georgina lambert

1. Constitutional Mandates At the heart of this opposition is the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This language has been interpreted by the courts to uphold the separation of church and state, ensuring that public institutions do not favor or endorse any particular religion. The New Hampshire Constitution also emphasizes individual liberties and the freedom of conscience. Article 5 asserts that “no person should be compelled to contribute to the support of any religious sect or to participate in any religious worship.” By mandating that public schools accommodate released time for religious instruction, HB 1628 compels schools to participate in activities that may promote specific religious beliefs, infringing on the rights of students and parents who do not share those beliefs. 2. Implications for Public Education Public education should be a space where all students feel welcomed and valued, regardless of their religious beliefs. Including religious instruction as part of the school framework can lead to factionalism and division among students. This risks creating an environment where students who do not adhere to specific religious practices may feel marginalized or excluded. Moreover, the bill opens the door for public funding and resources to be used for religious purposes, undermining the commitment to a neutral educational environment. By allowing credit for religious instruction, we blur the lines between education and indoctrination, which cannot be reconciled with the principles of secular governance. 3. Potential for Discrimination The implementation of released time courses could lead to disparities in educational opportunities, where students from different religious backgrounds receive differing levels of recognition and support. This could disproportionately disadvantage students from minority faiths or those who identify as non-religious, exacerbating existing inequalities in our educational system. It is crucial to recognize that while freedom of religion is a protected right, it should not infringe upon the rights of others or become intertwined with the public school system, which must remain neutral and inclusive. Conclusion In light of these concerns, I urge the committee to reconsider the implications of House Bill 1628. The separation of church and state is fundamental to maintaining a fair and equitable educational system. Instead of promoting divisive policies that entangle public education with religious instruction, we should focus on fostering a truly inclusive environment for all students. Thank you for considering my testimony.