The St. Louis Post-Dispatch is reporting that the so-called "right to pray" amendment to the state's constitution passed by a landslide vote of 82 in favor and only 17 opposed.
"Missourians have affirmed the right to pray in public places and repudiated religious intolerance," said Mike Hoey, executive director of the Missouri Catholic Conference.
"You don't have to see bringing religion to public square as a threat," he added. "We see it as positive thing, and most Missourians did too."
Writing on his Religion Clause blog, Howard Friedman, professor of law emeritus at the University of Toledo described the actual language added by the amendment to the state's constitution as "extensive".
For instance, the law forbids any infringement of a person's right to pray or express their religious beliefs. Coercion to participate in any prayer is also forbidden, but ensures that all people shall have the right to pray "individually or corporately in a private or public setting" so long as the prayer doesn't disturb the peace or disrupt a public assembly.
The amendment also allows prayer on government premises and public property as long as the prayer abides by parameters placed upon other forms of free speech. Invocations or other prayers are also permitted at meetings or sessions of the General Assembly.
Combating the increasing hostility shown in public schools toward Christian expressions of faith, Missouri's new amendment affords students the right to express their beliefs about religion in written and oral assignments and forbids discrimination based on the religious content of their work. Students will not be permitted to be compelled to participate in any assignments or presentations that violate their religious beliefs.
" . . .(T)he state shall ensure public school students their right to free exercise of religious expression without interference, as long as such prayer or other expression is private and voluntary, whether individually or corporately, and in a manner that is not disruptive and as long as such prayers or expressions abide within the same parameters placed upon any other free speech under similar circumstances," the amendment reads.
All schools are required to display the Bill of Rights "to emphasize the right to free exercise of religious expression, all free public schools receiving state appropriations shall display, in a conspicuous and legible manner, the text of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States."
Not surprisingly, opponents are already threatening to sue.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of Missouri and Southern Illlinois claims supporters of the initiative used deceptive wording on the ballot that oversimplified the issue to the point of deceit.
For instance, while the ballot said the amendment would ensure Missourians' right to express their beliefs, pray in schools and display the Bill of Rights, it didn't mention that the amendment would allow students to refuse to participate in school assignments that violated their religious beliefs, or that gave elected officials the right to pray on government property.
"This was misleading in its presentation and possibly unconstitutional in its application, so now we're headed for the courts," said Karen Aroesty of the ADL to the Dispatch. "We'll let the next branch of the democratic process do its part, and I suspect a case will be on file pretty soon."
Others say the amendment will open the door to taxpayer-funded lawsuits.
"This is going to be a nightmare for school districts, which will end up getting sued by individuals on both sides of the church-state debate," said Alex Luchenitser, associate legal director for Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. "This is the most far-out constitutional amendment we've seen in the church-state area."
Apparently, the citizenry disagrees and thyey made sure their voices were heard at the ballot box on Tuesday.
© All Rights Reserved, Living His Life Abundantly®/Women of Grace® http://www.womenofgrace.com
