Abington School District Abington School District vs. Schemppvs. Schempp

Christopher DewsChristopher Dews

The Origin of the CaseThe Origin of the Case At Abington High School, as At Abington High School, as

part of morning exercises, part of morning exercises, students were required to hear students were required to hear and sometimes read portions of and sometimes read portions of the bible as part of their the bible as part of their education.education.

Pennsylvania law required that Pennsylvania law required that at least ten verses from the at least ten verses from the Holy Bible be read at the Holy Bible be read at the opening of each school day as opening of each school day as well as the recital of the Lord’s well as the recital of the Lord’s Prayer.Prayer.

If it offended you, you were If it offended you, you were allowed to leave the roomallowed to leave the room

The CaseThe Case

Edward Schempp, a Unitarian, didn't want his son Edward Schempp, a Unitarian, didn't want his son hearing or reading any part of the Bible. So he filed a hearing or reading any part of the Bible. So he filed a suit against the school district declaring school Bible suit against the school district declaring school Bible reading unconstitutional.reading unconstitutional.

The case was appealed from the U.S. District Court of The case was appealed from the U.S. District Court of Eastern Pennsylvania and eventually reached the Eastern Pennsylvania and eventually reached the Supreme Court. Supreme Court.

The case was argued on February 27-28, 1963 and The case was argued on February 27-28, 1963 and decided on June 17, 1963 decided on June 17, 1963

Plaintiff’s Argument Plaintiff’s Argument

The plaintiffs (Edward Schempp and his The plaintiffs (Edward Schempp and his family) testified to having biblical family) testified to having biblical doctrines read to them during their doctrines read to them during their school exercises even though it was school exercises even though it was contrary to their beliefs.contrary to their beliefs.

Edward Schempp testified at the second Edward Schempp testified at the second trial that he had considered excusing his trial that he had considered excusing his children from the exercises but thought children from the exercises but thought that by doing so, the relationship that by doing so, the relationship between the children and their peers between the children and their peers would be jeopardized would be jeopardized

Argument for DefenseArgument for Defense William J. Brennan argued the William J. Brennan argued the

most on the side of defense.most on the side of defense. He stated in a 73 page He stated in a 73 page

concurrence that the framers concurrence that the framers intended the 1intended the 1stst and 14 and 14thth to to increase the value of religion in increase the value of religion in our culture not to destroy it since our culture not to destroy it since prayer was a long-standing prayer was a long-standing practice in that erapractice in that era

He also continued to say that the He also continued to say that the readings were not to force readings were not to force religious actions but to encourage religious actions but to encourage morals, values, and proper morals, values, and proper behavior.behavior.

The RulingThe Ruling

The Justices decided 8-1 in The Justices decided 8-1 in favor of the plaintiff favor of the plaintiff

Stating that no matter the Stating that no matter the religious nature of the religious nature of the citizenry, the government at all citizenry, the government at all levels, as required by the levels, as required by the Constitution, must remain Constitution, must remain neutral in matters of religion neutral in matters of religion “while protecting all, preferring “while protecting all, preferring none, and disparaging none”none, and disparaging none”

My RulingMy Ruling

This sucks but I’d have to rule with the This sucks but I’d have to rule with the Plaintiffs on this case because America is Plaintiffs on this case because America is packed full of different religions and styles packed full of different religions and styles of atheism.of atheism.

I wouldn’t want to be subject to someone I wouldn’t want to be subject to someone else’s beliefs in a ‘supposedly’ free else’s beliefs in a ‘supposedly’ free country.country.

Lasting AffectsLasting Affects

This separation of church and state This separation of church and state became known as “The Day that God was became known as “The Day that God was kicked out of schools.”kicked out of schools.”

Now it is illegal for schools to force any Now it is illegal for schools to force any religious actions on their students.religious actions on their students.

In SummaryIn Summary

At Abington High School, as part of morning exercises, verse At Abington High School, as part of morning exercises, verse from the Holy Bible were read over the loudspeaker. The from the Holy Bible were read over the loudspeaker. The students were asked to stand and repeat the Lord's students were asked to stand and repeat the Lord's Prayer right before the flag salute. Parents were informed Prayer right before the flag salute. Parents were informed that students had the right to leave the room and not that students had the right to leave the room and not participate in the reading or stay in the room and participate in the reading or stay in the room and participate. The Schempp family, who were of the participate. The Schempp family, who were of the Unitarian faith, challenged the state law claiming that it Unitarian faith, challenged the state law claiming that it was unconstitutional in supporting religion and specific was unconstitutional in supporting religion and specific denominations at that. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the denominations at that. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the First Amendment's forbiddance of laws building the First Amendment's forbiddance of laws building the establishment of a religion.establishment of a religion.

BibliographyBibliography

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abington_School_District_v._Schempphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abington_School_District_v._Schempp http://pro.corbis.com/images/U1383827.jpg?size=67&uid=%7B7A3D7241-CE74-4F0F-A4B0-7A14652B0D67%7Dhttp://pro.corbis.com/images/U1383827.jpg?size=67&uid=%7B7A3D7241-CE74-4F0F-A4B0-7A14652B0D67%7D http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/4/49/20051017020315!US_Supreme_Court_Justice_William_Brennan_-_1976_official_portrait.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/4/49/20051017020315!US_Supreme_Court_Justice_William_Brennan_-_1976_official_portrait.jpg http://www.constitutioncenter.org/timeline/flash/assets/asset_upload_file562_12288.jpghttp://www.constitutioncenter.org/timeline/flash/assets/asset_upload_file562_12288.jpg