This was in my Google alert today. There’s nothing more sad than a faith indulger trying to use logic to champion his indulgence. To cut to the chase, the author cites the constitution as well as Jefferson and others in an attempt argue that prohibiting school lead prayer is actually unconstitutional. As is often the case, the mistake lies in faulty presuppositions. I say often because the problem with faith indulgers is they wholeheartedly believe they’re right so they gloss over their presuppositions. To be fair, I see this in thesis papers from students frequently too, but in their case it’s just laziness and being over anxious to cut to the chase. The faith indulger instead glosses over his or her presuppositions because they feel they’re obviously true and therefore don’t see a need to first validate them.
Below is the extended version of my comment left there (there’s a limit to the length of comments, apparently). Actually, it may be the only version, as at this time it has yet to appear since there’s moderation.
The flaw in your logic is the presupposition that moments of silence are an exercise of atheism. They are not. They are an attempt to accommodate the ever increasing variety of religious beliefs held by Americans by allowing a time to pray, meditate, or what have you. Silent reflection is the only way to guarantee personal religious freedom.
This flaw of yours is born out of a larger flawed presupposition that atheism is a religion, thereby framing all arguments of lost ground for Christianity, Judaism, et al. such as not allowing prayer directed by a school official as gained ground for atheism. That’s a fundamental mistake for atheism is not a religion, and one religion’s lost ground in a place such as public schools is not gained ground for atheism but rather gained ground for religious freedom and our beloved constitution, for that privileged ground was unconstitutionally held in the first place. It was held at the expense of each and every American’s individual right to their personal religious beliefs.
This leads into my last point which is another flawed argument used by the religious, and that is framing such things as the prohibition of school lead prayer as a violation of free exercise of religion. For instance, framing the prohibition to deny equal rights to the LGBT community as a violation of your right to free exercise of religion is a fundamental misunderstanding of human rights. As Oliver Wendell Holmes said, “[t]he right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins.” Prohibiting school lead prayer is protecting the noses of all Americans from those who are selfishly swinging with no deference to others.