47
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 7:
Line 7: − Conservative legal scholars like Erwin Griswold, Dean of the Harvard Law School, criticized this ruling. Griswold said in a major speech that the Court had no authority to prohibit prayer in public school:<ref>''Washington Star'' (Mar. 3, 1963)</ref>+
I think we can keep the unverified quote, because of the original research commandment, but I noted that he was a former dean
In addition America’s morality has declined. Since the banning of school prayer there has been a 225 percent increase in amount of children without fathers, a 343 percent rise in illegitimate births and a 454% enlargement in the violent crime rate. <ref>[http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/usadecline.html]</ref>
In addition America’s morality has declined. Since the banning of school prayer there has been a 225 percent increase in amount of children without fathers, a 343 percent rise in illegitimate births and a 454% enlargement in the violent crime rate. <ref>[http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/usadecline.html]</ref>
Erwin Griswold, a former Dean of the Harvard Law School, criticized this ruling. Griswold said in a speech that the Court had no authority to prohibit prayer in public school:<ref>''Washington Star'' (Mar. 3, 1963)</ref>
:Congress had made no law [as required by the text of the [[First Amendment]], and] those who wrote the 'establishment of religion' clause might be rather perplexed by the use which has been made of it in 1962. ... [I]t was unfortunate that the Court decided the case, one way or the other [because] there are some matters which are essentially local in nature ... to be worked out by the people themselves in their own communities. ... In a country which has a great tradition of tolerance, is it not important that minorities, who have benefited so greatly from that tolerance, should be tolerant, too?
:Congress had made no law [as required by the text of the [[First Amendment]], and] those who wrote the 'establishment of religion' clause might be rather perplexed by the use which has been made of it in 1962. ... [I]t was unfortunate that the Court decided the case, one way or the other [because] there are some matters which are essentially local in nature ... to be worked out by the people themselves in their own communities. ... In a country which has a great tradition of tolerance, is it not important that minorities, who have benefited so greatly from that tolerance, should be tolerant, too?