Foes Target Amendment on Prayer in Schools : Beliefs: Citing federal guidelines, activists and some religious leaders say a change in Constitution is unneeded.

A coalition of old-line religious leaders and liberal activists stepped up their opposition Wednesday to a proposed constitutional amendment allowing prayer in public schools, saying that existing law makes such an amendment unnecessary.

Public schools are neither religion-free zones nor venues for imposing religious beliefs on students who do not agree, they said, echoing new federal guidelines on school prayer issued earlier this month by the Clinton Administration.

But they warned that a proposed “religious equality amendment” to the U.S. Constitution, sought by conservative politicians and leaders of the religious right, could subject students to unwanted religious harassment and proselytizing on campus--a charge strongly denied by amendment backers.

The Administration issued its school prayer guidelines in hopes of both heading off the constitutional amendment and staking out its support of “traditional values” as it looks to next year’s presidential election.

The guidelines, based on existing laws, reaffirm student rights to say grace before meals, pray individually or in informally organized prayer groups in public schools as long as they do not cause a disruption. Student religious clubs, like any other extracurricular activity, are also permitted to meet on campus during non-instructional time.

But the guidelines would not permit such things as organized prayer at graduation ceremonies or other school events where a captive audience would be compelled to participate. And they forbid teachers to promote or oppose religious activities.

“For some people that is not enough,” said Rabbi Gary Greenebaum of the Los Angeles chapter of the American Jewish Committee. “What they want in the public schools is the inclusion of daily prayer for other people’s children, whether those parents want this or not. They want the public schools to be used for religious proselytizing.”

Greenebaum was joined by officials of the American Civil Liberties Union, All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena and the Unitarian-Universalist Assn. at a news conference outside the headquarters of the Los Angeles Unified School District.

It was one of a series of press conferences held across the nation Wednesday to marshal support for the guidelines, characterized by the Clinton Administration as recommendations to guide school boards in determining what religious expression is allowed by law on public school campuses.

As millions of public school students prepare return to classrooms next month, the debate over the volatile issue of prayer in public schools shows no sign of waning.

Among students, the popularity of Bible clubs is growing on campuses across the country. In Los Angeles Unified, about half of the district’s 49 high schools have active Bible study clubs.

But opinions vary about whether prayer should be allowed as part of the school day.

“People should . . . be allowed to do what they feel like doing,” said Vicky Gutierrez, a 15-year-old 11th grader at Belmont High School near Downtown. “If they want to pray, they should let them pray.”

But fellow student Chalino Jesse Sanchez, also 15, said worshiping or praying on campus could cause tension because “some people might pray differently and there might be like a little war between the religions.”

Most of the state’s school districts allow voluntary religious activities, like Bible study clubs, on campus, but the issue comes up frequently in individual schools and administrators are often uncertain how to settle disputes.

In Los Angeles Unified, the state’s largest and most diverse school district, policies on school prayer are already in line with the Clinton Administration guidelines, said board member Jeff Horton. He anticipates no changes in district rules, but said the board may review them in light of the new recommendations.

But while the guidelines may help some districts clarify what religious activity to allow, they will not put the issue of religious expression on campus to rest, predicted Pasadena School Board member George van Alstine, pastor of Altadena Baptist Church.

“It puts a positive spin on what has been a very negative issue,” he said. “I don’t think for a minute it will satisfy the Christian right, but . . . if it is applied in a generous spirit by well-meaning people, I don’t think non-religious people would be opposed to it.”

In Washington, Education Secretary Richard W. Riley acknowledged that religion, especially in schools, will remain controversial.

“Nothing can be more sensitive to people than their religion. Add that with their children, and then add the public space of a school where you have different views and teaching is taking place,” he said. “. . . We need to stop and think about it, and it is not something to take a dogmatic approach on.”

But backers of the proposed amendment say current laws do too little to protect students’ rights to exercise their religious beliefs.

The Clinton guidelines are good, said Christian Coalition spokesman Mike Russell, but do not go far enough. He reported that there are numerous cases in lower courts in which student prayer or Bible reading continues to be challenged.

“We do not support teacher-led, state-mediated school prayer, but we do believe that students have the same religious rights as other people,” said Alan Crippen of “Focus on the Family,” a major evangelical Christian broadcast and publications ministry founded by psychologist James Dobson.

“Where a secular viewpoint is allowed, a religious viewpoint should also be allowed.”