The Truth About Florida’s School Chaplin Law & Church & State - Top 3 Takeaways – April 25th, 2024

Enough with the nonsense. The Sentinel Editorial Board is up to it again. Lying to their readers about public policy to attempt to achieve their desired political objective. This week the Orlando and South Florida Sun Sentinel Editorial Boards came together to take on one of Florida’s newest laws in their opinion piece: School chaplains law crosses a sacred line in Florida. Not lost to me is the ironic use of the term sacred in the headline. Also, what didn’t get by me is that they outright lied about the First Amendment to establish their premise. As was noted in the story: As he signed a controversial bill that will authorise school chaplains in Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis said something that underscored how totally wrong the legislation is. “There are some students,” he said, who “need soul prep.” That’s not a legitimate mission for Florida’s public schools, which at least have the authority to decide whether they want to establish a chaplain program. Local officials should say no. This a crass violation of the First Amendment’s separation of church and state. Now, maybe you agree with the new law and think it’s good public policy, maybe you don’t. Maybe you agree with Governor DeSantis and think Florida’s students “need soul prep”, maybe you don’t. There are reasoned arguments that can be made for and against this new public policy (I’ll offer one of each in a minute). But what there isn’t, and never has been, is a separation of church and state. While I’ve extensively covered this topic over the previous 26 years, it was only three weeks ago that I most recently addressed this in a Q&A that day. As I stated: The Establishment Clause to the 1st Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”. What there isn’t in the constitution is an edict that there must be a separation of church and state. That is an invented characterization advanced by secular interest groups based on a false premise. Many without context have attempted to manipulate the words: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”, to mean that religion and government can’t intersect. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. The context for the language used comes with the understanding of our country’s founding. The United States was founded out of a successful revolution against the British Crown. A country with an established state religion. The Church of England. The establishment clause clearly states that there shouldn’t be an established state religion, or the official religion of the United States, a la The Church of England. It most certainly didn’t exclude religion from holding influence in government. This is also why, among many other functions of government, In God We Trust is on our currency. It’s why there’s an annual National Prayer Breakfast. It’s why government meetings and functions begin with an invocation. There is no such thing as a separation of church and state in the United States. It’s a popularized false premise. What there is, is mandated religious neutrality from a point of governance so that you’re free to worship, or to not worship as you see fit. Significant as that may be, it wasn’t the only lie advanced within the opinion piece. It is also stated: (the law) clearly intrudes on the right of parents to set theiir (the typo is in their article) own expectations about any faith-based guidance their children receive. That’s demonstrably false. As is explicitly stated within the law: Require(s) written parental consent before a student participates in or receives supports, services, and programs provided by a volunteer school chaplain. There were six contributing members to this opinion piece between the two editorial boards. I don’t know if they’re uninformed about the First Amendment, and this law, or are dishonest (or both). But what they have stated as the basis for their opinion isn’t a matter of opinion –
It’s demonstrably wrong. The purpose of the Sentinel’s opinion piece was to create pressure on local school boards to reject the school chaplain program. What should be rejected is the Sentinel Editorial Board. What should be considered by the school boards are these thoughts and facts... Do we have a mental health crisis with youth in our schools? Is there evidence that a closeness to one’s faith improves mental health outcomes? Do we have unlimited funds (or enough, if you prefer) to address mental health issues in schools? If you accept the premise that there’s a mental health crisis with children, or at a minimum a problem that needs to be addressed, the facts are clear. In 2018 a Harvard Study I’ve shared several times since proved that faith, and a closeness to one’s faith, improves mental health outcomes. The headline to the Harvard study was this: Religious upbringing linked to better health and well-being during early adulthood and the findings were these: By the age of 20 those raised with religious practices average being 18% happier, 30% more likely to help others, 33% less likely to engage in substance abuse. What’s more is that those who fared best were those who prayed daily. In other words...
Having faith in one’s life in any capacity provided benefit, the more involved with one’s faith one was, the greater the benefit. I’d say those are compelling reasons for children to have access to a faith-based counselor. Additionally, the counselors would be volunteers – free to taxpayers. It’s fascinating that so many are quick to say that mental health needs on school campuses are underfunded, yet when free assistance is offered, that also may be the best possible assistance for students in need, we’re told it should be rejected. Now, as the Satanists who’ve challenged Governor DeSantis to a debate (after the governor said that wasn’t a valid religion) have established, there is potentially a tangled web that can be woven by traveling down this path. Sadly, that’s largely due to provocateurs who’re more interested in attempting to achieve their own often anti-religious objectives than they are in what’s in the best interests of society generally. As I’ve pointed out many times, morality benefits everyone including atheists.