Ernest Istook: “if the gentleman would engage in a dialogue on this, because you are exactly right, you are right on target, I believe…”

“if the gentleman would engage in a dialogue on this, because you are exactly right, you are right on target, I believe, with your analysis, because religion has been relegated to a category of speech which must be controlled and limited, because supposedly it carries some danger or some threat. You are familiar, as an attorney, with a number of cases where the U.S. Supreme Court has said, even though the First Amendment states an absolute right of free speech, that does not give you the right to incite a crowd to rebel against the government or to engage in libelous and slanderous comment or to yell ``fire'' in a crowded theater and so forth. So, too, we have some limits on free speech, but we also have freedom of religion. They have placed expression of religion, prayer and similar things in a category that does not have the same protection as you mentioned of wearing a black arm band. There may be some other students in class who say, ``I am offended by your wearing of a black arm band,'' but that does not give them the right to censor the other student. But if the student says, ``I am offended because they offer the prayer,'' then the Supreme Court says, oh, well, in that case, we are going to say you cannot do it. The U.S. Supreme Court has passed decisions protecting the Nazi swastika. They have passed decisions protecting the burning of a cross.”