Dear Editors,

The Patriot editors claim our right to freedom of religion is protected by the Establishment Clause prohibiting government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion” (“A compromise in game prayer issue” Bremerton Patriot, Oct. 23. ) While this is true, it is protected even more significantly by the Free Exercise Clause saying government may not prohibit the free exercise of religion. The Patriot editors completely ignore this crucial part of the First Amendment.

The one Supreme Court decision the editors quote regarding “School sponsorship of a religious message” regarded prayers being read over the school’s public address system. It should be obvious to all that Coach Kennedy’s private prayers are not school sponsored. If there is any doubt, the school can follow guidelines from the U.S. Dept. of Education and make a disclaimer that the prayer is his and not the school’s.

Other court opinions make clear that Coach Kennedy does not lose his free exercise of religion rights by being a school employee. In Bd. of Education v. Mergens, 1990, the Supreme Court states “there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the  Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect.” The same opinion also states “The proposition that schools do not endorse  everything they fail to censor is not complicated.”

Our Ninth Circuit Court explained in Hill v. Scottsdale Unified Sch. Dist., 2003, “the desirable  approach is not for schools to throw up their hands because of the possible misconceptions about endorsement of religion,” but “The school’s proper response is to educate the audience rather than squelch the speaker. Schools may explain that they do not endorse speech by permitting it.” But Bremerton Schools has chosen instead to squelch speech. The Patriot’s so-called compromise does as well.

Stan Mansfield,

Bremerton.