american atheist magazine oct 1985

8/9/2019 American Atheist Magazine Oct 1985

1/42

October 985

A Journal of Atheist News and Thought

$2.95

efcoul is:

g.ustworthy. A Scout tells the truth. He keeps his promises. Honesty is part of his

code of conduct. People can depend on him. .

ci?oyal. A Scout is true to his family, Scout leaders, friends, school and natir n~

telpful. A Scout is concerned about other eORle.He 0 . gs · 1 1 ~ r

others without payor reward.

9;.iendly. A Scout is a fClienoJ t). a e seeks to

understand othe . B~ respecl1&l, se

lidi'

eas and custom ot IS own.

< ((ourteo '.

SCOI '

polife to everyone tega


2/42

AMERICAN ATHEISTS

is a non-profit, non-political, educational organization, dedicated to the complete and absolute separation of state

and church. We accept the explanation of Thomas Jefferson that the First Amendment to the Constitution ofthe

United States was meant to create a wall of separation between state and church.

American Atheists are organized to stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry concerning religious

beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals and practices;

to collect and disseminate information, data and literature on all religions and promote a more thorough

understanding of them, their origins and histories;

to advocate, labor for, and promote inalllawfulways, the complete and absolute separation of state and church;

to advocate, labor for, and promote in all lawful ways, the establishment and maintenance of a thoroughly

secular system of education available to all;

to encourage the development and public acceptance of a human ethical system, stressing the mutual sympathy,

understanding and interdependence of allpeople and the corresponding responsibility of each individual in relation

to society;

to develop and propagate a social philosophy inwhich man is the central figure who alone must be the source of

strength, progress and ideals for the well-being and happiness of humanity;

to promote the study of the arts and sciences and of all problems affecting the maintenance, perpetuation and

enrichment of human (and other) life;

to engage in such social, educational, legal and cultural activity as willbe useful and beneficial to members of

American Atheists and to society as a whole.

Atheism may be defined as the mental attitude which unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at

establishing a lifestyle and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all

arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own

inherent, immutable and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that man

-finding his resources within himself - can and must create his own destiny. Materialism restores to man his

dignity and his intellectual integrity. It teaches that we must prize our lifeon earth and strive always to improve it. It

holds that man is capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism's faith is inman and

man's ability to transform the world culture by his own efforts. This is a commitment which is in very essence life

asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation and impossible without noble ideas that

inspire man to bold creative works. Materialism holds that humankind's potential for good and for an outreach to

more fulfillingcultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited.

American Atheist Membersip Categories

Life $500

Sustaining $100/year

Couple/Family $50/year

Individual $40/year

Senior Citizen

*

/Unemployed $20/year

Student* $12/year

*Photocopy of ID required

Allmembership categories receive our monthly Insider's Ne-wsletter, membership card(s), a subscription to

American Atheist

magazine for the duration ofthe membership period, plus additional organizational mailings,

i.e.,new products for sale, convention and meeting announcements, etc.

American Atheists - P.O. Box 2117 - Austin, TX 78768-2117


3/42

October, 1985

Vol. 27, No. 10

m e r i c n t h e i s t

A'Journal of Atheist News and Thought

Editorial: On Seizing Power - Jon G. Murray

2

Ask A.A.

4

News and Comments

God's Little Bastions: The Boy Scouts

5

The Secretary of (Private) Education

11

Meese's Original Intention

14

Marti and The Mass

19

Dial-An-Atheist

19

Massachusetts Atheists - Brian Lynch

2

Abner Kneeland and God: The Roots of a Blaspheme-In

23

The Atheist Next Door - David J. Mann 25

The Prospect of Physical Immortality, Part II: Stalling The Reaper - Frank R. Zindler

27

Poetry

3

Allah in The Dock - Margaret Bhatty

31

Historical Notes

33

An Inquiry About God's Sons

34

Book Reviews

36

Me Too - John Sikos

37

Letters to the Editor

38

Crosswords

39

Reader Service 40

On The Cover: Individuality is receding in America at a rapidly increasing rate. This can be seen in the group-like manner inwhich people dress, the

faddish popularity ofcertain styles ofmusic, the election of stereotyped political personalities, the contagiously-acquired usage ofdrugs - but most of all,

inthe manner inwhich mind-sets are transferred from generation to generation. The latter ofthese drifts from individualism isperhaps the most subtle -

the least noticed. Itstems from the usual conformities, acquired inchildhood, inany society; the authoritarianism ofparenthood; the requirements ofstrict

nationalism (fascism). But most ofall itstems from the synthesized insanities ofreligion- reverence No better example exists than that ofthe Boy Scouts

of America. As you read this month's issue of American

Atheist

you may become more aware of the psychologically damaging effect that practiced

conformity has on the people of a nation - why few people object to the programmed dissolution of individuality that is plaguing our nation. The

destruction ofsingularity ismanipulated through the props and fetishes and fantasies ofa god-system from which only the strongest of individuals can ever

hope to escape. Individuality is the only true enemy of religion and fascism. Itcould never be tolerated in a Christian Nation.

-G.

Tholen

Editor/R.Murray-O'Hair,EditorEmeritus/MadalynO'Hair,ManagingEditor/Jon

TheAmerican Atheist magazineispublishedmonthlyby theAmericanAtheistPress

G. Murray,Assistant Editor/Gerald Tholen,Copy Editor/SandraM.P.McGann,

(anaffiliateofAmericanAtheists),2210 HancockDr.,Austin,TX78768-2596, andthe

Poetry/Angeline Bennet, Gerald Tholen, Production Staff/ChristinaDitter, Bill

Society of Separationists, a non-profit, non-political,educational organization

Kight, Claudia Kweder, Laura L. Morgenstern, Jes Simmons, Non-Resident

dedicatedto the completeand absoluteseparationof state and church. (Allright~

Staff/Margaret Bhatty,MerrillHolste,LowellNewby,Fred Woodworth,FrankR.

reserved.Reproductioninwholeorinpart withoutwrittenpermissionisprohibited.) ,

Zindler.

Mailingaddress: P.O.Box2117, Austin,TX78768-2117. Subscriptionisprovidedas

an incidentofmembershipinthe organizationofAmericanAtheists.Subscriptions'

TheAmerican Atheist magazine

alone are availableat $2 5.00 forone year termsonly.(Frequency:monthly.Library

is indexedin

and institutionaldiscount: 50%.) Manuscripts submittedmust be typed, double-

Monthly Periodical Index

spaced, and accompanied by a stamped, self-addressedenvelope. A copy of

ISSN:0332-4310

AmericanAtheistsMagazineWritersGuidelinesis availableon request. Theeditors

copyright1985 bySocietyofSeparationists,Inc.

assumeno responsibilityforunsolicitedmanuscripts.

ARE YOU MOVING ?

Please notify us six weeks in advance to ensure uninterrupted delivery. Send us both your old and new addresses. Ifpossible, attach old

label from a recent magazine in the bottom space provided.

NEW ADDRESS:

(please print)

OLD ADDRESS:

(Please print)

Name Name

Address Address

City City

State

Zip

State Zip

Mail to - American Atheists, P.O. Box 2117, Austin, TX 78768-2117

Austin, Texas October, 1985

Page 1


4/42

E D ITO RI L

Jon

G Murray

ON SEIZING POWER

I have seen the inability to communicate

.bring one plan of action after another to an

end. Consider the following. Ifyou put one

dozen Atheists into a room together, locked

the door, and asked them to come out of the

room at the end of the day with a working

definition of what an Atheist is, the ensuing

debate would erupt into name-calling and

eventual fisticuffswithin hours and the meet-

ing would need to be adjourned. Now put a

group of one dozen right-wingreligionists in

a room and ask them to come up with a

definition of what a conservative is, and

they would emerge with a list of what a good

conservative should be on dozens of issues

and all be inagreement. That isthe essential

problem we face.

This is why liberal causes have always

been championed by inspired

indiuiduals

who have set out on their own to do some-

thing. These individuals have begun with a

naivete that has caused them to wind up in

one sand trap after another along the wayas

they pursued the learn-as-you-go route. The

conservative community knows the value,

on the other hand, of seeking expert advice

often and of following established and

proven business and professional proce-

dures. I emphasize expert advice in distinc-

tion to arm-chair philosopher advice which

often substitutes erudition for working

knowledge. The latter type of advice is well

known to the liberal group.

Let us take a look at what we are up

against in just the years of the Reagan

incumbency via the example of just four

groups. The American Enterprise Institute is

the oldest, founded in the 1940s. Its focus

has been on conservative legal issues such

as school prayer, government financing of

parochial schools, pornography (free press),

communism (free thought), and many oth-

ers. The kingpin of the Enterprise Institute is

Bruce Fein, a legal analyst who used to work

for the Justice Department under former

Attorney General WilliamFrench Smith. A

liberal group spokesperson could not even

get past the security check to get a Justice

Department job.

The Washington Legal Foundation

was founded in 1976 by Daniel J. Popeo.

Popeo is a former trial lawyer for the

Department of the Interior, not some

greasy-suited liberal public defender. He

allegedly started the group with a small per-

~

I

the course of the publication of this

journal it has reported to the Atheist

community many facts concerning various

religious communities and how they bring

their faith to focus in the area of public

policy so as to pressure everyone into

believing. In focusing on the particulars of

various persons or sects, I think that we all

may have made the mistake of missing the

larger view. Conservative religiosity and the

stilted morality that it carries with it is

becoming the bedrock of our political, judi-

cial, and educational systems.

The vast majority of liberal groups on

any issue whether that be state/church sep-

aration, ecology, the economy, civil rights,

consumer protection, free speech, free

press, or freedom of information tend to

focus on particular facts or local situations.

They seldom, ifever, as the old cliche goes,

see the forest for the trees. The leadership

and rank and filemembers seem each to be

fixated on the particular axe that they have

to grind. The opinions of each group are so

diverse beyond the single issue that holds

the group loosely together, that cooperation

with any other generally liberal concern is

virtually impossible. I have had some years

of personal experience in this area as a

cause leader. Virtually no other liberal

cause group willassociate itself with Ameri-

can Atheists for fear that the stigma of our

Atheism and the popular implied commu-

nism that the word Atheism connotes will

sully its supposedly snow-white reputation.

Black rights groups resent the presence of

concerned white liberals at their meetings

because they are whitey. Women's rights

group members feel uneasy with supportive

men who attend meetings. Peace groups

begin and end their marches in a major city

at a church or group prayer and are of-

fended at Atheists or anarchists who join in

the parade. Well-educated, liberal males will

not sitinthe same meeting room withhomo-

sexual males who are interested in the same

.issue and willingto lend their free time to a

group effort for said issue. On and on it goes

until we all wise up.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch (Reagan's

ranch in California), the conservatives are

forming one coalition and think-tank after

another to combat their unorganized liberal

foe. The pro-god, pro-gun, pro-life, pro-

censorship, pro-interventionism, pro-police

Page 2

state crowd are allon good terms among the

leadership, where it counts, and they

scratch one another's backs at

every

turn in

the road. They share information, work to-

gether, share funds, share mailing lists, and

get results. Meanwhile, the liberals fight

themselves as hard as they fight the

enemy. Not very logical, is it? But then who

ever said that logic was part of the liberal

creed. Bruce Fein, one of the founders of a

plethora of new right wing think-tank

groups, said it best as quoted in The

Washington Post

recently: The strategy is

to win the war, not a particular battle. The

left is tactically oriented, he added. That is

exactly the point. The right has never striven

to be different for the sake of being different

alone. They have always had an ulterior

motive, a long range plan. They need not

wear their positions on their backs or have it

reflected intheir office address, as seems to

be the case with their liberal foes. The liberal

has to drive a Volkswagen, wear an old

tweed jacket or jeans, and smoke a pipe

while living in the Village in order to be lib-

eral. A clean officewith modern technology,

presentable attire, the ability to stay out of

jail, and other marks of

establishment

con-

tamination that somehow elude the liberal

are marks of success, not surrender.

The leadership ofAmerican Atheists has

preached about the need for some liberal

coalitions for years now. It only makes good

common sense. Just one example will suf-

fice. What is the one failing that is common

to every struggling cause organization inthis

country, on every issue base? Media access

is the answer. Every cause group in the

country needs to present its message to the

general public in a massive way that pam-

phleteering will never provide. Conserva-

tives are able to get network airtime, satellite

transmissions and the like while we sit and

pump out newsletters to relative handfuls of

people. Why cannot all the liberal groups

unite just around the objective of getting

airtime equal to the conservatives from

major media sources? The coalition re-

quired would only need to be a loose align-

ment to achieve that specific objective. It

need not impinge on the individual auton-

omy of any single group. Yet, such an idea

seems to be elusive to the liberal cause lead-

ership as they focus on distributing a

hundred more mimeographed pamphlets.

October, 1985

American Atheist


5/42

sonal bank loan, a one-room office, and a

hundred dollars worth of rented furniture,

with his wife as a typist. In less than ten

years, the Legal Foundation now operates

out of a fashionable Washington, D.C.,

townhouse with an annual budget of $2 mil-

lion, a staff of fifteen, and 200,000 dues-

payingmembers. Forty percent ofits funding

comes from foundations and corporations

and individuals such as Richard

Mellon

Scaife (note the middle name) and Joseph

Coors. American Atheists has been trying to

get corporate or foundation grants now for

some twenty years and has been turned

down as often as a whore's bed.

The Free Congress Foundation is only

eight years old. Its founder is well-known

New Right activist Paul M. Weyrich. The

foundation's focus isto provide the intellec-

tual power for conservative members of

Congress to back up their right-wing legisla-

tive proposals. If a member of Congress

came to American Atheists for advice, it

would take us months to sort through the

carton boxes of clippings to get an answer,

and by that time the important vote would

be long since over and done. Joseph Coors

provides the major portion of the founda-

tion's $1.9 millionannual budget. No million-

aire will pour funds into a liberal cause,

chiefly because they all look like they are

about ready to fold from month to month.

What a prospectus that is to encourage

investment

The Center For Judicial Studies operates

out of Cumberland, Virginia, and is but two

years old. Its focus isto promote the consti-

tutional theory of strict constructionism. It

publishes a monthly journal called Bench-

mark,

which is distributed to the entire Fed-

eral judiciary, all the state supreme courts,

the U.S. Congress, allthe major law schools

in the country, and naturally the major

media sources as well. The American Athe-

ist

is distributed mainly to individuals who

are not inany positions ofpower whatsoever

and who must be stroked constantly to get

them to admit their Atheism even to their

own bathroom mirror.

Every liberal cause organization must

prostitute its leadership's talent and what

resources itcan muster to the task ofservic-

ing the tunnel-vision concerns of its mem-

bership in return for operating funds. The

funds, in turn, are never enough to do more

than to pay for the mechanical means of

servicing the membership. It is a circle that

leads nowhere. The group never has enough

left over to accomplish its purpose, because

it all goes back into the cost of asking for

more money just to survive.

Meanwhile, the top legal scholar for the

Heritage Foundation joins the White House

staff. A Harvard Law School professor who

provided expertise for several conservative

groups is now Acting Solicitor General. A

law professor working for the Center For

Austin, Texas

Judicial Studies used to be an aide to Jesse

Helms and was the former chief counsel to

the Senate Judiciary Committee. He has

placed a member of his advisory board on

the staff of Attorney General Meese, who in

turn has put him in line for a key Justice

Department assignment. A letter-writing

campaign organized by a network ofFederal

employees bombards individuals and edi-

tors with letters about the greatness of

America as a Christian nation. They have

access to correspondence from the files of

various government departments. The Sec-

retary of Education, whose glorious speech

appears inthis issue, has formally offered to

help school districts delay the implementa-

tion of a recent Supreme Court decision

banning public aid to parochial schools.

That boils down to a government official

supporting lawless activity on the part of

government school systems. The Undersec-

retary of Education can come out in public

and blame the breakdown of our moral

values, the rise of drug abuse, teenage

alcoholism, and the risingsuicide rate on the

absence of prayer in the schools and go

totally unchallenged.

The point that needs to be made here is

that in order to be effective, any cause

movement has to seek to establish itself

within the prevailing system. It cannot labor

totally outside ofthe system and make gains.

The larger goal must be to win the war,

which means making the system as a whole

partial to your particular view. There is no

need to convince masses ofindividuals inthe

streets. They don't count. They have never

counted. They willgo along with those per-

sons who control the system under which

they live. Ideas must become part of the

basic fabric of a culture or educational or

political system in order to be effective.

Being in favor of free speech and free

thought and equal rights must come as

second nature to each new generation

because they have been brought up that

way. The Right wins all the time because it

controls the mechanics of education, of

information distribution, and of law making.

Each of those areas have increasingly con-

servative undercurrents. Each generation

will become more Reagan-like as time

goes on. We must in turn think in terms of

the saturation ofour culture with a different

set of values so that everywhere one turns

one is subtly reinforced with ideas such as

liberty and justice and self-worth and, yes,

the importance of free thought.

In short, the liberal left needs to think in

terms of changing places with the conserva-

tive right. A given liberal would say Are you

saying that I should do the same kind of

dastardly things that the fascists are doing?

The answer is yes. The modus operandi of

the right is effective, so merely apply those

techniques to the furtherance of a different

set of values. Doing so does not make you a

rightist, itmakes you in command. That is

what itis allabout. Ifthe vast majority willgo

along with either position, and history has

proven that they will,then they might as well

go along with the Atheist position as the

religionist position. They can get accus-

tomed to one just as well as to the other.

I keep getting back to analogies with

respect to the Black anti-racism movement

in this country. They finally figured out that

what they had to do was to change places

with their white oppressors. They needed to

be the sheriff, the judge, the mayor, the gov-

ernor, the politician. They set out to fillthose

positions and they have done so step by

step. Itisnow to the point inmost communi-

ties that one dare not discriminate against a

Black. Whites are actually afraid to discrimi-

nate, when they used to enjoy it. We need to

be in the position where religionists are

afraid to discriminate against Atheists in-

stead of enjoying it.

Atheists must become the establishment

instead of resenting it. The sooner we get

that goal firmly fixed in our minds, the

better. ~

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

A second generation Atheist,

Mr. Murray has been the Director of

the American Atheist Center for nine

years and is also the Managing Editor

of the American Atheist.

He advocates Aggressive Atheism.

II

GOD LOVES US F ISHES SO MUCH THAT HE FLOODED

THE REST OF 'EM OUT.

October, 1985

Page 3


6/42

ASK A.A.

In Letters to

the

Editor, readers

give

their opinions, ideas, and information.

But in Ask A.A. American Atheists

answers questions regarding its poli-

cies, positions, and customs, as well as

queries of factual and historical sit-

uations.

I recently heard you on a radio talk show

saying that Adolph Hitler was a practicing

Roman Catholic. You just hate my church

and you take jabs at it without any proof at

all.

Anne Taylor

Lynchburg, Virginia

A letter in the Reader, Vol. 14, No. 49,

Chicago, Illinois,

on

September

6,

1985,

gives a contemporary answer to this query.

Here is the entire quote:

Hitler's Religion

To the editors:

In his eagerness topass Adolf Hitler

along to Atheists, the Reverend

Chumbley (Letters, May 10) over-

looks the following:

Hitler regarded himself as a [Ro-

man] Catholic until he died: I am

now as before a Catholic and will

always remain so, he told Gerhard

Engel, one of his generals, in 1941.

The Roman Catholic Church never

asked for his excommunication.

When Hitler narrowly escaped as-

sassination in Munich in November,

. 1939, he gave the credit to provi-

dence. Cardinal Michael Faulhaber

sent a telegram instructing that aTe

Deum be sung in the cathedral of

Munich to thank Divine Providence

inthe name of the archdiocese for the

Fiihrer'sfortunate escape. The Pope

also sent his special personal con-

gratulations.

Hitlerwas anti-Semitic; inpersecut-

. ing Jews he repeatedly claimed he

was doing the Lord's work. From

Mein Kampf:

Therefore, I

am

con-

vinced that I am acting as the agent of

our Creator. Byfighting off the Jews, I

am

doing the Lord's Work. At

a

Nazi

Christmas celebration in 1926:

Christ was the greatest early fighter

inthe battle against the world enemy,

the Jews .... The work that Christ

started but could not finish, I - Adolf

Hitler - will conclude. In a Reichs-

tag speech in

1938,

he again echoed

the religious origins of his crusade,

Page 4

believe today that I am acting in the

sense of the Almighty Creator. By

warding off the Jews, I am fighting for

the Lord's work.

Biographer John Toland wrote of

Hitler's religion: Still

a

member in

good standing of the Church ofRome

despite detestation of its hierarchy,

he carried within him its teaching that

the Jew was the killer of god. The

extermination, therefore, could be

done without

a

twinge of conscience

since he was merely acting as the

avenging hand of god ...

Jews were not the only holy vic-

tims. In Yugoslavia, Hitler installed

a

Croatian, Ante Pavelic, as hispuppet.

Pavelic,

a

[Roman] Catholic like

Hitler, began extermination of the

Serbs, who were Greek Orthodox.

The Vatican was not unaware of

the massacres conducted in Yugo-

slavia inthe name of[Roman] Cathol-

icism, but Pope Pius remained quiet

and received Ante Pavelic in private

audience, thereby giving his blessing

to this regime.

There is much more that could be

reported on Hitler's deeds. The

thought that Hitler could see himself,

and be seen by others as providen-

tially guided, protected, and inspired

is chilling. Religionists may keep

Hitler's membership for themselves;

Atheists surely don't want credit for

him.

Rita E. Bell

W. Chase

A friend of mine, who isan Atheist, scrib-

bles out the phrase InGod We Trust on all

the paper money he spends. He isalso in the

habit oftaking post -paid cards from religious

organizations and sending them back with

messages such as: Religion is the problem,

not the solution. Since he hates air pollu-

tion as much as religion, he sends the post-

paid cards from certain magazines back to

them with the message: Stop Tobacco

Advertisements. I think all this is fine, and I

hope it will make people think about what

they are doing, but I just wonder if there is

any danger in this. Could he be arrested if

the authorities find out about it?

Joe Wanner

Pennsylvania

It is only unlawful to write on currency if

October, 1985

one has the intention of changing its value.

For instance, one cannot add a zero after

the five on a five dollar bill. One can, how-

ever, otherwise write any sort of message

one wishes on the bill. Don't worry; hun-

dreds of Atheists write anti-religious mes-

sages or protests against the religious

inscription of In God We Trust

on

the

currency they handle every day. None have

faced anything worse than a strange stare

from a cashier. Infact, we would encourage

Atheists to make this sort of quiet, yet

con-

stant, rebellion against the Christianization

of our country.

As for the second matter - it is unlikely

that your friend would be taken

to

court by

any of the companies involved, unless he

bombarded one company inparticular. We

would, though, discourage him, and any

other Atheists, from doing this sort of thing.

The companies offer those post-paid cards

and envelopes in good faith for the conve-

nience of their customers, just as the Ameri-

can Atheist Center occasionally provides

post-paid envelopes for the convenience of

its members.

And

American

Atheists has been

at

the

receiving end of such tactics as your friend

uses. Once way back when, it provided

post-paid envelopes for all, members, non-

members, and subscribers. But envelopes

were returned once too often affixed to a

brick or a telephone book or filled with

paper junk. The return postage American

Atheists had to

pay was

staggering.Now itonly

sends such envelopes to members. It

is

for

this same reason that American Atheists

does not invoice as some other organiza-

tions do. The number of bilkers (i.e., cheats)

would be overwhelming.

But even with these precautions, The

American Atheist Center suffers from anti-

Atheists. Each day, dozens of bills are

received

at

the National Office for maga-

zines and products which have been or-

dered in the names of our staff members by

persons unknown and hostile.

Also, please remember that when one

writes a protest on one of those cards, the

only person who

sees

itisthe mail clerk who

throws it out. In the long run, it is more

effective to get out pen and paper and write

a letter to the company or individual(s)

against whom one wishes to complain.

Remember the religious people can play

the same game with The

American

Atheist

Center - only they can win by the sheer

force of numbers.

American Atheist


7/42

N E W S N D CO M M E N T S

GOD'S LITILEBASTIONS: THE BOY SCOUTS

Since the ejection ofa young West Virgin-

ia youth from the Boy Scouts because of his

reluctance to recognize a Supreme Being,

the American Atheist Center has been con-

tacted by many Atheists who were Boy

Scouts intheir youth or who presently have

children ineither the Boy Scouts or the Girl

Scouts. One and all refuse to believe that

there is a requirement for the belief in or

acceptance of a god idea in any Boy Scout or

Girl Scout regulations.

The American Atheist Center carefully

documented that such was the case twenty-

fiveyears ago, ten years ago, and presently

with this issue of the

American Atheist

magazine.

The Boy Scouts of America was incorpo-

rated byan Act ofCongress on December 6,

1915. The Articles of Incorporation are re-

produced here for your perusal. Subsequent-

1y, Bylaws were written for the organiza-

tion. They are in full force and effect and

.have always been so.

I

I

I

I

I

ii -

- . . -

- . . -

- . . -

- . . -

C O U1 1 _ C. ,

U~.

J,C: U. U

KOIIIIIIC ·IIH

CHARTER

Sixty-Fourth Congress of the

United States of America .

at the First Session

Begun and Held at the

City of Washington

On Monday, The Sixth Day

of December

One Thousand Nine Hundred

and Fifteen

AN ACT

To Incorporate the Boy

Scouts of America And

For Other Purposes

SECTION l.

Be

it

enacted by the

Senate

and

House ofRepresentatives of the Unit-

ed

States of America

in Congress

assembled,

That Colin H. Livingstone

and Ernest P. Bicknell, of Washing-

ton, District ofColumbia; Benjamin L.

Dulaney, of Bristol, Tennessee; Mil-

ton A. McRae, of Detroit, Michigan;

David Starr Jordan, ofBerkeley, Cali-

fornia; F. L. Seely, ofAsheville, North

Carolina; A. Stamford White, of Chi-

Austin, Texas

cago, Illinois; Daniel Carter Beard, of

Flushing, New York; George D. Pratt,

of Brooklyn, New York; Charles D.

Hart, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;

Franklin C. Hoyt, Jeremiah W. Jenks,

Charles P. Neill, Frank Presbrey,

Edgar M. Robinson, Mortimer L.

Schiff, and James E. West, of New

York, New York; G. Barrett Rich,

Junior, of Buffalo, New York; Robert

Garrett, ofBaltimore, Maryland; John

Sherman Hoyt, ofNorwalk, Connect-

icut; Charles C. Jackson, of Boston,

Massachusetts; John H. Nicholson, of

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; William D.

Murray, ofPlainfield,New Jersey; and

George D. Porter, of Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, their associates and

successors, are hereby created a

body corporate and politic of the Dis-

. trict of Columbia, where its domicile

shall be.

SECTION 2.

That the name of this corporation

shall be Boy Scouts ofAmerica, and

by that name it shall.have perpetual

succession, with power to sue and be

sued incourts oflawand equity within

the jurisdiction of the United States;

to hold such real and personal estate

as shall be necessary for corporate

purposes, and to receive real and per-

sonal property by gift, devise, or

bequest; to adopt a seal, and the same

to alter and destroy at pleasure; to

have offices and conduct its business

and affairs within and without the Dis-

trict of Columbia and in the several

States and Territories of the United

States; to make and adopt bylaws,

rules, and regulations

not

inconsistent

with the laws of the United States of

America,

or any State thereof, and

generally to do allsuch acts and things

(including the establishment ofregula-

tions for the election ofassociates and

successors) as may be necessary to

carry into effect the provisions of this

Act and promote the purposes of said

corporation. (emphasis added)

SECTION 3.

That the purpose of this corpora-

tion shall be to promote, through

October,

1985

organization, and cooperation with

other agencies, the ability of boys to

do things for themselves and others,

to train them in Scoutcraft, and to

teach them patriotism, courage, self-

reliance, and kindred virtues, using

the methods which are now in com-

mon use by Boy Scouts.

SECTION 4.

That said corporation may acquire,

by way of gift, all the assets of the

existing national organization of Boy

Scouts, a corporation under the laws

ofthe District ofColumbia, and defray

and provide for any debts or liabilities

to the discharge of which said assets

shall be applicable; but said corpora-

tion shall have no power to issue cer-

tificates of stock or to declare or pay

dividends, its object and purposes

being solely of a benevolent character

and not for pecuniary profit to its

members.

SECTION 5.

That the governing body of the said

Boy Scouts ofAmerica shall consist of

an executive board composed of citi-

zens of the United States. The num-

ber, qualifications, and terms of office

of members of the executive board

shall be prescribed bythe bylaws. The

persons mentioned inthe first section

of this Act shall constitute the first

executive board and shall serve until

their successors are elected and have

qualified, Vacancies in the executive

board shall be filledby a majority vote

of the remaining members thereof.

The bylaws may prescribe the num-

ber of members of the executive

board necessary to constitute a quo-

rum of the board, which number may

be less than the majority of the whole

number of the board. The executive

board shall have power to make and

to amend the bylaws, and, by two-

thirds vote of the whole board at a

meeting called for this purpose, may

authorize and cause to be executed

mortgages and liens upon the prop-

erty of the corporation. The executive

board may, by resolution passed by a

majority of the whole board, designate

Page 5


8/42

NEWS ND OMMENTS

three or more of their number to con-

stitute an executive or governing

committee, of which a majority shall

constitute a quorum, which commit-

tee, to the extent provided in said

resolution or inthe bylaws ofthe cor-

poration, shall have and exercise the

powers of the executive board in the

management ofthe business affairs of

the corporation, and may have power

to authorize the seal of the corpora-

tion to be affixed to all papers which

may require it. The executive board,

by the affirmative vote ofa majority of

the whole board, may appoint any

other standing committees, and such

standing committees shall have and

may exercise such powers as shall be

conferred or authorized by the by-

laws. With the consent in writing and

pursuant to an affirmative vote of a

majority of the members of said cor-

poration, the executive board shall

have authority to dispose in any

manner of the whole property of the

corporation.

SECTION 6.

That an annual meeting of the in-

corporators, their associates and

successors, shall be held once in

every year after the year ofincorpora-

tion, at such time and place as shall be

prescribed in the bylaws, when the

annual reports of the officers and

executive board shall be presented

and members of the executive board

elected for the ensuing year. Special

meetings of the corporation may be

called upon such notice as may be

prescribed inthe bylaws. The number

of members which shall constitute a

quorum at any annual or special meet-

ing shall be prescribed in the bylaws.

The members and executive board

shall have power to hold their meet-

ings and keep the seal, books, docu-

ments, and papers of the corporation

within or without the District of

Columbia.

SECTION 7.

That said corporation shall have the

sole and exclusive right to have and to

use, in carrying out its purposes, all

emblems and badges, descriptive or

designating marks, and words or

phrases now or heretofore used by

the Boy Scouts ofAmerica incarrying

out its program, itbeing distinctly and

definitely understood, however, that

nothing in this Act shall interfere or

conflict with established or vested

rights.

SECTION 8.

That on or before the first day of

Aprilof each year the said BoyScouts

of America shall make and transmit

to

Congress a

report of its

proceed-

ings for the year ending

December

thirty-first preceding. * (emphasis

added)

SECTION 9.

That Congress shall have the right

to repeal, alter, or amend this Act at

any time.

Approved 15 June 1916

WOODROW WILSON

*As amended August 30, 1964, Pub.

L. 88-504, 78 Stat. 636.

•

• •

s c • •• u _ c s

The American Atheist is taking the

extraordinary measure of reproducing be-

low the Article ofthe bylaws concerned with

religion exactly as published in Boy Scouts

of America's own literature. We ask each

Atheist who was a BoyScout and each Athe-

ist who has a child in the Boy Scouts to read

this article carefully.

$Ulll1I~ 1/U

POLICIES

ARTICLE IX. POLICIES AND DEFINITIONS

SECTION 1.

Religion

Clause 1. The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can

grow into the best kind of citizen without recognizing an obligation to

God. Inthe first part ofthe Scout Oath or Promise the member declares,

On myhonor Iwilldo mybest to do my duty to God and my country and

to obey the Scout Law. The recognition ofGod as the rulingand leading

power inthe universe and the grateful acknowledgment ofHis favors and

blessings are necessary to the best type ofcitizenship and are wholesome

precepts in the education ofthe growing members. No matter what the

religious faith of the members may be, this fundamental need of good

citizenship should be kept before them. The Boy Scouts of America,

therefore, recognizes the religious element inthe training ofthe member,

but it is absolutely nonsectarian in its attitude toward that religious

training. Its policy isthat the home and the organization or group with

which the member is connected shall give definite attention to religious

life. .

Activities

Clause 2. The activities ofthe members ofthe Boy Scouts ofAmerica

shall be carried on under conditions which show respect to the convic-

tions of others in matters of custom and religion, as required by the

twelfth point of the Scout Law, reading, Reverent. A Scout is reverent

toward God. He isfaithful inhis religious duties. He respects the beliefs of

others.

Freedom

Clause 3. In no case where a unit is connected with a church or other

distinctively religious organization shall members ofother denominations

or faith be required, because oftheir membership inthe unit, to take part

inor observe a religious ceremony distinctly peculiar to that organization

or church.

Leaders

Clause

4. Only persons willingto subscribe to these declarations or

principles shall be entitled to certificates of leadership in carrying out the

Scouting program.

Clause 5. Other major policies are set forth inArticle IXof the Rules

and Regulations.

SECTION 2.

DEFINITIONS

In addition to those contained inthese Bylaws, there are others, some

pertaining to the Bylaw material, set forth inArticle IXof the Rules and

Regulations.

Page 6

October, 1985

American Atheist


9/42

NEWS AND COMMENTS

If the Congress of the United States is

bound by its own promulgated principles, it

should vitiate these provisions of the Boy

Scouts as being inderogation of the numer-

ous laws which have been passed by that

Congress all affirming that there may be no

discrimination in our nation based on reli-

gion, race, or sex.

And, there is the rub. Atheism is not a

religion. Therefore, itis not protected. When

Madalyn O'Hair took a case to the United

States Supreme Court, * in which she

demanded that the Court speak to the

meaning ofa preposition, that Court refused

to do so and left a lower court ruling stand-

ing. The request to the court was to clarify if

freedom of religion included the idea of

freedom from religion. The thrust of the

lower court decision had been that itdid not.

In the United States citizens may choose

any ofthe above for a religion, but may not

opt out of the choice. The Reagan adminis-

tration ismaking thismore and more clear to

all.

Just as long as Atheists in the United

States pretend that they do not know about

religious requirements for membership not

alone in the Boy Scouts, in the Girl Scouts,

in the V.F.W., in the American Legion, in

most fraternal organizations, in government

employment, itisjust that long that they will

be treated as fifth class citizens.

1 I

' h

1,1.

$tDUIII'-IiSi

,1 ; h

-v-

SUluII~_IISA

• •

. s . . : . o o 1 l . ' ,~ J

The Boy Scouts ofAmerica are inextrica-

bly intertwined with religious organizations

which promote the Scouts' programs. These

include:

African Methodist Episcopal Church

African Methodist Episcopal Zion

Church

American Baptist Churches inU.S.A.

The American Lutheran Church

Armenian Church of North America

Assembly of God Church

B'nai B'rith

Buddhist Churches of America

Catholic Church, Knights of Co-

lumbus

Catholic PTO

Catholic War Veterans

Catholic Youth Organization

Christian Church (Disciples ofChrist)

Christian Methodist Episcopal

Church

*O'Hair v. Paine #1190U.S.S.c., Oct. Term

1970.

Austin, Texas

Church of Brethren

Church of Christ, Scientist

Church of God

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day

Saints (Mormon)

Church of Nazarene

Congregational Church

Eastern Orthodox Churches

The Episcopal Church

Evangelical Lutheran Church

Federation of Islamic Associations in

the U.S.

Jewish War Veterans

Knights of Columbus

Lutheran Church inAmerica

The Lutheran Church, Missouri

Synod

Methodist Episcopal Church

Missionary Baptist Church

Moravian Church in America

National Baptist Convention of

America

Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

Progressive National Baptist Conven-

tion, Inc.

Public Parochial School (Roman

Catholic)

Religious Society of Friends

Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ

of Latter-day Saints

The Salvation Army

Southern Baptist Convention

Unitarian Universalist Association

United Brethren Church

United Church of Christ

The United Methodist Church

United Pentecostal Church Inter-

national

Unity Church

Young Men's Christian Association

The Roman Catholic Church originated

the Religious Emblem Program of the

Scouts. The idea to recognize those who

demonstrate faith, observe creeds, and give

service to god originated in 1939 with the

Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los An-

geles. A program was developed by the

National Catholic Committee on Scouting

and approved by the Council of Bishops in

Washington, D.C. Then a medal was cre-

ated called Ad Altare Dei, a phrase derived

from the Forty-Third Psalm, With joy I

come to the altar of God.

This Ad Altare Dei program provided a

pattern and guide to other religious bodies

as they then created their own versions in

accord with their concepts of spiritual edu-

cation. All of the religious denominations'

Scouting programs are characterized by the

same ideas of exclusivity. Each Scout must

have a religious counselor of his own faith,

October, 1985

work toward a religious emblem which signi-

fies his own denomination, receive his em-

blem in a religious service, and wear the

religious emblem on his uniform centered

above the left pocket flap.

The first religious emblem program in the

Protestant field was prepared and released

in 1943by the National Lutheran Committee

on Scouting under the title Pro Deo Et

Patria. In the same year the Jewish Com-

mittee on Scouting released its program,

made available in 1944, entitled Ner

Tamid. And, the God and Country pro-

gram was developed in 1945 by the Protes-

tant Committee on Scouting.

A typical religious interpretation of The

Scout Law is that issued by the National

Catholic Committee on Scouting and dis-

tributed to Roman Catholic Boy Scouts. It

follows:

I

I

I

I

I

1,1-

-v-

-v-

·v·

-y-

$tDUId.lI$I

11II'-IiS

stOlIHIi·IISl

THE SCOUT LAW

The Scout Law is really a definition of

a Scout. Wearing the uniform does

not make the Scout. In fact, the boy

who keeps the Scout Law, even if he

has no uniform, is the real Scout far

more than the one who wears the uni-

form but does not keep the Law. This

is the Scout Law you promise to obey

in the Scout Oath:

A Scout is trustworthy: Character

is what a man is. Reputation is what

people think about him. A youth of

character isworthy oftrust. No one is

worthy of trust who does not recog-

nize his dignity and the dignity of all

men as children of God.

A Scout is loyal: Because our first

loyalty is to God, a Scout is loyal to all

to whom loyalty is due - his parents,

his church, and his country.

A

Scout is helpful:

Christ has told us

that the good turns we do for others

he willconsider as done to him. Our

motive, or the reason why we are

helpful, is that we see Christ in ev-

erybody. Ifour Lord was willingto die

for everybody, a Scout certainly

should be ready to render help. The

whole Scout program gives us an

opportunity to be helpful.

A Scout is friendly:

The basis and

motive of this point of the Law is

Page 7


10/42

N E W S N D C O M M E N T S

Christian charity. We are all children

of the same father, and brothers of

Jesus Christ. Recognizing this, a

Scout should be a friend to all, and a

brother to every other Scout.

A Scout is courteous: A Scout

should respect the image of God in

everyone. The meaning of love as a

Scout should be taken from the words

of Christ himself - I have come not

to be served, but to serve.

A Scout is kind: This point of the

Law refers mostly to animals. They

exist for our use. They have life and

feeling and God has given them to us

as a trust; as such we must use them

well, never abusing or mistreating

them.

A Scout is obedient: Jesus Christ

gave us an example of perfect obe-

dience throughout his life.This willbe

a difficult point of the Law for a Scout

to keep because itwillmean discipline

and givingup his own willat times. He

should obey, not because the com-

mand pleases him, but because the

one giving i t has the right to do so, is

someone in authority, and is right in

doing so. Disobedience brought death

and sin into the world; obedience

brought our salvation. Real victory

comes from obedience - first to God,

then to all he has placed in authority

as long as they deserve our obe-

dience.

A Scout is cheerful: Joy should be

one of the marks of a child of God. A

Scout will have joy in his heart and

manifest it outwardly by his cheerful

manner.

A Scout is thrifty: Thrift teaches

self-respect, making us unwillingto be

a burden to others. Far from being a

burden, we are able by thrift to help

them. A Scout is deeply concerned

with preserving our natural re-

sources.

A Scout is brave: He can face dan-

ger even ifhe isafraid. He has courage

to stand for what he thinks is right

even if others scorn him.

A Scout is clean: He keeps clean in

body and thought; stands for clean

speech, clean sport, clean habits; and

travels with a clean crowd.

Page 8

A Scout is reverent:

He is reverent

toward God. He is faithful in his reli-

gious duties and respects the convic-

tions of others in matters of custom

and religion.

and subscribe to the Scout Oath or

Promise and Law, as follows:

The Scout Oath or Promise

I

III

I

.

o _

-v- -v- -v-

v

$C.OIJ11~, .ijSl .UIuUh.~SA

COIIIIR'~Sl

On my honor Iwilldo my best

To do my duty to God and my country

and to obey the Scout Law;

To help other people at all times;

To keep myself physically strong,

mentally awake, and morally

straight.

The Rules

&

Regulations of the Boy

Scouts issued to every scout also includes

the following:

I

I

II

I

y-

-v-

y y

y

ltOUun u I

W)ull_'USl

i.I:~U.\lS

$tOllh~·USl

The Scout Law

A Scout is:

ARTICLE IX. PRINCIPLES,

POLICIES, AND DEFINITIONS

PRINCIPLES - OATH,

SLOGAN, PROMISES, MOTTO,

AND CODE

Reverent. A Scout is reverent

toward God. He is faithful in his reli-

gious duties. He respects the beliefs of

others.

SECTION 1.

The Cub Scout Promise, Law of

the Pack, and Tiger Cub Promise

The Scout Oath or Promise and

the Scout Law

Clause

4. AllCub Scouts must know

and subscribe to the Cub Scout Prom-

ise and the Law of the Pack.

lause

3. All Boy Scouts must know

October, 1985

American Atheist


11/42


l e l i l i o u

~ r i n c i ~ l e s n ~

l r a i n i n l

O Y

S C O U T S O F m E R I C

The Boy Scouts of America maintains that no member can grow into the best kind of

citizen without recognizing an obligation to God. Article IX Section 1, Charter and

Bylaws of the Boy Scouts of America.

The BSA does not define what constitutes belief in God or practice of religion. Religious

instruction is a responsibility of parents or the religious institution to which a member

may belong.

The BSA expects a member to accept the religious principles stated in the Charter and

Bylaws, the Scout Oath or Promise and Law, the Cub Scout Promise, the Explorer

Code, and on the membership application.

These commitments are involved:

1. Belief in God.

2. Reverence toward God.

3. Fulfillment of religious duties.

4. Respect for beliefs of others.

The Boy Scouts of America maintains a close working

relationship with authorities of all religious bodies on a

national level. Although Scouting is nondenominational, it

strongly encourages religious loyalty on the part of its

members. The BSA looks to each religious body to

provide for the spiritual training of its members.

Recognition of the spiritual is of great importance as a ,

youth participates in Scouting. This is done through

opportunities to worship at summer camps, camporees,

jamborees, and other Scouting activities.

Scouting members are encouraged to observe religious

practices in Scouting activities which they were taught at

home.

RELIGIOUS EMBLEMS

The purpose of the religious emblems program is to give

members guidance in achievinq the spiritual ideals of the

Cub Scout Promise, Scout Oath or Promise, Scout Law,

and Explorer Code. It gives them an opportunity to

become more aware of what his denomination is doing on

a local, national, or world level. It is a chance to serve and

grow as a participating communicant. Just as a Scout

keeps himself physically strong by camping, hiking, and

other outdoor healthful activities, so also he develops

spiritually and morally by practicing his religion. There are

many differen) religious emblems available so that every

Cub Scout, Boy Scout. or Explorer, regardless of religious

belief, hiS a program to relate to.

To ensure proper religious observance in the unit, the

rabbi, priest, pastor. or imam should serve as chaplain.

BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA

NO.

5-203

Austin, Texas

The chaplain gives guidance to the youth members and

leaders in all religious matters.

Each year in February, during Scouting Anniversary

Week, the Boy Scouts of America encourages the

celebration of Scout Sabbath or Scout Sunday. This event

is highlighted by the presentation of religious emblems.

One of the purposes of Scouting is to bring its members

closer to the ideals of their faith and country.

RELIGIOUS RELATIONSHIPS

October, 1985 Page 9


12/42

NEWS AND COMMENTS

Cub Scout Promise

,I, , promise

To do my best to do my duty to God

and my country,

To help other people, and

To obey the Law of the Pack.

The Law of the Pack

The Cub Scout follows Akela.

The Cub Scout helps the pack go.

The pack helps the Cub Scout grow.

The Cub Scout gives goodwill.

Tiger Cub Promise

L

,prom~

to love God, my family,and my coun-

try and to find out about the world.

The Explorer Code

Clause 5. All Explorers must sub-

scribe to the Explorer Code, as

follows:

As an Explorer

Ibelieve that America's strength liesin

her trust in God and in the courage

and strength of her people. I will,

therefore, be faithful in my religious

duties and will maintain a personal

sense of honor in my own life.

• •

KOUIIlt.US.

I

j-

; - ' . : ' (i

-v-

SCOIIU_'.UU

I

~ ~

-v-

~1I. uU

• •

u;;o,U ,Ul.

The Boy Scouts itself also issues a state-

ment concerned with its religious position,

which is reproduced on the preceding page.

Any Atheist parent withan Atheist child in

the Boy Scouts (or the Girl Scouts) can

challenge Article IX of the Bylaws of the

organization. All you need do is put your

family, your employment, your place in the

community on the line, and pay any attorney

perhaps $50,000 to $500,000 to wind a case

through the legal channels of the federal

courts up to the United States Supreme

Court. It will only take five to seven years

while you and your family are being excor-

iated by the media every inch of the way.

On the other hand, ifallyou ex-Scouts or

parents ofScouts would fund The American

Atheist Center, the job could be done for

you, while you continue your lifein an unaf-

fected manner.

In the matter ofPaul Trout ofShepherds-

town, West Virginia, after seven years inthe

Scouts he qualified inJune, 1985, for promo-

Page 10

tion to Life Scout. While being interviewed

by his local Scout Review Board he told its

members he did not believe in a Supreme

Being but rather had complete belief in self

and self-reliance.

The Review Board contacted the current

Chief Scout Executive at the Scouts' Na-

tional office and was advised

Youth and/or adult members of the

Boy Scouts of America must meet

certain membership requirements.

One of these requirements is belief in

a Supreme Being.

Ifa person does not have beliefin a

Supreme Being, then they [s ic] can-

not be a member of the Boy Scouts of

America.

The Trout familysimulated amazement at

the requirement and stated that neither the

Scout handbook nor registration materials

specify that explicit belief in god is a re-

quirement. When faced with the Scout

Oath, which reads, in part (see above) On

my honor, Iwilldo my best to do my duty to

God and my country, Paul said that he had

not taken such oath literally, that he ap-

proached it as being in the same category as

the nation's Pledge of Allegiance - basi-

cally, a mouthed requirement which had lit-

tle meaning. Paul, who said that he re-

spected the rights ofothers to believe ingod,

petitioned the Scouts to permit him to

remain in the organization and to gain the

Eagle rank he coveted.

The Scout hierarchy replied that the

t N. Tr out

Mr . , Mr s. Rober

POBOX 66 5443

Shepher dst own, WV

Mr , Mr s. Tr out : h Nat i onal

Dear • AXea counci l cont act ~~a~c: r el at ed. t o

The s t onewal l J acKson f Nner i ca. scck~n' J ~~S. board o

f

r ev1C·

counci l . aoy ~CO~~Sy~ur son paul dur 1ng

st at ement s ma e . .

L· f e Rank. d he di d not

~: : n :Sk~d abo~t thel ~c~u~ o~~~.o~a~; c~~~~~~~~ o~ ~~ys ~~r~~~

~ ~ona1 be 1e l n

he

had compl et e bc l e

have any per~ He st at ed

Bei ng or f or ce. .

sel

~- r el i ance. f Nncr~ca must

• scout s 0 . _

l t member s of t he BOY One of t hese r equl

r C

yout h and/ or adu

b

shi p rcqui rement

g

• _ ~ •••••• •••••••••

tai mem cr . .n


13/42


14/42

N E W S N D CO M M E N TS

This was sixty years ago. Within two

generations, thanks in no small part to the

education and example offered by organiza-

tions like yours, America had changed. A

[Roman] Catholic, John F. Kennedy, was

elected President, and the issue of divided

loyalty was laid to rest. The passage of fed-

eral aid to education in 1%5, with provision

for aid to all needy students, reflected an

acknowledgement of the clear legitimacy of

[Roman] Catholic and other private schools.

The long history of bitter religious division

seemed over. And in a sense it was over.

But in a sense it was not. For even as the

traditional sorts ofreligious intolerance were

being largely overcome, a new aversion to

religion was becoming increasingly respect-

able. This new aversion manifested itself in

certain intellectual and social circles; but it

manifested itself politically especially in the

guise of constitutional interpretation. The

same Constitution that had protected the

rights of religious parents, and under whose

aegis a host of religions had found happy

accommodation, now became, in the hands

of aggressive plantiffs and beguiled judges,

the instrument for nothing less than a kind of

ghettoizing of religion.

It would be fruitless here to go into a long

recapitulation of almost four decades of

misguided Court decisions, intensifying in

the last twenty or so years. These decisions

have had two effects: they have thrust reli-

gion, and things touched by religion, out of

the public schools; and they have made it far

more difficult to give aid to parents of chil-

dren in private, church-related schools.

These decisions have hurt [Roman] Cath-

olic parents. But they have hurt public

schools as well, and the children, and the

parents of children, in those public schools.

For neutrality to religionturned out to bring

with ita neutrality to those values that issue

from religion. Value clarification flourished

in our schools, but when public schools in

Kentucky posted the Ten Commandments

in classrooms, the Court found this uncon-

stitutional. The Commandments were taint-

ed, according to the Court, because they are

undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and

Christian faiths. And public school children

cannot be exposed to any statement ofsuch

faiths. This, we are told, would violate the

teenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

in that itdeprived parents and their children

of their rights in matter of selection of

schools and ina measure destroyed the prof-

itable business ofprivate schools and dimin-

ished their property in value.

Page 12

clear principle of separation of church and

state, of religion and the public.

The consequences of this attitude for our

public schools have been damaging. And

these consequences follow from a failure to

appreciate a subtle truth about the relation-

ship between religion, the values and habits

that religion supports, and the requirements

of education among a people charged with

self-government. For example, we in this

country cherish self-government because

we believe inthe dignity ofman. That dignity

is manifested in our possession of unalien-

able rights. Whence come those rights?

Listen: We hold these truths to be self-

evident, that all men are created equal, that

they are endowed by their Creator with cer-

tain unalienable rights ...

As inthe public school cases, in the aid to

parochial school cases I respectfully submit

that the Court has failed to reflect suffi-

ciently on the relationship between our faith

and our political order. The Court has itself

acknowledged the lack of clarity and pre-

dictability in its decisions, that it can only

dimlyperceive the boundaries ofpermissible

government activity in this area. Judge

Antonin Scalia of the District of Columbia

Court ofAppeals, writing a fewyears ago as

a law professor, put it more bluntly: Su-

preme Court jurisprudence concerning the

Establishment Clause in general, and the

application of that clause to governmental

assistance for religiously affiliated education

in particular, is in a state of utter chaos and

unpredictable change. Aid for textbooks

for parochial schools is fine; aid for school

supplies such as maps is not. Bus transpor-

tation to and from school can be provided

for parochial school students; but bus

transportation to and from fieldtrips cannot

be provided. State money can pay for stan-

dardized tests in parochial schools, but not

for teacher-made tests. Senator Moynihan's

famous question - What do you do with a

map that's in a textbook? - has yet to be

litigated.

Itwould be funny ifit were not so serious.

What is serious isa failure on the part of the

Court to reflect on the central importance of

religion inour public life.This isseen vividly

in the recent Felton decision. That decision,

which forbade public school teachers from

teaching remedial classes in parochial

schools, greatly impedes efforts to fulfillthe

Congressional mandate, dating back to

1%5, to provide compensatory services to

all needy students, whatever school they

attend. The Court could not be bothered by

the fact that not one complaint of improper

indoctrination had been filed; that this pro-

gram had, in the words of the Court of

October, 1985

Appeals, done so much good and little, if

any, detectable harm ; that the program had

ignited nothing in the way of divisive con-

troversy - beyond the lawsuit itself. But the

program was ruled unconstitutional because

it excessively entangled church and state.

How? Here is the majority opinion:

Administrative personnel of the public

and parochial school systems must

work together in resolving matters

related to schedules, classroom as-

signments, problems that arise in the

implementation of the program, re-

quests for additional services, and the

dissemination of information regard-

ing the program. Furthermore, the

program necessitates frequent con-

tacts between the regular and the

remedial teachers (or other profes-

sionals), inwhich each side reports on

individual student needs, problems

encountered; and results achieved.

Must work together ... , frequent con-

tact - these features are not praised, as

they should be. Rather these, in the Court's

opinion, are the problem.

We at the Department of Education will

do our best to nullifythe damage done by the

Felton decision to the education of needy

children. We will work with local school

authorities to devise other means to provide

services; and we are about to introduce leg-

islation allowing local school authorities to

convert Chapter One funds into a voucher

program. Such a program would allow par-

ents to use those funds inany school, includ-

ing private ones; and we are confident that

this Supreme Court willfind such a program

passes constitutional muster.

But the broader implications of Felton,

and its predecessors, cannot be nullified by

particular pieces of legislation. The attitude

that regards entanglement with religionas

something akin to entanglement with an

infectious disease must be confronted broad-

ly and directly. It is this attitude that allows

the New

York Times

to speak blithely ofthe

desirability of drawing a line at the parochial

schoolhouse door, as if parochial schools

are somehow less American than public

ones. Itis this attitude that leads the Boston

Globe to label me Secretary for Private

Education when I endorse methods, such

as vouchers and tuition tax credits, that

would foster choice among schools. Itis this

attitude that simply cannot understand why

over three-quarters of the American people

support this Administration in our effort to

restore prayer to our public schools. It is this

attitude, this underlying disposition about

American Atheist


15/42


the place ofreligion, and the values based on

religion, inAmerican life, that we must con-

front directly.

This means refusing to accept that the

reasoning underlying recent Supreme Court

decisions is sound. It means reminding

judges that these decisions are false to the

intentions of the Founders; that, in the

words of Walter Berns, the Court has

launched an interpretation under which the

First Amendment forbids precisely what

many a man in the First Congress went to

such pains to protect - namely, public sup-

port of religion, albeit on a non-discrimi-

natory basis. Itmeans saying what needs to

be said about the relationship ofreligion, and

the values that followfrom religion, and the

preservation of a free society.

Austin, Texas

And that relationship isthis: Our values as

a free people and the central values of the

Judeo-Christian tradition are flesh of the

flesh, blood of the blood.

In saying this, lA e- I - willbe charged

with being divisive: Indeed, a crucial reason

Justice Powell gave for joining the majority

in the Felton case was the potential of such

programs for fostering divisiveness. But the

fact is that the program was in no way divi-

sive; on the contrary, this program,

grounded inthe 1%5 legislation, marked the

overcoming of past tensions. Indeed it isthe

Court's decision in Felton, and the attitude

underlying that and previous decisions, that

fosters divisiveness. It is a great and tragic

irony that, having overcome to so great a

degree the old divisions of Protestant and

October, 1985

Catholic, Gentile and Jew, we now face a

new source of divisiveness: the assault of

secularism on religion. Nothing could be

more divisive than the attempt, in the words

of John Courtney Murray* almost forty

years ago, to channel all government aid

simply and solely towards the subsidization

of secularism as the one national 'religion'

and culture. It would be - it is - tragic

indeed to find that the passing of old-

*John Courtney Murray [1904-1967], lib-

eral American Jesuit theologian who taught

at the Society ofJesus' Woodstock College,

Maryland (1937-1957);advocate ofinterfaith

dialogue.

Page 13


16/42

NEWS AND COMMENTS

fashioned suspicion of particular religions

has been fo\1owed,with barely an interrup-

tion, by a new suspicion of our broad reli-

gious tradition on the part of secularized

elites, far more sophisticated, a bit better

disguised, but no less divisive, no less repre-

hensible, no less damaging.

To some my language will seem harsh.

But how else is one to react to commenta-

tors heralding the Felton decision on the

grounds that it helps save us from the fate of

Iran and Lebanon? But let us ask: IsAmeri-

can Catholicism a religion of car-bombs and

terrorism? It is not. Does the attempt to

deliver remedial education to needy stu-

dents in parochial schools augur an attempt

to turn the government to the service ofone

religious faith? It does not. Is the Pope a

force for intolerance in the world? Is intoler-

ant Christianity the problem that bedevils

the people of Eastern Europe? Is Catholic

Lech Walesa an Ayato\1ah waiting to hap-

pen? No. The Judeo-Christian tradition is

not a source of fear in the world; it is a

ground of hope.

And what of the United States? Was

George Washington wrong when he argued

that reason and experience both forbid us

to expect that national morality can prevail

in exclusion of religious principle ? Was Jef-

ferson wrong when he asserted that the lib-

erties of a nation cannot be thought secure

when we have removed their only firmbasis

- a conviction in the minds of the people

that these liberties are of the gift of God ?

Has subsequent history made the wisdom of

our Founders obsolete? I do not believe so.

Indeed, our history has, ifanything, deep-

ened the intimate relationship between the

Judeo-Christian tradition and the American

political order. Lincoln understood the Civil

War as a sort of divine punishment for the

sin of slavery - a sacrifice that made possi-

ble under God, a new birth of freedom.

And religious faith was central to the civil

rights movement a hundred years later:

Martin Luther King had a dream. It was a

dream that, as he said, the sons of former

slaves and the sons of former slaveowners

willbe able to sit down together at the table

of brotherhood; and it was a dream that

one day every va\1eysha\1be exalted, every

hilland mountain shall be made low, ... and

the glory of the Lord sha\1be revealed, and

a\1flesh sha\1see it together.

In a word, then: American history - the

fundamental shape of the American expe-

rience - cannot be understood without ref-

erence to the Judeo-Christian tradition, a

tradition which gave birth to us and which

envelops us.

Let me be clear. No one demands doctri-

nal adherence to any religious beliefs as a

condition of citizenship, or as proof of good

citizenship here. But at the same time we

should not deny what is true: that from the

Judeo-Christian tradition come our values,

our principles, the animating spirit of our

institutions. That tradition and our tradition

are entangled. They are wedded together.

When

we

have

disdain

for

our religious

tra-

dition, we have disdain for ourselves.

This Administration is fu\1ycommitted to

the First Amendment. We are fu\1ycommit-

ted to the principles of non-establishment of

religion and tolerance. We are fu\1ycommit-

ted to equal rights for all - for the believer

and no less for the non-believer. But we do

not shy away from what has become an

urgent necessity - a national conversation

and debate on the place of religious belief in

our society.

Iintend to speak up inthis debate; I have a

responsibility to speak up, insofar as many

of these issues come to a head in our

schools. The Administration inwhich Iserve

wi\1continue to press for legislation and,

where necessary, judicial reconsideration

and constitutional amendment to help cor-

rect the current situation of disdain for reli-

gious belief. And we do this for the sake of

our national we\1-being in general, and for

the sake of education in particular. And we

do this for the sake ofeducation in the public

as we\1as in the private schools. For we are

a\1equa\1yheirs and beneficiaries of the same

religious tradition. That is the subtle truth

that, in our time, we should not forget.

MEESE S ORIG INAL INTENTION

Edwin

Meese,

the

Attorney

General

of the

United

States,

a born-again

Christian, delivered the following ad-

dress to the American Bar Association,

in

Washington, D.C.,

on

July

9,1985.

Welcome to our Federal City. It is an

honor to be here today to address the House

of Delegates of the American Bar Associa-

tion. I know the sessions here and those

next week in London wi\1 be very pro-

ductive.

It is, of course, entirely fitting that we law-

yers gather here in this home of our gov-

ernment. We Americans, after a\1, rightly

pride ourselves on having produced the

Page 14

greatest political wonder of the world - a

government oflawsand not ofmen. Thomas

Paine was right: America has no monarch:

Here the law is king.

Perhaps nothing underscores Paine's

assessment quite as much as the eager antic-

ipation withwhich Americans await the con-

clusion of the term of the Supreme Court.

Lawyers and laymen alike regard the Court

not so much with awe as with a healthy

respect. The law matters here and the busi-

ness of our highest court - the subject of

my remarks today - is crucially important

to our political order.

Atthis time of year I'm always reminded of

how utterly unpredictable the Court can be

in rendering its judgments. Several years

October, 1985

ago, for example, there was quite a contro-

versial case, Tennessee Valley Authority v.

Hill.

This dispute involved the EPA [Envi-

ronmental Protection Agency] and the now-

legendary snail darter, a creature of curious

purpose and forgotten origins. In any event,

when the case was handed down, one publi-

cation announced that there was some good

news and some bad news. The bad news in

their view was that the snail darter had won;

the good news was that he didn't use the

Fourteenth Amendment.

Once again, the Court has finished a term

characterized by a nearly crushing work-

load. There were 24,935cases on the docket

this year; 179 cases were granted review;

140 cases issued in signed opinions, 11 were

American Atheist


17/42

N E W S N D C O M M E N T S

per curiam* rulings. Such a docket lends

credence to Tocqueville's t assessment that

in America, every political question seems

sooner or later to become a legal question. (I

won't even mention the statistics of the

lower federal courts; let's just say I think

we'll all be in business for quite a while.)

In looking back over the work of the

Court, I am again struck by how little the

statistics tell us about the true role of the

Court. In reviewing a term of the Court, it is

important to take a moment and reflect

upon the proper role of the Supreme Court

in our constitutional system.

The intended role of the judiciary gener-

allyand the Supreme Court inparticular was

to serve as the bulwarks ofa limited consti-

tution. The judges, the Founders believed,

would not fail to regard the Constitution as

fundamental law and would regulate their

decisions by it. As the faithful guardians of

the Constitution, the judges were expected

to resist any political effort to depart from

the literal provisions of the Constitution.

The text of the document and the original

intention of those who framed it would be

the judicial standard in giving effect to the

Constitution.

You willrecall that Alexander Hamilton,

defending the federal courts to be created by

the new Constitution, remarked that the

want ofa judicial power under the Articles of

Confederation had been the crowning de-

fect ofthat first effort at a national constitu-

tion. Ever the consummate lawyer, Hamil-

ton pointed out that laws are a dead letter

without courts to expound and define their

true meaning.

The Anti-Federalist Brutus took him to

task in the New York press for what the

critics of the Constitution considered his

naivete. That prompted Hamilton to write

his classic defense of judicial power in The

Federalist, No. 78.

An independent judiciary under the Con-

stitution, he said, would prove to be the

citadel of public justice and the public

security. Courts were peculiarly essential

in a limited constitution. Without them,

there would be no security against the

encroachments and oppressions ofthe rep-

resentative body, no protection against

unjust and partial laws.

Hamilton, like his colleague Madison,

knew that all political power is of an en-

croaching nature. In order to keep the

Per curiam refers to a decision issued by

the court as a whole.

Austin, Texas

powers created by the Constitution within

the boundaries marked out by the Constitu-

tion, an independent - but constitutionally

bound - judiciary was essential. The pur-

pose of the Constitution, after all, was the

creation of limited but also energetic gov-

ernment, institutions with the power to gov-

ern, but also with structures to keep the

power incheck. AsMadison put it, the Con-

stitution enabled the government to control

the governed, but also obliged it to control

itself.

But even beyond the institutional role, the

Court serves the American republic in yet

another, more subtle way. The problem of

any popular government, of course, is see-

ing to itthat the people obey the laws. There

are but two ways: either byphysical force or

by moral force. In many ways the Court

remains the primary moral force inAmerican

politics.

Tocqueville put it best:

The great object ofjustice isto substi-

tute the idea of right for that of vio-

lence, to put intermediaries between

the government and the use of its

physical force ...

Itis something astonishing what au-

thority is accorded to the intervention

of a court of justice by the general

opinion of mankind ...

The moral force inwhich tribunals

are clothed makes the use of physical

force infinitely rarer, for inmost cases

it takes its place; and when finally

physical force is required, its power is

doubled by moral authority.

By fulfilling its proper function, the Su-

preme Court contributes both to institu-

tional checks and balances and to the moral

undergirding of the entire constitutional edi-

fice. For the Supreme Court is the only

national institution that daily grapples with

the most fundamental political questions -

and defends them with written expositions.

Nothing less would serve to perpetuate the

sanctity of the rule of law so effectively.

But that is not to suggest that the justices

are a body ofPlatonic guardians. Far from it.

The Court is what it was understood to be

when the Constitution was framed - a polit-

ical body. The judicial process is, at its most

fundamental level, a political process. While

not a partisan political process, it is political

tAlexis de Tocqueville [1805-1859], French

statesman, author, Roman Catholic.

October, 1985

in the truest sense of that word. It is a pro-

. cess wherein public deliberations occur over

what constitutes the common good under

the terms of a written constitution.

As a result, as Benjamin Cardozo [1870-

1935, American jurist] pointed out, the

great tides and currents which engulf the

rest of men do not turn aside in their course

and pass the judges by. Granting that,

Tocqueville knew what was required.

As he wrote:

The federal judges therefore must not

only be good citizens and men of edu-

cation and integrity, ... (they) must

also be statesmen; they must know

how to understand the spirit of the

age, to confront those obstacles that

can be overcome, and to steer out of

the current when the tide threatens to

carry them away, and with them the

sovereignty of the union and obe-

dience to its laws.

On tha

american atheist magazine oct 1985

Documents