Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1958-06-26
Still Misses Point

Mr.. Yinger is still missing the
point of the argument concerning
the posting of the Ten Command
ments in public schools.
A public school Is part of
government, local, state or Fed.
eral. The Ten Commandments
are religious teachings. The
principle of separation of
church and state forbids any
religious teaching i'm public
schools; therefore, the Ten
Commandments should not he
posted in public schools.
The principle of separation of
church and state is not "an old
saw as Mr.. Yinger calls it. 1t
is vital, living principle which
the Supreme Court of the United
States has affirmed again and
again. Its purpose is to prevent
the loss of religious freedoms of
any American, and to eliminate
religious conflicts within the gov
eminent.
In Rutherford, N. j., the Board
of Education permitted the Glide.
ons to distribute copies of the
Bible (King James version), to
all children who wished copy.
One of the parents of Catholic
faith and one of Jewish faith
brought suit. The Supreme Court
of New Jersey in 1853 held that
the introduction of the Bible into
public schools would violate the
principle of separation of church
and state embodied in the First
to the Constitution
of the United States. The Court
also felt that it would establish
one religious sect in preference
to another. 1t was clear to the
Court that the fly in the oint-
ment was the difference in the
Bibles used by the various sects
the old testament and not the
new is sacred to Judaism, the
Catholics prefer Douay's version,
the Protestants prefer the King
James version and now some
Protestants accept the Revised
Edition. And, of course,
there are people who do not ac-
cept the Bible.
Let us assume that it is de-
cided to post the Ten Command
ments in public schools. Which
version will you choose? Two
solutions are possible: Establish
by law the correct version or YER
sions; or post all versions of
them and, of course, if any re-
ligious group comes out with an
other version, post that, too. In
Mr.. Yinger, every man
has a right to decide for himself
what is the word of God and
what is the correct version of
the Ten Commandments. You,
and no one else, under the laws
Of this nation as interpreted by
the Supreme Court of the United
States can, as a public official,
propagate any specific religious
Eeaching. l will fight for your
right to believe and preach your
religion but don't bring it into
the public schools.
Mr.. Wilbur F. Nash, Jr., in a
letter that appears beside your
column, says that your idea is
fine but objects to the version
given in the Catechism of the
Church of Rome. That is his
1t is also the priv.
lege of the Catholic Church to
teach any version of the Ten
Commandments they choose. 1t
seems likely that some members
Of the Catholic Church will OBJ
lect to Mr.. Nash's remarks. All
this is fine, but the minute the
government enters into the pic
ture by propagating the version
of Mr.. Nash, of the Catholic
Church, of the Revised Standard
Edition, or of any other, they
are violating the Constitution of
the United States.
1t would seem that some
Catholics will be irritated by
MIR. Nash's remarks. Bring
few more sects into the picture
and you will have a grand
melee. / believe that public dis
cussion of important issues Is
good for the nation. Religion is
certainly important, but such
discussions produce dissensiOn
and bitterness among some peO-
pie. Bring any portion of It
into government and we will
have dissension and bitterness
In the government because of
religion. The picture is clear,
MIR. Yinger. Read some history
and think.
In both your columns on this
subject, Mr.. Yinger, you have
asked that the Ten Command
ments be posted in public schools.
What about the people who do
not believe that the Ten Com
mandments are the law of God?
Are their children to be subjected
to religious teachinps In vvhicb