[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 11]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 15242]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 ONE MORE REASON WHY RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGY SHOULD NOT DRIVE PUBLIC POLICY

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. FORTNEY PETE STARK

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, July 26, 2002

  Mr. STARK. Mr. Speaker, As critics predicted, Bush's goal to make 
faith-based institutions the primary deliverers of social services has 
led to them promoting their religious beliefs with government money. 
Today, the Washington Post reported that a Louisiana federal judge 
ruled that the state illegally used federal money to promote religion 
in its abstinence-only sex education programs.
  How many more examples do we need before Bush abandons this failed 
social policy?

               Judge Orders Changes in Abstinence Program

                           (By Ceci Connolly)

       A federal judge in Louisiana ruled yesterday that the state 
     illegally used federal money to promote religion in its 
     abstinence-only sex education programs, a decision that could 
     jeopardize President Bush's ambitions for expanding the 
     effort nationwide.
       U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. ordered the 
     state to stop giving money to individuals or organizations 
     that ``convey religious messages or otherwise advance, 
     religion'' with tax dollars. He said there was ample evidence 
     that many of the groups participating in the Governor's 
     Program on Abstinence were ``furthering religious 
     objectives.''
       Using government money to distribute Bibles, stage prayer 
     rallies outside clinics that provide abortions and perform 
     skits with characters that preach Christianity violate the 
     Constitution's separation of church and state, he ruled.
       One group in its monthly report talked about using the 
     Christmas message of Mary as a prime example of the virtue of 
     abstinence.
       ``December was an excellent month for our program,'' the 
     Rapides Station Community Ministries said in a report quoted 
     by the court. ``We were able to focus on the virgin birth and 
     make it apparent that God's desire [sic] sexual purity as a 
     way of life.''
       Gov. Mike Foster (R) expressed dismay over the decision and 
     said he would review the state's legal options.
       ``It's a sad day when such a worthwhile program is attacked 
     by the very people who are supposed to protect the interests 
     of the citizens of Louisiana,'' he said.
       The suit, filed in May by the American Civil Liberties 
     Union, was the first legal challenge to abstinence-only 
     programs created under the 1996 welfare reform legislation. 
     Bush has asked Congress to extend the $50 million-a-year 
     program and increase other federal abstinence grants from $40 
     million this year to $73 million next year.
       Cities, states or organizations that receive the federal 
     grants must use the money to teach abstinence as the only 
     reliable way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted 
     diseases. Supporters say abstinence education helps 
     youngsters build character and develop the skills to ``say no 
     to sex.'' Grant recipients may not discuss contraception, 
     except in the context of failure rates of condoms.
       ``Today's decision should stand as a wake-up call that this 
     practice is unacceptable,'' said Catherine Weiss, director of 
     the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project.
       The ruling was also a victory for liberals and public 
     health advocates who argue that abstinence-until-marriage 
     programs are unrealistic and put young people in danger of 
     unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
       Abstinence-only ``is not a public health program,'' said 
     James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth, which 
     lobbies for broad-based sex education. ``This is either 
     ideology or religious instruction trying to pass itself off 
     as public health.''
       The most recent, detailed analyses have concluded ``the 
     jury is still out'' when it comes to teaching abstinence, 
     said health researcher Douglas Kirby.
       Wagoner called on policymakers to conduct audits of the 
     abstinence programs similar to the current federal 
     investigation of other types of sex education and HIV 
     prevention programs.
       Bill Pierce, spokesman for the Department of Health and 
     Human Services, said the administration ``remains deeply 
     committed'' to both abstinence-only programs and faith-based 
     initiatives.
       Weiss and Wagoner said that the misuse of abstinence money 
     went beyond Louisiana and that they had begun to collect 
     evidence of other instances of proselytizing. Many have close 
     ties to the anti-abortion movement, they said.
       Three weeks ago, HHS awarded $27 million in new abstinence 
     grants to numerous organizations with religious affiliations. 
     Weiss acknowledged that it is constitutional to funnel tax 
     money to religious groups as long as the money is used for 
     secular purposes.
       During a court hearing last month, Dan Richey, head of the 
     Louisiana program, testified that the state had stopped 
     subsidizing religious activities or overwhelmingly religious 
     groups.
       Porteous acknowledged the changes but added, ``The Court 
     does, however, feel the need to install legal safeguards to 
     ensure the GPA [Governor's Program on Abstinence] does not 
     fund `pervasively sectarian' institutions in the future.

     

                          ____________________