Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1962-06-28
LETTERS TO THE STAR
Reaction to Court Ruling oh School Prayers

CACALlOu 4IOLIl JIlc UNIVERSAL
mind. They prefer a crea-
ton without a cause" and
even without mechanics; a
creation by chance" They
have not heard of the "con-
tingency" of all human
things, nor Of the sufficient
reason" which all existence
must have to be ineligible.
So they prefer the amateur
ish education of a causeless
world. One does not have
to be q religious person to
know this absurd position
must lead to q dehumaniza-
ton Of the human race. The
Moscow bells toll for the
burial Of a civilization that
has caused us 5000 years Of
toll and suffering to establish.
Joseph /. Puente.
Some Of the comment on
the Supreme Courts decision
on prayers in the schools
suggests that there are once
again irresponsible people
who would interpose mas
sive resistance" to the SUI
preme law Of the land. The
case that was decided, how
ever, leaves no room for hon.
est disagreement as to the
meaning Of the First Amend
ment to the Constitution.
1t is particularly signifi-
cant that the New York case
was a more difficult one for
the obJecting parents than
would have been presented in
the District. In New York,
as distinguished from the
District, ID the prayer was
non-sectarian; (2) the pray
er was not required by the
State, but was optional with
each local school administra-
ton, which need not have
used any prayer at all, and
CD recital Of the prayer was
optional with each student,
who could have been excused
from participation.
Prior to the decision, our
public officials indicated
that they would obey any
ruling by the Supreme Court
as, indeed, it is their duty
to do. They should do so now,
unhesitatingly. Moreover,
since the language of the de-
cision is unambiguous to the
effect that the power, pres
tige and financial support Of
the Government cannot be
placed behind any religious
observance in the schools, the
opinion clearly m.braces
celebration Of religious holi-
days in the Districts pri-
mary and secondary schools,
as well as the Recreation De-
partment nursery schools.
Monroe H. Freedman,
Associate Professor of Law,
George Washington Univer-
versity.
- -
So once again the August
Ones have struck. This time
a blow for the-sic-conSti-
tutional guarantee of sepa-
ration of church and state.
But In vain have I searched
In the controversial prayer
for any reference to church"
The prayer is addressed to
God. And is it not probable
that the Founding Fathers by
their word church." meant
exactly that? That they
meant only to safeguard the
new nation from possible &C.
clesiaStical clutch and had
neither desire nor intention
OF separating state from God.
God and church" are not
synonymous. Church" came
into existence because of
God, but long before there
was a church ian eternity
that battles our imaginingJ
God was the Supreme Being.
That a prayer in which chill
dren ask His blessings should
be adjudged unconstitutional,
is tragic.
Ina S. StOvaII.
4
I attended public schools
in California for 10 years.
There were no prayers said in
the classroomS and no mo-
ments of silence. However, we
did pledge allegiance to the
United States of America and
sing a patriotic hymn each
morning in the elementary
grades; and each week in as
sembly in the junior and SEN
ior high schools.
Patriotic observance in the
public schools is a must.
Religious observance in the
public schools is a must not.
Mrs. Arthur James Rauchle.
\
June rs, 1862, was a black
day for the Nation: The
United States Supreme Court