Evening star., 1962-04-11

Your editorial, Freedom to
Pray" should not be allowed
to pass without comment.
Even though, as you state,
the vast majority of parents
in New Hyde Park may be
perfectly satisfied with this
innocuous prayer, the fact
that there is even one parent
who thinks prayers do not
belong in school is sufficient
reason to stop and think. The
tiny minority of which you
write has rights that should
be as jealousy protected as
those of the great majority
even more so, since the tiny
minority is usually also un-
popular and is thus in great
er need of a defender. And
the right to diSbelieve is just
as much Of a right as the
right to believe.
You appear to think that
such a prayer is not incon-
sistent with the First Amend
ment. Obviously there are
people who differ with you
give them credit for honest
opinions. courageously held,
and with sufficient convic-
tion to fight for their opin-
ions. How do you know they
are wrong and you are right?
It would appear to me that
the prayer cited. or any other
prayer for that matter, would
be diStasteful to an agnoStic
or an atheist. Yet the quot
ing Of prayers is, it must be
admitted. an attempt to foist
some sort of religion upon
them. Clearly this is a con-
travention Of the First
Amendment. If this prayer,
which affirms a belief in the
existence of God, can be ad-
mitted to a public institution.
why not some statement of
atheism also? Obviously nei-
ther belongs in a public in
Stitution.
Your editorial goes to some
length to illustrate the en-
phasis placed on religion and
God by our founding fathers,
but this is no reason that
such a religious idea, or any
other religious idea, must be
perpetuated in our public in
Stitutions. These same found
ing fathers. who so fervently
avowed their faith in God,
also practiced human slavery,
but this is hardly a convinc-
ing argument for the per-
petuation of that disgraceful
institution.
So all hail to these five
brave and dedicated parents
with convictions so honestly.
so firmly, and so courageous
ly held that they are willing
to tackle the New York Board
OF Regents, the great majori-
ty Of parents and people, the
power Of the press, and even
God himself in defense of
their convictions.
Samuel J. Rosenberg.
y y II
I wish to express nv
thanks to you for your edi-
torial on Freedom to Pray"
1t is difficult for me to
understand American citizens
who are opposed to having
prayer in our schools. We
don't expect all people to
think or believe as we do, but
we don't expect them to try
to make us think or believe
as they do, either. The United
States was founded on Chris
tian principles and is known
all over the world as 9
Christian Nation.
If the five parents of chill.
dren in the schools of New
Hyde Park, Long Island, anc
others like them, feel thai
prayer might contaminatt
their children, then I thinl
they should move to a godles
country.
l Tor one hope that we havt
no one on the Supreme Cour
bench far enough to the lef
to sponsor a move to do ava,
with prayer in the schools.
Louie Hiner.
I can only utter a reveren
Amen to your editorial en-
titled Freedom to Pray"
G. d. Broyles.
4 y 4
I was diSguSted with Tn,
Stars editorial of April
entitled Freedom to Pray.
1t was an utter reputation
of all the basic principles O
democracy. Speaking of tn
handful" of militant S
from New Hyde Park VIII,
have taken the issue O
prayer in the New York pub
lie schools to the Suprem
Court, 1t said in effect tha