand(a) and bad aspects to it, thusly providing me with the evidence that this is a stronger argument than that of Bergel. Frucci suggests to us that high school is the worst time to impose such a subject for the simple reason that its a time when one is learning about ones self and its not the time to impose new mindsets. Firstly, Religion cant be impose but rather be encouraged and taughtits up to the educated whether or not to accept the knowledge. Fruccis statement is purely circumstantial because people learn at all times of life and new ideas are presented everyday.Therefore, the teaching of religion in schools can only offer more options rather than changing ones whole mindset. In saying that the setting is inappropriate, Frucci is clearly showing signs of his immaturity. In my own opinion, school is the one of the best places to teach religion. The childs inability to concentrate and focus on the task at had does not warrant removal of school prayer. If thats the case, school in general should be gotten rid of because of the childs inherent nature to be comfortably distracted and loose concentration. One of Fruccis strongest arguments within the paper is that prayer in schools does create a since of discrimination. However, he takes it to the extreme when saying that the since of community will be ruined because of their nonparticipation.Overall, Fruccis essay is stronger than Brugels in the since of me, the reader, being able to relate to the authors point of view, as well as the amount of support that was given to each point raised. Fruccis essay presents more of an argument, as opposed to Brugels which is more of an outcry of ideas. However both essays are pretty weak in their persuasiveness, but since I have to choose on, Id have to say that Fruccis is the stronger of the two.