WRE and the use of public resources: TIME

At a forum on Tuesday Sept. 13th, Staunton City School Board candidates weighed in on the possibility of reintroducing Weekly Religious Education (WRE) for public school children. Three candidates clearly supported reintroducing WRE in Staunton public schools: Lisa Hatter, John T. Wilson, and Fontella Brown-Bundy.  

Of the three, Mrs. Hatter cited Thomas Jefferson in order to support her position.  As she put it, Jefferson saw the “wall between church and state” as a one-way process.  Citizens bring their religious views into civil life through their participation in public institutions; however, the government cannot promote religion to its citizens.  

Isn’t Mrs. Hatter’s take on Jefferson a very strong argument against WRE, rather than for it?  Why?  

Her description of this one-way process assumes that no public school system resources are used to promote religious practice.  This is not the case with WRE.  While our courts have decided that WRE satisfies the legal requirements of the first amendment, it remains true that WRE uses essential public school resources in order to promote religious practice.  

No, you say?  Step back and look at the program itself.  Staunton’s most recent version of WRE, discontinued in 2015, “released” public school students through third grade to receive religious instruction for one hour each week, during the middle of a school day, for the entire school year.  Public school staff escorted students to the school property line at which point WRE staff took them to a nearby church for religious instruction.  

All students through third grade “participated” in this program in that their school day was reorganized in order to accommodate this religious instruction.  Students who remained behind in their classrooms worked with an environmental education program called “roots and shoots”.  This program functioned to fill in the time when other students were receiving religious instruction; neither WRE nor “roots and shoots” were integrated into the school’s instructional curriculum. 

WRE met the letter of our constitutional law because it was “opt in”, and the schools did not promote the program, recruit WRE students, or help to create the religious curriculum.  However, WRE did require the use of school resources, including two of the school system’s most essential resources: time and control of the program of instruction.  These are the most basic tools enabling the schools’ most precious resource – teachers – to do their job.  And teachers need every bit of both.  

Educational success hinges on a school system’s control of the few hours that they have with their students every day of every week of the school year.  Individual classes are not isolated experiences; success requires that classes and activities fit together as one part of a school day that is an integrated educational effort.  All of every school day should contribute in some way to fulfilling the public school’s educational mission.  

That mission is to develop the life skills and knowledge necessary to empower students to become well-informed, successful citizens.  The public schools are responsible for achieving this for every child in our community, whatever their physical or social situation in life.  This is a remarkable challenge, one at which Staunton Public Schools excel.  This success has come through a lot of effort on the part of every member of the school division, using every bit of time and material resource at their disposal, as constructively as possible.  

Parents who believe that instruction in a particular religion is also essential for empowering their children to become well-informed, successful citizens, are free to provide this religious instruction outside of the school day.  There is abundant time and material resource available to them, including through their own church.  

We need to support our public school system by giving the entire school day over to our educational workers.  Should we wish for our children to also receive instruction in religious practice, we should take responsibility for providing that ourselves on our own time, outside of the school day, rather than drawing from the school system’s time and organizational resources.

  

Dan Stuhlsatz

Staunton