Distribute Bibles Says Government Official.

[Gregory Matthews]

See:

 

http://www.adventistreview.org/world-news/story2571-%E2%80%8Boklahoma-ag-wants-citizens-to-distribute-religious-literature-in-schools

 

However, this is more complex than it may look like on the surface:

 

 

 

But Pruitt suggested an out: “Under the U.S. Constitution, school districts can permit private citizens to distribute to students religious literature, including Bibles,” he wrote. “To allow private citizens to do so, the school should simply enact a neutral policy that allows equal access for all Oklahomans to engage their free exercise rights.”

 

But as at least one media account pointed out, Pruitt may have inadvertently opened public school doors to atheists, Satanists, and others wishing to distribute literature to students. “If private citizens want to distribute religious material or hold religious services in public schools, the schools must set up an open forum where all religious organizations can participate,” said Gary Allison, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Tulsa College of Law.

 

The above has been a fundamental principle:  What is granted to one religious group, must be available on the same terms to other such groups.  From this perspective, if Bibles are freely distributed, then an atheist may have the same right to also distribute.  In this case, the  question becomes:  Do the  citizens of a school district want to have such a wide range of material distributed to their children because they have chosen to distribute Bibles?

 

 

 

Meanwhile, Andrew Seidel, legal counsel for the Freedom From Religion Foundation, wrote to Pruitt in response: “If the goal of the Oklahoma Attorney General’s office is to allow public schools to be used to distribute atheist messages, then this is a brilliant idea.”

 

But, the issue is still complex:  There may be some differences between a governmental body that serves citizens at large and one that serves a select group of people.  There also may be some differences between a governmental agency that serves minor children and  one that serves competent adults.

 

The U.S. military is an example of a government agency that serves a select group of competent adults.  As such, it has an obligation, on some levels, to provide for the spiritual/religious nurture of its members.  It does not have any obligation to provide for the spiritual/religious nurture of people who are not its members.    So, when a group of soldiers at Ft. Hood formally requested that Wiccan services be allowed to be held on post the post granted the Wiccan request on the same regulatory basis as applied to Christian and other organizations.   But, it would not have been obligated to allow such services to be held on post if there had not been an identified group of soldiers, at Ft. Hood, who requested such.

 

The chaplains at the VA hospital in Denver provided Quran's to patients who requested such on the same basis that they provided literature to Roman Catholics who requested such.  But, they did not circulate certain other religious literature as it had never been requested.

 

NOTE:  In this specific case the Qurans were provided free of charge by an Islamic group, as Roman Catholic literature was provided by a Roman Catholic congregation.

 

NOTE:  In a previous life I formally taught this subject to U.S. Army officers in a formally accredited school.