In a significant display of concern, over 150 individuals have voiced their opposition to a proposed bill requiring school districts to permit students to leave school for religious instruction, raising vital questions about the implications for educational environments and student welfare.
Critics of the bill contend that implementing religious release time programs would not only disrupt the school day but also foster a potentially divisive atmosphere between students who partake in such programs and those who do not, thus infringing on the principles of religious freedom.
Rev. Vicki Zust, rector of Saint Mark’s Episcopal Church in Upper Arlington, emphasized the impact on the rights of non-participating students, stating, “My concern with religious release time programs during the school day is the rights of the children who do not participate in those programs.”
During last week’s Ohio House Primary and Secondary Education Committee meeting, only three opponents had the opportunity to present their testimonies, amidst a crowd that required reminders from committee chair Gayle Manning, R-North Ridgeville, to maintain silence as participants shared their views.
Detailed accounts were provided concerning LifeWise Academy, a Hilliard-based religious instruction initiative that has attracted the enrollment of approximately 50,000 students across 29 states and operates within 169 Ohio school districts. This non-denominational Christian program focuses on Bible education.
“In June, during proponent testimony, it became evident that this bill is not centered around religious pluralism,” remarked Christina Collins, the executive director of Honesty for Ohio Education. “It is fundamentally about a singular, well-funded initiative striving to impose its brand of Christian nationalist beliefs on an impressionable audience during school hours.”
Ohio law currently allows school boards to develop policies enabling students to attend religious instruction courses, but the proposed bills aim to revise this law, mandating a more structured religious release time policy by changing the phrasing in the Ohio Revised Code from “may” to “shall.”
House Bill 445 was introduced earlier this year by state Rep. Gary Click, R-Vickery, alongside Al Cutrona, R-Canfield, who currently serves in the state Senate. Meanwhile, Sen. Michele Reynolds, R-Canal Winchester, presented Senate Bill 293 this summer.
“To be honest with you, I think this might be the easiest piece of legislation before you this General Assembly,” Cutrona remarked during a recent Senate Education Committee meeting. “This is simply about changing one word from may to shall. … The goal is to ensure that participation in religious release time programs is a decision made by parents, rather than imposed by school boards.”
State Sen. Catherine D. Ingram, D-Cincinnati, noted the significance of the proposed word change, asserting, “Despite the fact that it’s only one word, it’s a huge word.”
The United States Supreme Court upheld released time laws in the landmark 1952 case Zorach v. Clauson, permitting school districts to allow students to leave for religious instruction during part of the school day.
However, parents like Jaclyn Fraley, whose child is a first-grader in Westerville Schools, raised practical concerns about the execution of these programs. “While LifeWise claims that the process of leaving and returning to school is smooth, anyone who has ever tried to organize first graders for a field trip knows it is far from seamless,” she stated.
In a significant move, the Westerville City Schools Board of Education has recently voted to terminate their religious release time policy that permitted LifeWise Academy to conduct Bible classes off-campus during school hours.
Fraley further highlighted troubling experiences shared by parents within her advocacy group, Westerville Parents United. “One parent in my group shared that her daughter was told in class that she and her mothers were ‘going to hell’ because they belong to an LGBTQIA family,” she recounted. “Another parent described how their child was told they didn’t ‘really believe in God’ because they are not Christian.”
Moreover, it was brought to attention that students who do not participate in LifeWise programs within Defiance Schools are relegated to study hall, referred to disparagingly as “LifeWise leftovers,” according to Fraley.
Rev. Zust condemned the hostile environment these programs create, stating, “This creates a hostile environment for the children of my congregation as well as children of other denominations and faiths. That is a violation of their First Amendment and educational rights.”
Opponents of the bill suggested exploring alternative avenues for religious education beyond school hours, with Fraley asserting, “We didn’t have these programs. Our parents took us to church. Our parents took us to temple. Our parents took us to mosque.”
State Rep. Jodi Whitted, D-Madeira, raised questions regarding accommodations for students with Individualized Education Programs, leading Collins to express concerns about the lack of communication between school districts and religious programs like LifeWise, where IEPs remain confidential within the district.
“We’re talking about students with special needs who are being sent off-campus to individuals that are ill-equipped to address their needs, with no provisions in place for ensuring those needs are met,” Collins explained.
Additionally, State Rep. Beryl Brown Piccolantonio, D-Gahanna, questioned how districts would handle students with fixed prayer times. Collins clarified, “They simply leave, do their prayers and come back; it’s not akin to an event where they leave the campus, returning with stickers and candy.”
State Rep. Joe Miller, D-Amherst, highlighted the overwhelming public sentiment against H.B. 445, revealing that his office had garnered nearly 200 emails opposing the bill, while fewer than 20 were in favor.
Follow OCJ Reporter Megan Henry on X.
How can schools ensure inclusivity and respect for all beliefs while navigating the complexities of the proposed religious release time bill?
**Interview with Rev. Vicki Zust: Addressing Concerns Surrounding Proposed Religious Release Time Bill in Ohio**
**Interviewer**: Thank you for joining us, Rev. Zust. There has been a significant outcry regarding the proposed bill that would require school districts to allow students to leave for religious instruction. Can you share your thoughts on what this means for educational environments?
**Rev. Zust**: Thank you for having me. My primary concern revolves around the impact this bill will have on non-participating students. Allowing some children to leave for religious instruction during school hours creates an imbalance. It can foster a division among students—those who participate may feel a sense of privilege, while those who don’t can feel marginalized. Education should promote inclusivity, not exclusion.
**Interviewer**: Critics have suggested that such programs may infringe on the principles of religious freedom and create a divisive atmosphere. What are your views on this?
**Rev. Zust**: Absolutely. While I respect the right of families to choose religious education, we must consider that public schools should remain neutral spaces. The introduction of such programs during school hours may inadvertently pressure students into participating or ostracize those who cannot or choose not to. The rights and feelings of all students should be prioritized, not just those in the majority or those who adhere to a specific belief system.
**Interviewer**: During the recent Ohio House committee meeting, only a few opponents had the chance to present their testimonies. How do you feel about the platform provided for dissenting voices in this discussion?
**Rev. Zust**: It’s concerning. This lack of representation signals that the voices of parents and community members who have reservations about the bill are not being taken seriously. A robust democratic process should allow ample space for all viewpoints to be voiced, especially when it comes to matters that affect children’s welfare.
**Interviewer**: The LifeWise Academy has gained traction in Ohio. What are the implications of such specific religious programs operating within public schools?
**Rev. Zust**: Programs like LifeWise complicate the educational landscape. While they may provide valuable services to some, they also raise questions about the secular nature of public education. Furthermore, we need to consider the psychological effects on children who don’t participate, as they may face comments and judgments from peers. Education should combat division, not exacerbate it.
**Interviewer**: What steps do you think should be taken to address these concerns if the bill is further pursued?
**Rev. Zust**: I believe that any policy must prioritize the educational environment’s integrity. Community discussions should be held to address the concerns of all stakeholders—including students, parents, educators, and religious organizations. It’s vital to find a solution that respects diverse beliefs while maintaining an inclusive and supportive educational setting for every student.
**Interviewer**: Thank you, Rev. Zust, for sharing your insights on this pressing issue. It’s clear that much more dialogue is needed as we move forward.
**Rev. Zust**: Thank you for having me. I hope we can engage in constructive discussions that truly reflect the diverse fabric of our community.
