Istook Amendment: open letter to Congress
Gibbens, Daniel G
gibb0392 at MSMAILHUB.OULAN.OU.EDU
Tue Mar 17 12:08:55 PST 1998
Apparently this is getting wide circulation. I assume it is also of
interest to this list --
Dan Gibbens
University of Oklahoma College of Law
> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 1998 8:27 AM
> To: Coats, Andrew M
> Cc: 'dgibbens at ou.edu'
> Subject: FW: your mail
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barry B Boyer [SMTP:boyer at acsu.buffalo.edu]
> Sent: Monday, March 16, 1998 8:23 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: your mail
>
> I'm willing to be listed as a signer of the letter. ---Barry Boyer,
> University at Buffalo Law School
> On Fri, 13 Mar 1998, Robert J. Reinstein wrote:
>
> >Dear Colleague:
> > >
> > > The Judiciary Committee of the House of
> Representatives has voted
> > favorably on a proposed constitutional amendment that would
> substantially
> > alter the protections now provided by the religion clauses of
> the First
> > Amendment. We understand that this proposed amendment may be
> voted upon by
> > the full House as early as next week. Because we believe that
> the First
> > Amendment should not be changed, and that the particular
> proposal under
> > consideration would threaten religious liberty in the United
> States, we have
> > drafted the following letter to members of Congress. If you
> wish to join us
> > in signing this letter, please respond as soon as possible.
> > >
> > > Robert J. Reinstein
> > > Temple University School of Law
> > >
> > > Martin Belsky
> > > University of Tulsa College of Law
> > >
> > Nathaniel E. Gozansky
> > Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
> > Emory University School of Law
> >
> > Aviam Soifer
> > Dean
> > Boston College Law School
> >
> > Harry H. Wellington
> > Dean
> > New York Law School
> >
> > >Open Letter to Members of Congress
> > >
> > >Dear Representative:
> > >
> > > As law school deans and scholars, we write to
> express our profound concern
> > regarding a proposed constitutional amendment currently before
> you. The
> > proposed "Religious Freedom Amendment," H.J.Res. 78, reads as
> follows:
> > >
> > > To secure the people's right to acknowledge God
> according to the dictates
> > > of conscience: Neither the United States nor
> any State shall establish any
> > > official religion, but the people's right to
> pray and to recognize their
> > > religious belief, heritage, or traditions on
> public property, including
> > > schools, shall not be infringed. Neither the
> United States nor any State
> > > shall require any person to join in prayer or
> other activity, prescribe
> > > school prayer, discriminate against religion, or
> deny equal access to a
> > > benefit on account of religion.
> > >
> > > This amendment would substantially change the
> protections for religious
> > freedom that are now guaranteed by the First Amendment. Any
> such change to
> > the First Amendment is unnecessary. The First Amendment's
> guarantees of
> > religious freedom have served our nation well for two
> centuries. We as a
> > people should not contemplate amending our Bill of Rights
> unless the need is
> > absolutely compelling. In this instance, there is no
> compelling need - -
> > indeed, there is no need at all.
> > >
> > > The First Amendment's two religion clauses work
> together to allow a wide
> > variety of religions to flourish in this country free from
> government
> > intrusion. While there is always room for disagreement
> regarding specific
> > Supreme Court decisions, the First Amendment's enduring legacy
> has been its
> > ability to protect the right to religious expression while
> simultaneously
> > guarding against government-sponsored religious coercion.
> There is no
> > country in the world today where citizens have any greater
> religious
> > liberties than they do in the United States.
> > >
> > > We recognize that there have been some occasions
> when religious expression
> > has been unduly restricted, and that such examples played a
> role in the
> > genesis of H.J. Res. 78. If an individual's religious
> expression has been
> > unfairly limited, he or she already has recourse under
> existing law.
> > >
> > > The proposed amendment is not only unnecessary,
> but its specific terms are
> > also dangerous. They would do violence to the ideals which
> led generations
> > of immigrants to seek religious freedom in this country. This
> proposed
> > amendment would appear to authorize such practices as
> organized prayer in
> > public schools, religious curricula and holiday celebrations
> in public
> > schools, religious symbols in courtrooms and buildings where
> government
> > business is transacted, and government funding for religious
> activities.
> > Such intrusions of religion into public life, and of
> government into
> > religion, would be offensive to many Americans, and would
> certainly be
> > unwelcome to those in the religious minority. We believe they
> would be
> > unwise, and contrary to the principles of religious liberty
> upon which
> > America has flourished.
> > >
> > > H.J. Res. 78 poses a serious threat to religious
> liberty in the United
> > States. We urge you to vote against it.
>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > Private reply: "Robert J. Reinstein"
> <rreinst at vm.temple.edu <mailto:rreinst at vm.temple.edu> >
> > Public replies: lawdeans-l at lawlib.wuacc.edu
> <mailto:lawdeans-l at lawlib.wuacc.edu>
> > To subscribe, signoff: listserv at lawlib.wuacc.edu
> <mailto:listserv at lawlib.wuacc.edu>
> > Listserv questions: Mark Folmsbee, zzfolm at acc.wuacc.edu
> <mailto:zzfolm at acc.wuacc.edu>
> > Message Archives: http://ftplaw.wuacc.edu/listproc
> <http://ftplaw.wuacc.edu/listproc>
> > List owners: Carl Monk, cmonk at aals.org
> <mailto:cmonk at aals.org>
> > Jim Concannon, zzconc at acc.wuacc.edu
> <mailto:zzconc at acc.wuacc.edu>
> > Allen Easley, zzeasl at acc.wuacc.edu
> <mailto:zzeasl at acc.wuacc.edu>
> > Is your law school listed correctly at our site?
> > http://lawlib.wuacc.edu/washlaw/lawschools.html
> <http://lawlib.wuacc.edu/washlaw/lawschools.html>
> >
> >
> >
> >
More information about the Religionlaw
mailing list