The Catholic times. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1951-current, 1960-03-25
JOSEPH BREIC-
Insult In
The Senate

There is no human right that is under more re-
lentless siege nowadays than the right of parents to
see to it that their children are educated In religion as
well as in the other Rs of learning.
THIS is TRUE in America, and it is true in much
of the rest of the world.
In some places the attack is massive, open and
frontal, as behind the iron and bamboo curtains, or
under the recently overthroWn communist government
In kerala State In India.
In other places the persecution-and persecution
it ISIS like the nagging of a Shrew of a wife who
hopes to have her way by a process of endless accusa-
tons, putting herself always in the right, and her hus-
band everlastingly in the wrong.
This latter is the case in the US.
THERE ARE certain people who miss no OPP
portunity-and indeed create opportunities-to make
it appear that parents who do not send their young
sterS to unsupported public schools are second-class
citizens.
These citizens are denounced as "~divisive."
They are represented, slyly, as somehow I'M
American.
The implication is broadcast that there is some
thing disloyal-if not nearly subversive-about them.
Religious schools are subjected to a constant
smear campaign, adroitly worded, and cunnlngiy plant
ed in the public prints.
Loftily phrased propaganda conveys the notion
that religious schools-and Independent schools of any
kind-are at best contemplate, and at worst dangerous
to national unity and progress.
The theory seems to be that if enough tar is brush
ed on, some of it will stick.
SOME OF 1T STICKS, all right. This was demon
strated recently in the US. Senate.
A bill was introduced to spend 1888, 000, 900 IN
two years Ill federal aid TO public schools, IN part for
construction, in part for teacher salaries.
Roughly, the idea was to provide $40 a year, per
pupil, in federal aid to states, so that schools in poorer
states might be brought toward the standards of those
in richer states.
But here's the rub: children in parish and other
Independent schools were to be counted in each states
school population. These same children would then
be counted out: no aid would go to them; all aid would
90 to public school pupils.
n INSULTING EouITY of this is obvious.
Not only was the bill a direct slap in the face for re-
ligiouS parents; but the largest proportion, by far, Of
independent-school pupils is in the richer states.
Thus the count EN- in, count 'em. OUT provision
went directly contrary to the stated purpose of the bill.
One man in the Senate raised his voice in protest.
Sen. Frank j. Lausche of Ohio told his colleagues that
the bill would rub salt in the wounds of parents who
send their children to religious schools.
He tried to amend the bill to count only public
school pupils. He was voted down. The Senate then
passed, 51-34. the salt in the wounds bill.
PARENTS OF CHILDREN in religious schools
thus were contemptuously brushed aside by a large
majority of senators, including Catholic presidential
aspirant John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts
The Senate then voted down a bill to lend $3.50
million to independent schools for construction, al
though its sponsor, Sen. Wayne Morse of Oregon, esti-
mated that such schools save US. taxpayers $1.135-
100000 a year by educating children without public
expense.
Sen. Kennedy voted against that bill, as did Sen.
Lyndon Johnson of Texas, another presidential hope
ful. Sen. Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota voted for
it. Sen. Stuart S%ymington of Missouri, also mentioned
for the presidency, was absent and not voting,