[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 27 (Wednesday, March 5, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E391]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT REGARDING HOUSE CONCURRENT 
         RESOLUTION 31, PUBLIC DISPLAY OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT

                            of massachusetts

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, March 5, 1997

  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, in the 6 weeks I have served in the 
Congress I have been called upon to cast fewer than 20 substantive 
votes. Over half of those votes were on various proposals to amend the 
Constitution to limit congressional terms of office. Two votes 
concerned the question of whether to allow the President to spend 
international development funds on the family planning programs for 
which they were previously appropriated. One was to establish a post 
office in memory of a late colleague and one was to issue a reprimand 
to the Speaker of the House.
  Mr. Speaker, I did not campaign on any of these issues. The issues 
that my constituents sent me here to address have yet to be considered 
at all. The Congress has yet to debate a single piece of legislation on 
health care, the economy, Social Security, the plight of our cities and 
towns, the state of the environment, the defense of our Nation or the 
many crises we face on the international scene.
  Now, instead of addressing any of these matters, we are being asked 
to consider a truly urgent and pivotal public concern: Whether, in our 
opinion, a judge should or should not be permitted to display the Ten 
Commandments in a courtroom in the State of Alabama.
  With all due respect to Alabama, our vote today will have no effect 
on anyone, in Alabama or anywhere else. It merely expresses our undying 
devotion to the Decalogue and our conviction that everyone should 
believe as we do.
  On one level, Mr. Speaker, I am relieved that we are voting to 
enshrine the Ten Commandments rather than, let us say, the ten articles 
of the contract for America. It is surely better that we do nothing 
than that we do harm.
  It is also a relief that the Republican leadership has resisted the 
temptation to offer an amendment to the Commandments. Presumably they 
recognized that a ``Thou shalt not submit a budget that is not 
balanced'' would require more than a two-thirds majority of the House.
  On the other hand, I do not know that the Code of Hammurabi is any 
less entitled to be honored in our courtrooms as a fount of legal and 
ethical teachings, let alone the Analects of Confucius or the sacred 
texts of Buddhism or the Golden Rule.
  Nor do I believe that more than 25 centuries after the covenant at 
Sinai the Ten Commandments needs the Congress of the United States to 
rise to its defense. The very idea that our approval or disapproval 
could enhance the majesty of those tablets does more to trivialize 
religion than any court decision could.
  I also fear it says more about our arrogance and conceit than some of 
my colleagues would like to admit. To paraphrase Thomas More, if the 
earth is round, can an act of Congress make it flat? And if it is flat, 
will our pronouncement make it round?
  Finally, would it not be better, Mr. Speaker, for all of us to try to 
follow the Ten Commandments, rather than issuing empty endorsements of 
them?
  I am as fond of apple pie as the next person, but I intend to vote 
``no WDD'' on this silly resolution. I urge my colleagues to do 
likewise. And then I hope this Congress will get to work.

                          ____________________