After I graduated from East Stroudsburg University in 1961 and got my first teaching job at Stroud Union (now Stroudsburg Area) High School, in addition to teaching my major subject (French), I also was assigned homeroom duties.

At the start of each school day, I was expected to take attendance, read relevant school-related announcements, lead the students in the Pledge of Allegiance and read 10 designated verses from the New Testament of the King James Version of the Bible.

My fellow educators and I considered reading the Bible verses as something that was mandatory but inconsequential because rarely did the students pay attention to the Word of God.

Fast forward about 61 years, and the idea of reading the Bible in the classroom every school day sounds almost like fiction, but I assure you that it was real.

The U.S. Supreme Court decision - Abington (Pennsylvania) School District v. Schempp in 1963 - invalidated the reading of Bible verses and the Lord’s Prayer in public school settings. The famous and much hated atheist, Madalyn Murray O’Hair, and her young son, William, challenged similar practices in Maryland, which led to a companion case - Murray v. Curlett, also in 1963.

Writing in the Abington case, Justice Tom C. Clark acknowledged that Americans were religious but they are also bound by the establishment clause of the First Amendment, which forbids the supremacy of one religion over others and of government recognition of religion in general.

Now we have a gubernatorial candidate in Pennsylvania, who, if he had his way, would bring Christian prayer back into the public schools and turn back the hands of time.

The U.S. Constitution is unequivocal on the matter of religion. The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …”

This means that each of us is free to worship whomever we choose, even if it’s, as late comedian George Carlin facetiously suggested in his famous routine on religion, actor Joe Pesci.

Doug Mastriano, the Republican candidate for governor, has resurrected interest in what has become known as “Christian Nationalism,” the belief that God intended for the United States to be a Christian nation.

The concept is not new, but until now it has not had such a prominent advocate who would try to curtail religious freedoms of some non-Christians in our state.

Since the days when I was compelled to read Biblical verses to my homeroom students, the United States has become a much more pluralistic and diverse society.

Christians represent 65% of the total adult population, although many admit to being nonpracticing. Among this group, 43% identify as Protestants while about 20% identify as Roman Catholics, and 2% as Mormons. About a quarter of American adults say they have no religious affiliation.

Among non-Christian faiths in the United States, 1.9% consider themselves Jewish, 0.9% Muslims, 0.7% Buddhist, 0.7% Hindu and 1.8% other faiths.

It is startling to learn that there are about 10,000 religions worldwide. Nearly 85% of the world’s population is affiliated with Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism or other beliefs. The rest do not identify with any specific religion and consider themselves as atheists or agnostics. An agnostic claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

A New Jersey native, Mastriano attended Eastern College, a Christian university in St. David’s, Delaware County. He has suggested that Christians of today should take their cue from the warriors of the Old Testament in the Bible.

According to Salon, a politically progressive and liberal news and opinion website, some religious leaders who support Mastriano say they are in “direct communication” with God as part of “God’s army” and look upon the GOP gubernatorial standard-bearer as a general in their war.

There is no question that Mastriano has moderated his extreme views now that he is the Republican nominee and must attract a broader swath of voters, but the big question is whether he is softening some of the extreme rhetoric because he is changing or because he is prospecting for more votes for the Nov. 8 General Election.

In July, Jewish community leaders, elected officials and faith leaders criticized Mastriano for aligning himself with Gab, which has been branded as an anti-Semitic website.

Asserting that he is not anti-Semitic, Mastriano branded the criticism as smears by the Democrats and the media. “I reject anti-Semitism in any form,” wrote Mastriano in a statement posted to his social media site. (Mastriano refuses to talk to mainstream media, saying, “I wouldn’t give them the time of day.”)

He is facing the Democratic nominee Josh Shapiro, who is Jewish and who has been running ads blasting Mastriano’s “extremist” views on such major issues as religion, abortion, election integrity and anti-democratic beliefs.

In addition, Dr. Mehmet Oz, the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate running against Democrat John Fetterman, is a Muslim. Earlier this year, Mastriano shared an image that said, “Stop Islam,” and another post that said, “The American people have a right to be fearful of the prospect of a large number of Muslims being elected to Congress, specifically if they practice Sharia law.”

By Bruce Frassinelli | tneditor@tnonline.com

The foregoing opinions do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board or Times News LLC.