[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 147 (Wednesday, September 20, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1812]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                        RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, September 20, 1995
  Mr. HAMILTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert my 
Washington Report for Wednesday, September 20, 1995 into the 
Congressional Record.
                        Religion and Government

       For most Hoosiers I meet with, religion is very important. 
     Religion helps form the values and character critical for 
     strong families and communities, and faith has played an 
     important role in the history of our nation. Today, more 
     Americans believe in God and attend religious services than 
     any other industrialized nation. Yet many Hoosiers worry that 
     our political culture does not take religion seriously. This 
     is a legitimate concern.
       The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the free 
     exercise of religion. To do so, it prohibits Congress from 
     establishment of religion. At some periods in our history the 
     concern was that religion had too much influence over public 
     policy, but today the concern is that we do not permit enough 
     religious influence in public policy. I think we should take 
     religion seriously, and do not agree with those who 
     trivialize matters of faith. I agree with Hoosiers who want 
     to seek guidance from religion on moral decisions--including 
     decisions about politics and government. As the son and 
     brother of ministers, faith has always been important to me 
     and my family, and there is no question my faith has a strong 
     influence on my actions as an individual and as a public 
     official.
       There is a great deal of misunderstanding over the proper 
     role of religion in government, and government in religion. 
     Most agree that the government should not be in charge of any 
     religious activity--in churches, public schools, or 
     elsewhere. Most also agree that government officials should 
     not tell us how to pray, what to pray, or when to pray. At 
     the same time, an individual's right to practice his or her 
     religion should be sacrosanct.
       Our founding fathers were deeply suspicious of too much 
     government involvement in religion. Over the years the 
     Supreme Court has made clear that neither states nor the 
     federal government can set up a church, pass laws to fund 
     religion, or favor one religion over another. Unfortunately 
     there are still gray areas in the law that need to be 
     resolved--particularly regarding religion and public schools. 
     Uncertainty over what the Constitution permits has led many 
     schools to suppress religious activity and has prompted 
     hundreds of lawsuits that could have been avoided. This 
     newsletter is simply an effort to identify what is 
     permissible under current law and what is not, and what areas 
     need clarification.
       The First Amendment imposes two equally important 
     obligations on public schools. First, schools may not forbid 
     students from expressing their personal religious views 
     solely because they are religious in nature. For example, the 
     1984 Equal Access Act, which I cosponsored, requires schools 
     to give the same access to student religious groups as other 
     extracurricular student clubs. The Court recently upheld the 
     constitutionality of this law. Second, schools may not 
     endorse a particular religious activity or doctrine, nor may 
     they coerce participation in religious activity. For example, 
     school officials may not tell students what to pray in class.
       Many people believe the law requires schools to be 
     religion-free zones. I do not think that is an accurate view; 
     there are many acts of religious faith in school that are 
     both appropriate and constitutional.


                           permitted activity

       According to recent Justice Department guidelines, students 
     today in public schools have the right to pray and study 
     religion individually, to discuss religion with other 
     students, to read the Bible or other religious texts, to say 
     grace before meals, to be taught about the importance and 
     influence of religion, to meet in religious clubs before and 
     after class hours, to express their religious beliefs in 
     classwork, and to wear clothing or jewelry bearing religious 
     messages or symbols.


                          prohibited activity

       These actions are not allowed: religious services organized 
     by school officials, religious harassment, teaching students 
     to practice a particular religion, teaching or officially 
     encouraging religious or anti-religious activity, and denying 
     school rooms to religious groups if they are provided to 
     other private groups.
       Often actions to suppress legitimate activity are a result 
     of school administrators who are simply not clear about 
     complex court decisions and who fear litigation. There are 
     isolated examples where students were told they could not say 
     grace before lunch, or carry a Bible in class. The school was 
     wrong in these cases. While I understand the difficulties 
     confronting administrators in understanding the law, the 
     suppression of religious expression is just as much a 
     violation of the First Amendment as imposing a religion on 
     students.
       Of course, there are issues that still need clarification. 
     For example, does a graduation prayer by a student amount to 
     state-sponsored action? Courts have issued contradictory 
     opinions on this issue, and the implementation varies from 
     region to region. Ultimately, this issue should be resolved 
     by the Supreme Court or Congress. In the meantime, many 
     students have organized independent prayer services before or 
     after graduation.
       Some Members of Congress have suggested amending the 
     Constitution to clarify some of these gray areas. Others 
     believe Congress should act by statute, as it has in the 
     past. Congress has previously considered provisions to 
     protect moments of silent prayer and to allow students to 
     engage in voluntary vocal prayer during noninstructional 
     periods. Yet these issues have not been resolved, and further 
     clarifications are necessary.
       I am encouraged by the new dialogue on religion and public 
     education. We are certainly getting a better understanding of 
     what can and cannot be done. There is absolutely no reason to 
     think that religious expression has to be left behind at the 
     schoolhouse door. With the help of clergy, parents, teachers, 
     and students, Congress should continue to clarify current law 
     to avoid misunderstanding.
       It is important to recognize that our founding fathers knew 
     that religion gave our people the character and virtue 
     without which a democracy cannot survive. They also 
     recognized that, in a free country, government must not be 
     permitted to coerce the conscience of any person. Our 
     challenge is to maintain religion's protection from heavy-
     handed state interference while preserving the environment 
     that has made the United States the most religious nation in 
     the world.
     

                          ____________________