On Missouri's Constitutional Amendment 2

MO Constitutional Amendment 2: A Rant or In Which I Climb on my Soapbox and Vent about Yesterday's Elections 

I am perturbed by the recent passing of Amendment 2 to the Missouri State Constitution and the misrepresentation present in the ballot language. The way the ballot read suggested that the voter is only voting to protect a Missourian’s right to pray (a redundant proposal even if that was the only thing the amendment did. That right is covered in Amendment 1 of the United States Constitution and can’t be undermined at a state level). When one reads the full text of the Amendment which was not available at the polls, it becomes clear that the amendment goes far beyond protecting prayer.

Buried in the middle of the text of this amendment is the provision “that no student shall be compelled to perform or participate in academic assignments or educational presentations that violate his or her religious beliefs.” This has ramifications far beyond what lawmakers and supporters of the amendment seem to have foreseen (though Rob Stitt of Lee’s Summit MO understands and describes in his letter to the Lee’s Summit Tribune’s editor). The ballot may have said that lawmakers “estimated this proposal will result in little or no costs or savings for state and local governmental entities,” but they don’t seem to have factor in the cost schools begin to sort through questions created by this amendment. I will list a few that came to my mind this morning.

1.      How does one define a religious belief? How will teachers determine what is a valid religious belief, and what is a clever child trying to avoid an assignment they don’t want to do?

2.      Are parochial schools bound by this amendment? I would assume yes, which I find amusing, since according to the article by Chris Blank, AP run in the News Tribune the MO bishops urged Catholics to vote for it. This amendment will essentially give non-Catholics attending Catholic schools in Missouri a free pass from homework in religion classes.

3.      To what level of schooling does this amendment apply? Will a Creationist desiring a degree in biology be excused from any course work applying to evolution? Will someone who believes the world is only 6,000 years old be allowed to graduate with no knowledge about carbon dating?

Finally, “protecting” students from things they don’t agree with will be detrimental to the development of their critical thinking skills. Preventing them from learning about how other people think won’t make their faith stronger; it will make it weaker. They won’t learn how to defend their ideas against those who disagree with them, nor will they learn to appreciate differing opinions. Shielding students from other beliefs will make it harder for them to develop into open-minded, tolerant, and well-educated individuals. This amendment does them a gross disservice.