wfn.org | NCC's Testimony on Religion in School

[CAROL_FOUKE.parti@ecunet.org (CAROL FOUKE)]

National Council of the Churches of Christ in the
U.S.A.
Contact: NCC News, 212-870-2227
Internet:  news@ncccusa.org

51NCC5/20/98              FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Testimony of OLIVER THOMAS
Special Counsel for Religious and Civil Liberties
National Council of Churches
Before the United States Commission on Civil Rights
Hearings on "Schools and Religion"
Meeting on May 20, 1998

Thank you for allowing me to appear before you
today.  I commend the Civil Rights Commission for
convening this hearing on the subject of schools and
religion.  No issue is more important to the future
of the United States.  I say this for two reasons.
First, religion is one of the few things people will
actually kill each other over.  We could look at the
bloodiest conflicts in the world today from Europe
to the Middle East to Asia, and we would find that a
majority of them have something to do with religion.
Similarly, our most divisive domestic issues. --
abortion, gay rights, capital punishment -- involve
clashes of deeply held religious viewpoints.
Second, we are the most religiously diverse nation
on earth.  Every world religion is represented here
in large numbers, and there are literally thousands
of sects and subgroups.  Indeed, I received a letter
just this month to inform me that we have yet
another American religious group on the scene -- The
Church of Princess Diana.  Conservative Christians
are more politically active than ever, yet one of
the fastest growing groups is those who claim no
religious affiliation.  Unless Americans can live
together with these deep differences, our public
education system will struggle to survive.

Having said that, I am pleased to report that
significant progress has been made in how religion
is treated in the nation's public schools.
Certainly, problems of compliance remain on both
ends of the spectrum.  Some districts continue to
promote religion while others persist in
discriminating against it.  But overall, the Equal
Access Act, First Amendment and related laws are
being implemented and adhered to in a manner that
surpasses that of any previous period in our
history.

In the past, public schools tended to follow
one of two paradigms, both of which failed.  The
first, the sacred public school, as Dr. Charles
Haynes and I like to call it, had a distinctly
Protestant tone.  Protestant prayers were offered,
and the Protestant Bible was read as schools --
often with the best of intentions -- sought to guide
students toward what most Americans considered to be
a proper moral and spiritual upbringing.  Despite
nostalgic calls for these "good old days," the
sacred public school was not a place of
- more -
51NCC5/20/98
Religion & Schools Testimony/Page 2

peace and harmony.  Communities split over which
prayers would be offered and which version of the
Bible would be read. Cincinnati and Philadelphia,
for example, experienced "Bible Wars" in which
churches and convents were burned, and blood was
spilled.  The reason we have a system of Catholic
schools today is because the Protestant public
schools were simply intolerable for devout Roman
Catholics.

The sacred public school also failed the test
of fairness.  Forcing impressionable children to
participate in or conspicuously to excuse themselves
from religious exercises not of their own choosing
violated the conscience of both parent and child.
Though unpopular at the time, it is noteworthy that
the Supreme Court's prayer decisions of the sixties
are now supported by virtually every religious group
in the United States including the Southern Baptist
Convention.

The second paradigm was what President Clinton
has referred to as the "religion-free zone." in the
name of neutrality, some schools drove every vestige
of religion out of the curriculum and out of the
classroom.  In such districts, Martin Luther King
became a political reformer, "Frosty the Snowman"
replaced traditional Christmas carols and students
were told they could not gather around the flag pole
for prayers or form Bible clubs on an equal footing
with other extracurricular student groups.

At last, the country is embracing a third
paradigm -- one that is supported by groups ranging
from Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition to Norman
Lear's People for the American Way.  Under this
approach, schools seek neither to promote nor to
inhibit religion.  Rather, they work to ensure that
all faiths are treated with fairness and respect.

Three developments, in particular, have paved
the way for this new consensus.

The first was the 1994 publication of FINDING
COMMON GROUND.  Now in its fourth printing, this
First Amendment hand book for schools contains legal
guidelines on religion and the curriculum, religious
holidays and equal access as well as bibliographies
for teachers and practical suggestions for resolving
religious disputes in local school districts.  When
the book was released, attorneys for the Christian
Legal Society and National Association of
Evangelicals stood alongside attorneys for the ACLU
and the Union of American Hebrew Congregations to
voice their support for this approach.

Then, in 1995, came the Presidential Directive
on religion and the public schools.  Arising out of
a broad-based drafting committee chaired by the
distinguished attorney for the American Jewish
Congress, these guidelines have made a significant
contribution toward increased understanding of the
law as well as increased tolerance for one another.
Finally, the Freedom Forum's statement of
principles, "Religious Liberty, Public
- more -
51NCC5/20/98
Religion & Schools Testimony/Page 3

Education and the Future of American Democracy"
drafted by Dr. Haynes and endorsed by groups ranging
from the American Center for Law and Justice to the
Anti-Defamation League, has provided a set of ground
rules for living together -in public education
despite our religious differences.

The most important work remaining is education,
not litigation.  Though we continue to litigate
around the edges, the vast majority of Americans
appear content with the common-ground approach in
which government is the fair, neutral, honest broker
for all students who are free to bring their
religious or nonreligious beliefs and practices with
them into the public schools.

Although Dr. Haynes and I have trained
thousands of educators from hundreds of school
districts in perhaps a dozen states, most states
offer little or no training.  Equally disturbing is
the fact that teachers colleges are not providing
students with either the basics about the religious
liberty rights of students or the proper means of
teaching about religion in a public school.  Without
training we run a substantial risk that, despite our
best efforts at the national level, ignorance, fear,
distrust and acrimony will continue to characterize
this issue.

My recommendation to you is that the
Commission, through its own efforts as well as those
of its state advisory committees, encourage state
legislatures and boards of education to provide
their teachers and administrators with training on
haw to deal properly with religion.  Moreover, local
boards of education should be encouraged to develop
their own policies based upon these national
consensus guidelines.

Respectfully submitted,
Oliver Thomas

- end -
 -0-