And the lady, with her job on the line, with stature stood and said, "I would do it all over again." And he fired her right on the spot. [Applause] Mr. ISTOOK. I want to ask you about your efforts, and I applaud your efforts in Texas regarding reinforcing and establishing students' rights regarding prayer. And there has been a lot of discussion about a moment of silence, as you mentioned there. Mr. EDWARDS. Yes. Mr. ISTOOK. Now, I find it interesting that a lot of people who say, "Let us have a moment of silence rather than prayer in schools," are totally unfamiliar with a particular U.S. Supreme Court case which I am sure you have come across. Mr. EDWARDS. Yes. Mr. ISTOOK. Which is the reason you are making your statements very carefully there. That is the case of Wallace v. Jaffree, which was decided in 1985 by the U.S. Supreme Court. It concerned a statute that Alabama passed setting aside a moment of silence at the beginning of each schoolday. But because one of the intended and permitted-I should say because one of the permitted purposes of the moment of silence in the Alabama schools was to permit students to say a silent prayer if they desired to do so, the U.S. Supreme Court said it is unconstitutional. Now, and I noticed that you were careful to avoid saying that one of the purposes of your "moment of silence" law is to let a student pray, rather than to let a student meditate or to reflect. But how do you feel about the U.S. Supreme Court saying that if a moment of silence can be used to offer a prayer, it has therefore become unconstitutional? Mr. EDWARDS. I think that is ridiculous. [Laughter and applause.] I really cannot imagine sane human Americans making a decision like that collectively. Maybe if one of them took that position, maybe so. But not as a total body, to say that if I want to silently pray it is unconstitutional. Well, because first of all the majority of prayers I bet in this room today were silent. I mean, mostlyand prayer is voluntary. You cannot-if I do not want to pray you cannot make me pray. But most of the time I pray more silently, believe me. You know, driving down the street and some truck is about to run over you, or before I close a real estate deal, I mean, most of us pray silently. I think for America to be at the point that we are, knowing when we looked at what happened when prayer was taken out of school how that crime went up in school, violence on TV went up, gangs problem went up, guns on our campuses, sex on our campuses, drugs on the campus. I mean when prayer was taken out those things went up, increasingly. And I cannot see how the leadership of this country will stand by today and take that position. I just do not understand it. It is-to me it is inhuman. Mr. ISTOOK. Sure. Mr. EDWARDS. So I am totally opposed to that. Mr. ISTOOK. And I am sorry that under the U.S. Supreme Court guidelines, it might be necessary to have a constitutional amendment just to tell students, "You have the right to remain silent." [Laughter.] 22-755 96-17 The final thing I did want to ask you about. Of course, I served in the Oklahoma Legislature. We began our sessions with prayer. I served Mr. EDWARDS. So do we. Mr. ISTOOK [continuing]. I served that is what was my question. Because I served on a city council. We started meetings with prayer. In the Congress of the United States we start meetings with prayer. You know, civic groups, chambers of commerce, groups all across this country find it acceptable, nonoffensive, a totally common, normal, everyday, praiseworthy practice to begin an important activity with prayer. And I very much appreciate I was going to ask you if the Texas State Legislature still does. Mr. EDWARDS. Let me tell you, Mr. Chairman, I—we do it. It is part of our-I mean, before we do anything else, other than punch the roll and make sure we have a quorum, that is the first thing that we do is pray. You know, in the President's way-and in Congress we do it. And in everything we do, we do it. But, and that is why I think it is so phony and hypocritical for the courts to take that position. And, you know, I have not been there when the courts convene, but, you know, it is possible that they probably pray maybe before they start. And then to rule that that the little children cannot do it. But the Book says, "Suffer little children to come unto me," and I think that that is what happened. And let me just say this, you know. The day that I admitted my calling to the ministry, when I went back to to Austin that Monday, the minister that was to give our prayer that day did not show up and the speaker had me to give the prayer. So I know we pray in-in the house in Texas before we start. And I think that if we can do it and every group can do it, then why not, if we are trying to train our children to do what they should do and grow up to be good citizens like some of us have made it, then-then I think they should be able to do the same thing. Mr. ISTOOK. Chairman Edwards, I thank you very much for your comments. Mr. EDWARDS. Thank you very much. And we will be praying for you all on the vision. [Applause.] Mr. CANADY. Next we will hear from Dr. Lavonn Brown, pastor of the First Baptist Church in Norman, OK. In addition to over 40 years experience as a pastor, Dr. Brown is the author of several books and articles. Dr. Brown, thanks for being here today. STATEMENT OF REV. LAVONN D. BROWN, PASTOR, FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH, NORMAN, OK Mr. BROWN. Thank you. I want to thank the members of this committee for the opportunity to speak briefly on a subject so vital to our historic concept of a free church and a free state. At one time the simplest and safest subject for a Baptist pastor to address was the separation of church and state. In recent years this issue has become clouded. In fact, sitting listening to opening remarks and to the statements that have already been made, you know, I really try to avoid situations where I feel like a lion in a den of Daniels. [Laughter.] But I feel very much that way today. Permit me to begin by saying that I have three sons who have graduated from public schools, and both Christian and State universities in Oklahoma. They are productive citizens with good families. My wife is the product of a home of public school administrators and teachers, and as a Baptist pastor, I too am deeply troubled by the avalanche of immorality that threatens to inundate our Nation. The place where we perhaps differ is in our assessment of the causes of this moral decay, and the solutions being suggested. I wish I had time to deal at length with our history. Obviously I do not. I simply offer some simple observations. The struggle for religious liberty has a long history. The history of ancient Egypt, India, Middle East, Medieval Europe is a story of conflict between government and religion, stories of religiously based persecution and forced conversion. This struggle came to America. It is true that many people came to America seeking religious freedom. But in some cases they sought this freedom for themselves. Early America has its stories of persecutions, harsh theocracies, enforced orthodoxy, banishment, and prison sentences. These atrocities led James Madison and Thomas Jefferson to draft the first amendment of the Constitution. Later Jefferson would describe this first amendment as building a wall of separation between church and state. It may well be that this privilege of a free church system in one of-is one of the most underappreciated aspects of America life. [Applause.] Mr. BROWN. Underappreciated simply because we have never known any other way. It is like whether or not a fish would have a word for water. Sanford Cobb, a religious historian, called the doctrine of separation of church and state "America's great gift to civilization and the world." The genius of this American system is that in religious matters the Government is neutral by law. The only way we can have true freedom for religion is to have freedom from enforced religion. [Applause.] Mr. BROWN. The first amendment has served us well for over 200 years. So when I hear people clamor for government to use its coercive power to impose religious conformity I say that we have been there and we have done that. [Laughter.] Mr. BROWN. The first amendment was drafted to insure that it would not happen again. It is amazing to me that when those who want less government interference in our daily lives are begging for more government involvement in our religious life. [Applause] Mr. BROWN. Particularly as it relates to our public schools. We should not amend the Constitution, particularly the first amendment, unless there is compelling need. And it is my personal feeling that there is none here. Instead of opening Pandora's box with a Constitution amendment, why not affirm and announce the rights that our public schools already have. For example [Applause.] Mr. BROWN [continuing]. We can have religious clubs and groups on campus. We can use release time for legitimate Bible study and instruction. We can have equal access to school facilities, just like others. We can teach and study about religion and its role in our history and in our lives. Students can pray anytime they like; in the classroom, lunchroom, or playing field, even orally and collectively, as long as it is not disruptive. In Matthew 6, Jesus pointed out the primacy of private prayer over public prayer. Students can pray without ceasing at school now. They can pray with friends around the flagpole in the morning, when the teacher hands out an algebra test in the afternoon, and as they are running onto the football field at night. For the past 2 years appropriate baccalaureate services have been held at our church, planned by an interdenominational committee. Attendance was voluntary. The Gospel was preached freely. Students sang and prayed. The house was packed. People came an hour early for special seating. Despite what some voices would have us believe, we have greater freedom than we are presently using in this country to be religious in our public schools, and in society in general. [Applause.] Mr. BROWN. What we need in America is not a religious equality amendment. Rather we need continuing neutrality of government in matters of religion, and we must educate our educators about our present freedoms. And on [Applause.] Mr. BROWN [continuing]. And on July 12 the Presidential directive on religious expression in the public schools was released in an attempt to further educate the public about all that is presently permitted. Let us be honest. The primary reason for the passage of a constitutional amendment dealing with religion is the apparent decline of morality in America. There is no doubt that we are in trouble. Our Nation is hemorrhaging. Our families are falling apart. However, is the total responsibility for this decline to be attributed to the Supreme Court decision of the 1960's which removed teacherled prayers and religious exercises from the public schools? Moreover, is the cure for the 1990's to be found in more prayer and religious activity in the schools? We live in a complex society. When we search for causes of moral decline, we must include a lot of social forces at work over the past 30 years. Rapid population increases; the post-World War II economic boom which fed materialistic attitudes; increased ethnic and religious pluralism; the rights movements of the 1960's; the Vietnam war; the prevalence of sex and violence themes in the media. And we must avoid cosmetic solutions to serious diseases. [Applause.] Mr. BROWN. I urge you to reject the “knee-jerk” legislative or judicial reaction to our social and moral quagmire. Let us exercise care that our efforts to ensure the free exercise of religion—in the doing of that, that we do not take measures that will result in the establishment thereof. Let us avoid any constitutional amendment that would redefine the boundaries between church and state, allow for public funds to be used to support private religious schools, or the use of citizens' taxes to be used in-to support the promulgation of another person's faith. Remember, public policy always follows public money, and it should. The effort to secure public funds for private schools means the intrusion of government into the operation of the schools. I am convinced that if this amendment passes, in the end religion will be the loser. [Applause.] Mr. BROWN. Today I go on record taking my stand with Madison and Jefferson. Let us keep the wall of separation between church and state intact, and insist that the Government should remain neutral in matters of religion. I reject the idea that an action of Congress or the Supreme Court can get God back into the Nation and its affairs, or for that matter to get God out of or into anything. Thank you for the opportunity to share these convictions. [Applause.] [The prepared statement of Reverend Brown follows:] |