Santa Fe Case: Gov't Protects Person, Property, & Religious Liberty

Introduction

In the case Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, the concept of living under a government that protects person and property is applicable. Reason being individuals are protected from participating in Baptist prayers without their willingness. According to Hannah Smith in Holts v. Hobbs, "Under federal law, prison officials cannot impose unnecessary restrictions on religious liberty. While prisoners do surrender many rights at the jailhouse door, they do not surrender the fundamental right of conscience." Therefore, the petitioners were forced to "surrender their fundamental right of conscience," by the Baptist's Student chaplain before the court ruled prohibiting prayers in public.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Based on the case law mentioned above, the statement living under a government that does not harm person and property is not relevant. In the case, no persons or properties are being harmed apart from that people's rights being inflicted. John Locke is quoted, "The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions" (Jerome 4). Hence, the case is exempted from the concept as nobody has "harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions."

The concept of religion in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe is applicable. The reason it applies is that it involves delivering prayers before football games which affect the respondents. As in the case Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S 577 (1992) the Supreme Court ruled that no single individual should be forced to be a participant of the establishment of any religion. This means that every individual should have the freedom to choose on which religion to belong to and no favor is to be given to any religion. This attribute applies to this case because the school policy of allowing student prayers at football games breaches the Establishment Clause, which provides individuals with the freedom to choose the religion of their choice.

The idea of personal liberty is applicable in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe. The reason is that the students are being forced by the school policy to attend prayers held at the school games. As ruled in the case Engel v. Vitale (1962), individual should have religious freedom and not be coerced to attend any religious event contrary to their will. John Locke also argues that human beings should have the freedom to act in the way they think fit without violating the rights of others, E5 (1706).Therefore, the concept of personal liberty applies to this case because the students' freedom is limited and they do not have the "perfect freedom to act what they think fit"

Self-Government concept is applicable in the case mentioned above. The case involves a district school; therefore, the leadership of the institution draws its power from the State. However, the government has no control over what an individual perceives ideas only they can. Eric Metaxas says, "America is the only nation in the world based on an idea - freedom, and self-government - so if we don't understand that idea and what sacrifices were made to win that freedom and keep it for over two centuries, how can we possibly continue to keep it?" (Metaxas 5) Meaning, no person should determine the other ones believes. Therefore, "an idea - freedom and self-government" is a significant right for each individual.

Works Cited

Metaxas, Eric. If You Can Keep It: The Forgotten Promise of American Liberty. Penguin, 2016.

Perry, Hersel W. Deciding to decide: agenda-setting in the United States Supreme Court. Harvard University Press, 2009.

Shestack, Jerome J. "The philosophic foundations of human rights." Human Rights. Routledge, 2017. 3-36.