Evening star., 1948-03-15
TO the Editor Of The Star:

TO the Editor Of The Star:
The cartoon which you published on March
IL produced some mixed emotions It endeavors.
OF course, to convey the results produced by the
8-to-1 decision OF the Supreme Court barring
religious instruction in the public schools
The Inference one gathers from the cartoon
Is that the weight Of the United States Consti-
tuition plus atheism greatly outweighs the
teachings Of, and position held in high honor
by, the Holy Bible in America.
Permit me, however, to point out that this
Supreme Court decision has once again served
notice upon the world that we believe in the
separation Of church and state: That this
Nation recognizes the inalienable rights of man,
or OF the individual on an equality before<the
law. 1t also serves notice on atheism that we
also recognize its rights to freedom Of thought
In land with abundant belief in religion
Now atheism should recognize the Christianity
OF our motives, and fight with us for our per-
sonal rights to worship as we choose. The
Supreme Court decision, nevertheless, Is q
victory for religion.
When our forefathers ned from Europe, some
came from countries where the Protestant
faith was imposed by state control Others
came from lands where the Catholic religion
was regulated by the state They desired to
follow the religions Of their own choice in
America, and, unfortunately, for time, even
attempted to impose those religions upon their
fellowmen.
But we owe our hard-fought freedoms
primarily to Roger Williams, who founded
Rhode Island, that little island of freedom lust
beyond Massachusetts, from which he had been
exiled because he believed in the absolute
separation Of church and state. Our history
has shown Williams, though a profoundly
religious man himself, was right in his decision,
for America is what she is today because of
that heritage. He established the precedent
that civil authorities should administer the
affairs Of state "only in civil things"
CHARLES ALLEN RENTFRO,
To the Editor Of The Star:
wish to express sincere commendation for
your excellent editorial entitled Church and
State" 1t gave us some very sound thinking
on . difhcult problem.
If religion is q good thing, the laws of our
land should not discourage it. We must be
careful to preserve the Christian principles
on which our Constitution was founded II
we wish to preserve our democratic way of
life. JOSEPH LIE FROIs.
To the Editor OF The Star:
For nearly so years I have admired the car
toons Of the elder Bergman and those of the
younger Bergman since they first appeared
They are unequaled for their humor, so entirely
free from all bitterness and from all vulgarity
full of humanity, they warm the heart.
For the first and only time, find In The Star
OF March II false note.
There was no question Of the Bible or of
atheism in the Supreme Courts decision.
Neither was involved. On the one side was the
United States Constitution and that alone. On
the other was an infraction thereof.
For once the Bergman cartoon casts its
influence on the side of those who would in
crease bitterness between members of the
human race
Well, even Homer mods. The Berrymans still
are to me the princes of cartoonists.
EUSTACE 8. GLASCOCK.
To the Editor Of The Star:
Thank you for your excellent editorial on the
Supreme Courts decision on religious training
in the schools 1t is an evidence Of clear
thinking and fundamental recognition Of the
freedom of religion as one Of our hard-held
rights of democracy. Coming from more or
less rural section of the State of Virginia,
voice an opinion that am sure is held by most
of the people who are concerned for the reli-
gious instruction of the youth Of the day For
several years we have had course of religious
instruction open to children in two grades of
the public schools with the consent Of the chill
dren's parents. This instruction is inter-
UNCONVENTIONAL in character and was offered
in the beginning to give our children back
ground in religious education which the school
systems did not offer and to give to those chill
dren, attending church schools or not an
attempt at a general background of the liter
ature and history included in the Bible.
Perhaps the fact that the Supreme Court
did not take into consideration is that this is
the only course in such cultural history that
Is not offered in our public schools, and that
for those children from families who do not
take the trouble to send their children either
to church or Sunday schools this is their only
contact with the general teachings in the Bible.
1t is paralleled, in my opinion by the families
who will not prepare lunches for their children,
but there is no objection to the State feeding
their bodies-so why not their spiritual bodies?
come from family that has an immediate
sense of responsibility in sending children to
the church for such instruction. and yet our
children have taken, and benefited, by these
courses in the schools. Why not let all those
interested have chance to study in some small
part the greatest piece of literature the schools
will ever have q chance to use-the Bible?
H. D.
To the Editor Of The Star:
I don't believe the trainers OF our Constitu-
ton were atheists, and am sure the present
members of our Supreme Court are not.
In all the years of reading your paper have
never seen anything in such poor taste as
your front page cartoon by James T. Bergman.
I am not an atheist either, and my years of
reading your paper are 3O R. H. DENNIS
To the Editor Of The Star:
Those Protestant and Jewish leaders have
truly succeeded in their efforts to Danish any
religious teaching from our public schools.
Ironically, however, it is our Protestant and