hirty-seven years after Madalyn Murray O'Hair fought a U.S. Supreme Court case to end unison prayer and Bible verse recitation in Baltimore public schools, two Maryland legislators have introduced a measure that would permit students to lead religious exercises during school-sponsored events such as graduation ceremonies. The measure, H.B. 832, is sponsored by House Majority Whip George W. Owings III (D) and Delegate Anthony J. O'Donnell (R).

   According to the Washington Post, the legislation was prompted by events at a graduation ceremony at Northern High School in Calvert County. The school had planned a prayer let by a 17-year old student as part of the event. Student Nick Becker protested, arguing that the prayer was unconstitutional. The Maryland State attorney general's office agreed, and school officials then decided to substitute a "moment of silence."

   Published reports of the ceremony indicate that when a 17-year old student approached the podium and asked the crowd to bow their heads for the period of silence, an unidentified man in the audience began to recite the Lord's Prayer aloud. "Virtually the entire 4,000-member audience joined in," reported the New York Times.

   At that point, Mr. Becker left the ceremony in protest; he later attempted to return and collect his diploma, but troopers from the Maryland State Police blocked his way back into the building and threaten to arrest him.

   "I told the cops I'm getting my diploma," Becker later told the Washington Post newspaper. "He (the cop) said, 'You're not going back in.' He walked me over to the car, put me in the front of the patrol car and said he was going to give me a citation for failure to obey a lawful order."

   Police said they "didn't want (Becker) to disrupt the ceremony."

   The Maryland bill mimics other legislation being introduced in several states; it would permit prayer at school events if it is "initiated" and "led" by students. In March, the U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in a Texas involving the Santa Fe Independent School District's policy of permitting student initiated religious invocation at high school athletic events.

   Owings and O'Donnell said that their legislation could permit prayer which fits in with "orderly conduct" and did not violate "community standards."

   "We have this steel curtain between church and state," O'Donnell declared. He told the Washington Post that the Maryland General Assembly begins its legislative day with a prayer.

   "That has never caused a problem for me or my colleagues," he added.

   George W. Owings III is a Democrat and represents Calvert and Anne Arundel Counties. He was elected to the House of Delegates in 1988, and has been Majority Whip since 1995. Mr. O'Donnell represents portions of Calvert and St. Mary's counties, and has served on the Judiciary Committee since his election to the House in 1995.

   H.B. 832 goes beyond simply allowing "student led" prayer. Provisions call for the state attorney general's office to provide legal representation to any school boards challenged for the practice, and for the public treasury to "reimburse" county school boards for any damages they may suffer as a result of "compliance" with the new act.

   The first article of H.B. 832 declares:

"(A) On public school property or other property being utilized for a school-sponsored event, student-delivered, voluntary messages or prayers shall be permitted during graduation or commencement ceremonies or other school-sponsored events within the context of the event."

   Any content "shall be determined solely by the student delivering the message."

   Critics charge that "student led" prayer is a simple ruse for smuggling religious exercise back into public schools classrooms.

   "It makes little difference whether the prayer is 'led' or chosen by a student, teacher, administrator, state senator or any other official," said Ellen Johnson, President of American Atheists. "You still have a captive audience of young people, and you still have the official imprimatur of the government on this religious ritual."

   Johnson added that official school events like graduation ceremonies or athletic contests "should not become a 'call to prayer.'"

   "What about students like Nick Becker? What about those who disagree with the prayer, or refuse to participate and become victims of harassment and even physical violence for not conforming?"

   Johnson said that the prayer issue is not only about mixing government and religion, but "religious people being seen by others, in public, while in the act of praying."

   Like other measure being introduced in state legislatures elsewhere, the Maryland bill incorporates two features designed to encourage what many suspect is unconstitutional activity in the public schools.

   ¶    School districts are ordered to adopt "regulations" based upon a model to be drawn up the attorney general. They are then given the incentive to allow constitutionally suspect activities (such as prayer) knowing that their legal expenses will be carried by the state of Maryland.

   ¶    Even if a practice is shown to be unconstitutional after litigation, the school district pays little or no price. Instead, the state government intervenes to "reimburse" school boards for any monetary losses.

   Religious and conservative legal groups which support so-called "student led" prayer justify the activity under the free exercise clause of the First Amendment (which guarantees freedom of religion) and as a form of free expression. H.B. 832 uses the same rationale.

   Critics charge, though, that this "free expression" inevitably takes the form of Christian prayer -- often one with a distinctly sectarian message. How would a community react if, say, a Muslim or Jewish student demanded the opportunity to deliver a prayer? Scientologists or members of other fringe religious groups might demand the same right as well, and even an atheist may wish to test the claim that the legislation truly permits genuine free expression.

   A case in point involved an effort in 1998 by a Utah man to conduct the opening prayer at city council meetings in Murray City, Utah. Four year earlier, Tom Snyder had successfully won permission to lead a "prayer" before the Salt Lake City council; his invocation called upon "Our Mother who are in heaven (if there is indeed a heaven), to discourage self righteous politicians from misusing the name of God in conducting government meetings..."

   Other portions of Snyder's prayer state: "We ask that you deliver us from the evil of forced religious worship now sought to be imposed upon the people of the State of Utah..."

   The Salt Lake City Council discontinued the prayer ritual after Snyder's appearance. He then took his prayer campaign to Murray City, which refused his request to give an invocation.

   In November, 1998, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that cities could be selective in allowing citizens to recite prayer at government meetings, and essentially regulate the content of any invocations.

   Perhaps mindful of Snyder's case or the possibility that controversial prayer may be offered, Owings and O'Donnell -- while paying lip service to religious rights -- have included language in House Bill 832 which limits content of any invocation to that which "does not substantially interfere with the orderly conduct of a ceremony..." In addition, school authorities and others may take steps to ensure "that the content of student-led voluntary messages and prayers is consistent with community standards and is appropriate for the event."

   Indeed, instead of leading or directly writing any prayer, schools (and by default the State of Maryland) become censors in this limited exercise of "free expression."

   Critics like Suzanne Smith of the Maryland ACLU warn that students, unlike legislators, are a "captive audience." She told the Washington Post, "This would lead students in prayer and essentially demand that other students pray with them."

   "Will any student who wants to get up and deliver a prayer be allowed to do that? Once you create a public forum, the courts are not going to look kindly and someone coming in and saying, 'You can talk about this or that.' "

[text only]