This week I want to continue the discussion. I want to take the theory of co-existence and apply it to policy-making. This is a tough proposition because this country is so diverse, but I do believe we can accomplish this if we use that dirty “c” word: compromise. I want to look at two areas of policy. These two areas of policy will be same-sex adoptions and school prayer. I wanted to look at two policy areas where solutions can be found (and have been found) so that greatest amount of good can be found between conservatives and liberals alike.
Same-Sex Adoptions
This is an area where I am shocked that there is so much disagreement. I should not be shocked because I do realize that not everyone will believe in the same principles, but I am shocked that we are not looking at the truth of the matter. The truth of the matter is that state child welfare systems are chaotic. They hurt the children that they are supposedly protecting. As discussed in the scholarly article, “Cumulative Risks of Foster Care Placement by Age 18 for U.S. Children, 2000-2011:”
"Though clearly helpful to some children, foster care placement frequently introduces additional instability to their already-chaotic lives, potentially further harming them. This combination of maltreatment and instability means that children who have experienced foster care suffer not only from elevated rates of mortality in childhood, but also from a host of other problems ranging from asthma to behavioral problems to suicidal ideation. Children in foster care are five times more likely to be diagnosed with depression, four times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD, and ten times more likely to be diagnosed with bipolar disorder than other children, for instance" (Wildeman & Emanuel, 2014).
Foster children are at higher risks of developing anti-social behavior, physical health problems, and even death. However, some people believe that a gay person or couple should not have the right to adopt children because having two daddies or two mommies will be harmful to the child. It should be noted that the majority of Americans support same-sex adoptions. According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll taken from February 27 to March 2, 2014, 61% of Americans support same-sex adoptions while only 34% oppose. However, knowing that a third of Americans oppose same-sex couple from adopting is quite troubling. It is troubling because these Americans are hurting the children that they claim that they are protecting. They fear that children of same-sex parents will be damaged because children need a mom and a dad. Opponents say these things even though the American Sociological Association states, in their amicus brief to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in regards to same-sex marriage:
“The clear and consistent consensus in the social science research is that across a wide range of indicators, children fare just as well when raised by same-sex parents as children raised by different-sex parents.”
I believe these detractors are missing the point. A child does not need a mom and a dad. They need two loving parents. They need stability. Stability is more important than the sex of the parents raising them. Opponents are obsessed with the fact that “no matter how loving, two fathers can never replace a mother.” They are so obsessed with the fact that a child needs a mother and a father that they are hurting the children they want to protect.
I would ask opponents of same-sex adoption to think about the thousands upon thousands of children in foster care and orphanages that just want loving parents. They do not care about the sex of their parents. They just want someone to love them. I will respect (but disagree) with the fact that same-sex adoption opponents believe that a child needs a mother and a father, but I would just want to know if they would prefer children to be locked away into the foster care system? They would rather have a child waste-away in foster care (and I am not saying that all foster parents are not loving and caring people) than be adopted by two people (of the same-sex) who will love them and take care of them.
Who cares what you believe. In the end, we want children to be in loving homes. Does it matter if is a traditional family where there is a mother and a father? Is it not better for a child to have two fathers or two mothers then being stuck in the child welfare system? Can’t we agree that getting children out of the foster care system is better than leaving them in a system where children can be harmed? I believe we can agree on this because we need to put our personal, petty feelings aside so we can help the most vulnerable people in our society: our children.
Prayer in School
"When a kid in school is cussing away like any character in any Tarantino movie, nobody bats an eye. Ooh, but a kid saying a prayer in school, those hypocrites lose their minds." – Sarah Palin
There are many traditionalists like former Alaskan governor, Sarah Palin, who believe that prayer is missing from school. They believe that our country has taken a dangerous turn because children are not allowed to pray in school. There are people that believe that allowing prayer in school would help our children learn, grow, and behave like the outstanding citizens we want them to be. No one can argue with that thought process. It is a fruitless endeavor in trying to argue with someone of faith and tell them that their beliefs are not true. I know many people are sincere in their faith and they believe that prayer in school would help out their children.
However, this notion that a child cannot pray in school is false. Charles Haynes, director of the Religious Freedom Education Project told the Washington Post that:
“Students of all faiths are actually free to pray alone or in groups during the school day, as long as they don’t disrupt the school or interfere with the rights of others. Of course, the right to engage in voluntary prayer or religious discussion does not necessarily include the right to preach to a captive audience, like an assembly, or to compel other students to participate.”
Haynes goes on tells the Washington Post that some public school officials are ignorant of this fact and when they don’t allow kids to pray, they lose in court.
Prayer in school is allowed in school, as long as they don’t disrupt class, meaning that they can’t vocally pray during an English lesson. If they want to have a silent prayer at their desk, that is acceptable. If they want to pray in a group at recess, that is acceptable. They cannot have a group prayer when class is in session. In my estimation, this is where people who want prayer in school have a problem. I believe they want to have a morning or afternoon prayer that involves the whole class. I would ask these proponents of school prayer, “why is that fair?”
Most school classrooms are going to have an eclectic mix of students. Some students may be Christian, others may be Jewish, others may be Muslim, and others may be agnostic or atheist. Is it fair that all students in a public school must listen to a prayer that they may be uncomfortable or disagree with? Would it be fair for a Christian in a predominately Islamic populated public school to be forced to participate in a Muslim prayer? No one should be forced into anything as sacred as a prayer.
Some people may argue that any student who did not want to participate in the prayer could leave the room, as argued in the Supreme Court case, Town of Greece v. Galloway, where the Supreme Court ruled, in a 5 to 4 decision, that prayer in public meetings does not violate the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment Clause. The Supreme Court found that no one is coerced into participating in the prayer. People do not have to bow their heads. A meeting participant can just leave the room while the prayer is being administered. The problem with doing this with school children is that children are impressionable beings. They may feel pressure (coercion) into saying the prayer because they are afraid to speak up and say that they do not want to participate. They may not want to be singled out for leaving the classroom during the prayer. Besides, that leaves school administrators with another dilemma. Children in school need constant supervision. Even if you want the child to stand outside the classroom while a prayer is being said, that creates a safety concern because children have been known to wonder off. Children need to be accounted for at all times when they are at school, so you would need adults supervising the children who are not part of the prayer (and who are in the classroom having the prayer).
The next problem would be how many prayers are going to be said? If you have a classroom with Jewish, Muslim, and Catholic students, does this mean you have three separate prayers? In all fairness, you must allow all students to participate in the prayer that they want said. During the Catholic prayer, do you allow Muslim and Jewish students to leave the room? There are many reasons why group school prayer during class would not work. The logistics of trying to accommodate every religion becomes too complicated and it takes away from the valuable instruction time that our students desperately need.
As a compromise, maybe a block of religious time could be set aside before the official start of school. If students wanted to pray in the classroom setting with their peers, maybe they could gather into different classrooms, each separated into different religions, 15 minutes before the start of class. They can say their prayer and then get to class before school starts for the day. This way the students are not infringing on school time and/or the religious rights of others. But, this compromise brings up logistical issues as well; the children would still need to be supervised while they are in prayer. Do you ask for parent or teacher volunteers to watch over the students? Again more issues are raised, but in good faith, I am sure many people would want to try and find a solution that would benefit everyone.
The solution I just proposed sounds a lot like what is already available to students. If a group of students want to meet before class and have a prayer together, they can already do that. I believe many Americans would like to try and accommodate students who want to pray at school. We can compromise, but to insist that every child should sit and participate in prayer every day at school is an un-American principle. We are an individualistic people who want to follow our own path. One of those paths might include following the path of Christ, through religion, while others may want to follow a secular path. There is no wrong or right path, but forcing someone on to that path is fascism at its finest. Many people believe that prayer is a powerful tool in their life and I am happy for them for feeling that way, but many people believe the opposite.
It’s not political correctness in finding alternative arrangements for the faithful or the secularists; it’s just the fair thing to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment