1
Congressman Chet Edwards
Speech to the Baptists Committed
July 12, 2003/San Antonio, TX
Good morning. I consider it a privilege to be with you, because of my deep respect for your defense of one of the greatest of Baptist legacies—the principle of religious freedom.
I wanted to be with you for one key reason. I believe religious freedom in America is at great risk, and that you and I, as people of faith, have a responsibility to do much more to protect it.
I believe we must act NOW and act BOLDLY if we are to stop a massive, well-organized and well-funded attack on the American principle of separation of church and state.
Let me share with you the basis of my beliefs and concerns.
First, I am a passionate believer in the principle of church-state separation. The basis of that passion is that I believe that religious freedom is a divine gift. Our omnipotent God, the creator of our universe, could have easily made us mere puppets of His will. But, instead, He chose to give us free will—the right to believe in Him or not. Consequently, I believe any action by government to tamper with that divine gift is sacrireligious.
If we accept, as I do, that religious freedom is the first freedom, the foundation of all other freedoms, then I believe we can make the case that perhaps the greatest contribution to the world from America’s experiment in democracy is the principle of church-state separation as enshrined in our First Amendment.
Baptists, in particular, should take pride in knowing they helped build that wall by influencing our founding fathers, and Baptists have been at the forefront of its protection ever since.
I come to you today to say that sacred wall is being torn down, brick by brick, in an incessant attack that operates beneath the radar screen of most American citizens. We simply cannot let that attack succeed. We must prevail in this fight, because no less than the religious freedom of our children and grandchildren is at stake.
Let me explain why I say religious freedom in America is at great risk. Reasonable people could ask: Aren’t we the envy of the world when it comes to religious freedom and tolerance? Aren’t we known as the land of the free? Aren’t you exaggerating the threat to religious freedom?
My answer is that, yes, we are a land of unparalleled religious freedom. And, precisely because of the magnificent first words of the Bill of Rights, “Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
But, those words and the principle they represent are under attack by Congress, the Administration and a well-organized and well-funded network of religious fundamentalists.
Let me be specific.
Under the guise of supporting “faith-based initiatives”, the Administration has proposed two dangerous ideas: direct funding of churches with taxpayer dollars and discrimination in federally funded job hiring based solely on one’s personal religious faith.
If we have direct taxpayer funding of houses of worship, that doesn’t just chip away at the wall of separation—it obliterates it.
And, if hundreds of thousands of job applicants for federally funded jobs can be denied those jobs simply because of their religious faith, itmakes a mockery of the free exercise of religion.
Thus, these two proposals are a direct attack on both the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses of the First Amendment.
These attacks did not begin with the Bush Administration, but for the first time in my 12 years in Congress, the White House is empowering them with the full force of the bully pulpit and executive regulations.
This effort is being fueled by a multi-million dollar network of right wing think tanks, fundamentalists and religious organizations, or in some cases, I might say political organizations operating under the guise of religion.
From the American Enterprise Institute to the Christian Coalition to the Southern Baptist Convention, these groups are working in tandem with Republicans in Congress and the Administration to suggest that church-state separation is a new concoction of 20th century liberals bent on destroying the role of faith in America. As ludicrous as that revisionist history is, they have succeeded in convincing many Americans that church-state separation is an attack on religion….the retired teacher in Temple.
After I helped lead the fight in Congress to defeat the Istook Constitutional Amendment on School Prayer, the Christian Coalition sent out thousands of letters in my district saying that my views were anti-American…and anti-Texan. Never could I have imagined that defending the First Amendment from being re-written would be considered un-American. I have always thought the Bill of Rights was rather pro-American, but the tactics of our opposition are not unlike what you saw at the Southern Baptist Convention of 1979.
The assault on church-state has been relentless ever since.
They used September 11th to push a House resolution saying that it was Americans’ “necessary duty” to pray. We stopped it, but only because it was on the Suspension Calendar, thus requiring a 2/3rds vote for passage. I take no great comfort in knowing that a majority in the U.S. House thought that government should demean prayer by designating it as a “necessary duty”.
Multiple efforts have been made in the past five years to require the 10 Commandments to be prominently displayed at taxpayers’ expense at all public schoolhouses.
When they tried to do it last December as an amendment on another bill, I had my staff let the Rules Committee know that I was also preparing a few amendments, in fact, one page at a time, I intended to offer the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Torah and the Koran.
They pulled down the 10 Commandments amendment. I can only hope that perhaps they saw the absurdity of having a political correctness committee in Congress trying to decide which religious beliefs should and should not be put in public schools at taxpayers’ expense.
Unfortunately, I am concerned that President Bush is making federal court nominations that believe church-state separation is a secular attack on religion.
Last year in the House we were able to defeat the Jones bill, because about 40 Republicans joined Democrats in saying that allowing churches to become conduits for political campaigns was demeaning to our houses of worship. However, somewhat like Freddy Krueger in the movie Friday the 13th, Jones is coming back.
My point in all of this is that we can expect constant attacks in Congress and from the Administration on church-state separation in the years ahead. They will be backed by massive grassroots efforts across the country and by a growing network of conservative TV and radio talk shows. Their think tanks will spew out so-called scholarly studies to Members of Congress, state legislators, courts and the press. Their arguments will be clever and will often be honed into 8-second TV sound bites.
One might think the success of church-state separation in protecting Americans’ religious liberty for over two centuries might make their efforts futile. But, as one of my personal heroes in the church-state battle, Mr. John Baugh, once said of some Baptist fundamentalists, these folks are “patient revolutionaries”.
They frame their arguments as a debate on whether you are for or against school prayer, the 10 Commandments and faith-based organizations, thus appealing to Americans’ religious faith and suggesting that if you are against them, you are against religion.
That is precisely why I think people of faith, and faith-based groups such as Baptists Committed and the Baptist Joint Committee must play a leading national role in this fight. Every time a Madelyn Murray O’Haire or the ACLU lead our battles, it plays into the fundamentalists’ allegations that church-state separationists are attacking religion itself. I welcome the resources of the ACLU, but people of faith MUST take a higher profile in the battle for religious freedom in America.
I believe the greatest threat we presently face is the Bush Administration’s effort to allow direct funding of houses of worship and their policy that religious discrimination in public job hiring should be perfectly legal.
While we slowed down this effort in the House and Senator Jack Reid of Roger Williams’ Rhode Island killed the effort in the CARES bill, they are now trying to attach the religious discrimination language in numerous bills reauthorizing social programs, such as the Head Start bill and the Federal Jobs Training legislation.
I just find it terribly offensive that any American citizen would have to pass someone else’s religious test to qualify for a federally funded job. As I have said on the House floor, I cannot imagine allowing a church associated with BobJonesUniversity to receive a $1 million federal jobs training grant and then print a sign with taxpayers’ dollars that says “No Jews or Catholics need apply here for these federally funded jobs”.
The Becket Fund is calling this “mission-based hiring”. The Administration is calling it fairness for faith-based groups. I call it federal subsidies for religious discrimination. Whatever you call it, it is wrong.
The Administration now wants to privatize up to 850,000 federal civil service jobs, and guess what? The private sector groups receiving tax dollars to replace those jobs will be able to discriminate in job hiring based, not on an applicant’s capabilities, but rather on the basis of religious tests.
I can’t wait to hear what Jerry Falwell will say the first time a Muslim group receives tax dollars and puts out a sign that says, “No Christians need apply here”.
The direct funding of churches is being pushed by the Administration on the basis that for churches not to be able to compete for billions of federal dollars for social programs is “discrimination” against religion.
I think Mr. Madison and Mr. Jefferson would be surprised to hear that the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment discriminates against religion. I always thought that the 1st Amendment was intended to put religion on a pedestal far above the reach of politicians and government.
Even if one accepted the false notion that not directly funding churches with tax dollars is discrimination, I find it odd that the Administration’s solution to this discrimination against religion is to subsidize religious discrimination against federal job applicants.
Odder yet is that we presently have American Army Generals preaching the virtues of church-state separation in Iraq, while the Administration is attacking the wall of separation here at home.
For all of these reasons, I believe the threat to our religious freedom is real, it is now, it is methodical, and it is well-funded. The “patient revolutionaries” are at work, even as we speak today.
THE REAL QUESTION IS WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?
Right now I believe we are being out organized, and out financed, out strategized and out marketed. The fundamentalists opposing church-state separation have a long-term game plan and the patience, tenacity and resources to pursue that plan, which is to dismantle the Establishment Clause through Congress, Executive Orders and the Courts.
Our side is not without its strengths, the first of which is the valuable lesson of all of human history-- that government involvement in religion, harms religion, not helps it. In my opinion, the Baptist Joint Committee is doing great work, but with too limited resources. BJC has played a key role in all the successes we have had in during my tenure in Congress, but when you’re fighting against an army with several divisions, a platoon can only go so far.
Americans United Against Church and State and the ACLU continue to fight a good fight, but I believe the public, rightly or wrongly, sometimes sees these groups as being anti-religion.
We have scholars all across America that understand the history and importance of church-state issues, but too often they are too far removed from the political arena.
Without suggesting I have ever had a monopoly on wisdom, because I never have, I would like to suggest ______things we must do to win the short and long-term war against church-state separation.
First, we people of faith, laymen and pastors alike, must make a renewed, passionate commitment to protecting our religious liberty. Even though this issue has been the single most important one to me in my 20 years in public office, my recent conversations with John Baugh on the assaults against church-state separation have inspired me to try to do much more.
With his consummate business skills, Mr. Baugh reminds me that we don’t need talk, we need action.
I am reminded of a story Governor Mark White once told me. He was in the middle of his re-election campaign against Bill Clements when a supporter came to him and said, Governor, I hope you drown your opponent in this election and proceeded to give Governor While a check.
The Governor looked at it, handed it back to his supporter and said, “Unfortunately, with that kind of support, I can’t even get his feet wet.”
My point is that Mr. Baugh is right to say, in effect, we need to back our commitment to religious liberty with our passionate deeds, not just our passionate words.
Second, we need to bring together all of the major groups committed to church-state separation and take an inventory of our strengths and weaknesses.
Third, we then need to put together a short-term and long-term, coordinated plan with specific goals and timetables.
Fourth, we must do a better job of educating the media on the importance of church-state separation. I have been appalled at the lack of national attention to this constitutional issue, but with recent threats being more visible, we have a window of opportunity to educate and utilize the media to get our message out to the public.
Fifth, too many of our groups are hindered in directly lobbying the Congress, because of their tax-exempt status as 501C3’s. I believe we need one or more 501C4’s that can directly lobby. We cannot win this battle playing defense all the time, anymore than a football team could do so. We must go on the offensive with the public, Congress, press and courts.
Sixth, we must develop effective grassroots lobbying. The best lobbyist associations today are not those that just go see Members of Congress directly. They have the ability to get constituents back home to lobby their respective Members. Let me be blunt. We are in the Little Leagues on this front, while the opposition is in the Major Leagues. We can change this imbalance, and we must do so. We should be able to immediately galvanize 100 people in every key Congressional district to meet with Members and write letters to them and letters to their newspaper editors.
Seventh, I believe Baptists must reassert their historic national role in protecting the 1st Amendment. The Baptist Joint Committee can do this, but it must have the resources to do so. If you’ll pardon the Baptist interpretation of my Mark White story, we have to decide if we are going to baptize the opposition, or just get their feet wet.
Eighth, and finally, I believe our greatest single void in the church-state fight is that if we convince Members of Congress to vote to protect religious liberty, we cannot leave them hanging out to dry when the Christian Coalition attacks them in their next campaign. We not only need them back to vote in the next Congress, I can tell you this for a fact. If we develop a coordinated national effort on church-state issues, but then fundamentalists defeat even one or two Members of Congress over church-state votes, we will have set back our cause by decades. Members who agree with us on the principles will vote against us based on the politics. That is a fact of life, and it is absolutely miraculous that this hasn’t happened recently.
That is why I believe it is imperative that we have a Jefferson/Madison list…that is, a nationwide network of citizens who, when called upon in targeted races, will give $10, $100, $500 or $1000 to a principled candidate under attack.
If Emily’s List can develop 250,000 such contributors nationwide for pro-choice, Democratic women, then surely we can build a nationwide network of supporters willing to say that the religious freedom of their children and grandchildren is worthy of financial support. Keep tuned in. We are working on this.
If all else I say is eminently forgettable, let me repeat one thing I referenced earlier. In the fight to protect religious freedom, we must act boldly and we must act now. We must act with passion in word and deed, because the status quo is not good enough.
Just as you have protected the Baptist General Convention from fundamentalist assaults, we can and we must, as people of faith, be good stewards in protecting God’s gift of religious freedom. Failure cannot be an option.