I think the gentleman has stated things very well. I appreciate your recognition and expression of the fact that this amendment is about tolerance. Some people have developed the mistaken notion that if they are present when somebody says something with which they disagree, that they have been put upon. Well, hearing something with which you disagree and being respectful of it does not mean you agree with it. It happens all the time on the floor of this House. It happens all the time in classrooms at school. And to single out religion and say, you cannot say something that does not have unanimous approval because it infringes on someone else's rights, what you are really doing is stomping on the rights of almost everyone just because somebody there is intolerant. I think of the case, this was the graduation prayer case, the prayer there was said by a Jewish rabbi. The Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional to expect people to be there because they would be expected to be respectful. That interfered with their constitutional rights. I suggest to you and to everyone that if they said, well, we expect students to be respectful when somebody is speaking, we expect them to be respectful if the school choir is singing a song, we expect them to be respectful of all the occasions, but if it is a prayer, you cannot expect respect. What a terrible doctrine the Supreme Court unleashed there. We have to correct it.
Ernest Istook: “I think the gentleman has stated things very well. I appreciate your recognition and expression of the fact that this…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of tolerance and respect for religious expression in schools.
Share
More from Ernest Istook
Just because people that may do a corporate inversion, may choose to go to these countries does not mean that everybody that is in there is. If you live in a country or in a city where there is a lot of crime, it does not mean that you are…
I feel the need to speak a little bit in greater length because of the consequences of this point of order. This point of order would strike the final two provisos in section 218 but leave intact the remainder of that section. Those…
The fact that there may be corporate expatriates in these countries does not mean you should disqualify everybody that is in those countries. If you want to get at corporate expatriates, go after them, but do not say that because, maybe…
Mr. Chairman, of course the effect of the point of order raised is to take the money that was in the bill, $900 million, the amount requested by the administration for Amtrak, and to remove it. I regret that the people who are staunch…





