No Room for 'Jesus' in School District's Prayer Policy

UPDATE: Tuesday, February 26, 1:07pm.

A newly proposed prayer policy would forbid the mention of "Jesus"  and put an end to student-led invocations at Pickens County school meetings.

On Monday evening, the School District of Pickens County's trustees voted on first reading for a more generic, non-sectarian prayer policy, against strong objections from the public.

“God doesn’t honor faithless prayers,” said Rev. James Anthony. “How do we justify praying at God and not praying to the God of Heaven and gaining access to the only begotten Son?"

The move comes on the heels of a threat of legal action by the Freedom Freedom From Religion Foundation, which contracted district officials and asked them to put a stop to the tradition of having board meetings open with a student-led invocation.

Last month, Board Chair Judy Edwards asked counsel to draft a prayer policy that would not violate the constitution, a policy that would allow for non-sectarian prayers to be offered by board members at the start of their meetings.

Anthony, along with many others, challenged the school board to stand firm against the FFRF, taking the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary.

“We’re supposed to do what’s right,” said Pastor Gary Gwinn. “We need to take a stand. We need to fight wrong. It’s not a matter of winning or losing – it’s what’s right. If it costs us $300,000 to lose, we took a stand. Please don’t rob us of our faith.”  

Rod Ramsey said he was tired of "Christians rolling over," because someone complained.

“I’m very upset at one individual, who’s a snake and a sneak, that caused this mess here,” Ramsey said. “And I don’t see him. That tells me he’s a wimp.”

Daniel Hotel, a member of the community, told the board he is prepared to sue the district over the new policy.

“It is recognized by the federal government of the United States of America that there is, in fact, a God, by virtue of the currency which is printed, ‘In God We Trust,'" Hotel said. "Prayer should remain unchanged."

A second reading of the policy is planned for next month.

ORIGINAL REPORT:  

For the second time this year, a large crowd attended the school board meeting to find out how school board trustees intended to respond to a threat of legal action by the Freedom From Freedom Religion Foundation

The foundation contacted district officials, asking them to put a stop to the tradition of having board meetings open with a student-led invocation.

Last month, Board Chair Judy Edwards asked counsel to draft a prayer policy that would not violate the constitution, a policy that would allow for non-sectarian prayers to be offered by board members at the start of their meetings.

Just like the January meeting, last night’s meeting drew empassioned speakers who urged board members to fight the Freedom From Religion Foundation – all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

See the video attached to this story for speakers’ comments.

But board members said the issue could lead to a legal fight that the district might not win.

Attorney Bick Halligan of Childs & Halligan outlined the draft policy.

“We wanted to recommend to you a policy and relatively easy to apply and not violate,” he said.

“The board will not begin meetings for student matters with a public invocation,” the policy reads.

The policy further states:

“The public invocation will be non-sectarian and will not proselytize for or advance any one, or disparage any other faith or belief. The public invocation is for the benefit of the board but no member of the board, or any other person attending the meeting, will be required to participate in the public invocation. The purposes of the public invocation are to express thankfulness for the right of self-government, solemnize the board’s legislative tasks, dignify and confirm the seriousness of board meetings, encourage respect and appreciation for all board members, seek to unite and not divide the board and contribute to the wisdom and soundness of decisions by the board.”

The public invocation will be offered on a voluntary basis by a member of the board on a rotating basis. Board members may choose to offer a moment of silence addition to or in lieu of the public invocation. 

The public invocation will be based on the invocations offered by the chaplains of the South Carolina Senate and House of Representatives.

Halligan urged the public and the board to read the chaplains’ prayers themselves.

Trustee Alex Saitta asked Halligan his opinion on the district’s prior practice of student-led sectarian prayer.

Sectarian prayer violates the Constitution, according to federal courts, Halligan said. It also does not comply with state statute, he said.

“You can not impose one faith-based opinion over others,” Halligan said.   

District administration also recommends the proposed policy, Superintendent Dr. Kelly Pew said.

Trustee Ben Trotter said he didn’t want to be a part of the invocation rotation at all.

“Take my name off the list,” he said. “If I can’t pray the way that I intend to, I’m not going to pray. I’m not going to vote for this policy.”

Trotter asked if a chaplain could be selected to deliver the invocation. Halligan said yes, but that the chaplain would have to abide by the policy  

“It would have to be non-sectarian, not favoring one faith or another,” Halligan said.

Saitta asked if court rulings “have the power of law.”

“Yes,” Halligan said.  

“How are those case laws enforced against the parties that ignore them or act against them?” Saitta said.

Federal lawsuits could result from an allegation of a violation of constitutional rights.

“They would name as parties the school district and board members individually,” Halligan said.  

Board members would have “qualified immunity.”

“In other words, you would not have any personal liability, as long as your actions was reasonable within constitutional law,” Halligan said. “There’s a lot of debate and gray areas as to where that might be.”

But board members, if found not to be immune, could be held liable, including for the plantiff’s legal fees, he said.

Saitta asked if the district would be immune if they continued what they were doing – student-led sectarian prayer at meetings’ start.

“You have a very substantial risk of not winning,” Halligan said, citing the results of previous court opinions.

If a district ignored a court order to stop sectarian prayer, it could be held in contempt and face fines, Halligan said.

“So many people have urged me to just keep fighting, like it’s Judge Judy and you just walk out of there” Saitta said. “At some point, the federal courts start to enforce their court orders. They do it against you personally. They can throw you in jail. The insurance companies have already warned us in a letter, saying such cases are indefensible and it’s likely they would not provide liability coverage," Saitta continued. "What he’s saying is to continue to do what we were doing and you’ll be outside of what’s reasonable and you’ll have all sorts of risks and you’re going to lose anyway.

“I’m with you emotionally,” Saitta told the crowd. "I don’t agree with many of the court rulings over the last 50 years myself. I don’t like how out­siders are using the Constitution and federal courts to jam all sorts of stuff down our throats. However, no one can just ignore federal case law which has the might of constitutional law and enforcement behind them. Walking into court to face such a legal shot gun blast is unwise.   

“Our objective with this policy is to get you square under our state statute and squarely under the Fourth Circuit cases … that allow non-sectarian prayers,” Halligan said.

Trustees voted 3-2-1 to accept the recommended non-sectarian prayer policy, with Trotter and Trustee Jim Shelton opposing and Trustee Jimmy Gillespie abstaining.

Shelton attempted to table the motion, stating that the motion violated board policy as the prayer policy had not been sent to the policy committee.

But Saitta stated that not all policies had to go before the policy and Shelton’s motion, though seconded by Trotter, did not find support.

Before the vote, Trotter called for accord following it.

“We’re supposed to be forgiving, not blaming everybody,” Trotter said. “I heard this this week, ‘Ben and Jim done the right thing, everybody else didn’t and we’re in an awful mess.’ They’re doing what they think is best, that’s all we can do up here. I could be wrong. I could get us sued for a lot of money, but I’m also stubborn. I know what I was taught when I  was a child and I’m going to go with that, and that’s why I’m going to vote against this policy After the vote, we can all still get along. We don’t have to agree with them, but we don’t have to try to be mean either.” 

The policy requires a second reading before taking effect.