c. 1997 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON _ Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., announced plans Monday (March 24) to introduce a newly worded amendment to the Constitution he says will protect religious expression in public places, including the nation’s public schools.

Istook’s proposed amendment, supported by a consortium of conservative groups including the Christian Coalition, is the latest overture in an ongoing attempt by advocacy groups and several in Congress to legislate on the controversial issue of broadening constitutionally-protected religious expression.

Liberal and conservative religious leaders and church-state experts have fallen on different sides of the issue. Additionally, there also has been division in conservative religious circles among supporters of the intent of an amendment as to the appropriate language it should contain.

Istook, as well as Reps. Henry J. Hyde, R-Ill., and Richard K. Armey, R-Texas, have previously proposed amendments but their inability to agree on language doomed the effort.

Istook’s latest proposal, the”Religious Freedom Amendment,”reads:”To secure the people’s right to acknowledge God: The right to pray or acknowledge religious belief, heritage or tradition on public property, including public schools, shall not be infringed. The government shall not compel joining in prayer, initiate or compose school prayers, discriminate against or deny a benefit on account of religion.” Joined by about a dozen representatives from a variety of”pro-family”causes, Istook told a news conference in the Capitol the amendment is needed because references to the nation’s religious heritage are being driven from the public stage.”This is our peaceful answer to that assault,”he said.”Under the pretense of promoting tolerance, religious expression is being singled out for censorship.” Istook cited recent instances where an Alabama judge has come under fire for placing a Ten Commandments plaque in his courtroom and a recent court order removing a cross that has been a longtime fixture in a San Francisco park. Others decried instances where students were prevented from giving out Valentines that mentioned God or carrying Bibles unless the volumes were wrapped in brown paper.

The most prominent backer of the latest amendment language is the Christian Coalition.”Sadly, there is a war going on against religious freedom in America,”said Executive Director Ralph Reed, who said the Christian Coalition will spend more than $1 million promoting Istook’s proposal.

Other organizations supporting Istook are the Family Research Council; Toward Tradition, a conservative Jewish group; Concerned Women for America; National Clergy Council and Americans for Voluntary School Prayer, a new group co-founded by former Rep. Bill Dannemeyer, R-Calif.

An opposing array of groups, the Coalition to Preserve Religious Liberty, held a news conference outside the Capitol to present the other side of the issue.”This debate is not about people who care about religion on the one hand and people who don’t on the other,”said Mark Pelavin, associate director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism and chairman of the coalition’s legislative task force.

Pelavin and other representatives of mainline Protestant, Unitarian and Jewish groups said that many of the issues cited by Istook _ especially those concerned with religious expression in public schools _ could be resolved by educating officials rather than altering the Constitution.

Rather than helping religious people, Istook’s amendment will, in enacted, hurt religious minorities, said the Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State.”It will marginalize non-Christians and it will permit government officials to run roughshod over the rights of religious minorities,”Lynn said.

Mary Anderson Cooper, associate director of the Washington office of the National Council of Churches, called the Istook proposal”unnecessary, meddlesome and potentially harmful.””The Constitution already requires that religion be treated fairly and equally,”Cooper said.”If the proposed amendment is an attempt to use the power of government to promote the faith, it is worse than unnecessary _ it is dangerous. History has shown, and we bear witness, that in marriages between church and state, religion is the abused party.” Istook’s latest version of the proposed amendment language received support from House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., and Armey.

Hyde spokesman Sam Stratman, said the Illinois Republican is reviewing the language and is likely to call for a hearing on the measure this summer.

Asked if Hyde intended to introduce his own version, Stratman said,”We’re going to focus on one vehicle.”

DEA END BANKS