Monday, June 28, 1999
Commandments fight spreads
U.S. House mirrors local debate
BY CHRISTINE WOLFF
The Cincinnati Enquirer
Carved granite stones outside four Adams County schools have led to a heated battle.
| ZOOM |
|
A Catholic boy who sat alone in an Adams County classroom more than 40 years ago today remembers well the sting of being left out.
Berry Baker's fourth-grade classmates were gone to church that day long ago, marched by the teacher to a local Protestant service commemorating Good Friday.
“I argued with the teacher and prevailed. She left me alone in the classroom,” Mr. Baker recalled. “I was 10 ... I felt they were trying to force me to go to their church. I'm sure there was confusion — "Why are they doing this?'”
Mr. Baker still argues religious freedom with authority figures. This time, his fight is in federal court in Cincinnati against the Adams County/Ohio Valley school board. His goal: removal of granite monuments carved with the Protestant Ten Commandments from in front of four Adams County high schools.
His battle got a surprise hit — or maybe a boost — from action last week in Congress. The House of Representatives voted 248-180 to give state legislatures the authority to decide whether the Ten Commandments can be displayed on public property.
For decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that religious items — the Bible's Ten Commandments, crosses, Nativity scenes — are unconstitutional when displayed in such places as public schools and courtrooms. The displays violate the Constitution's First Amendment, which prevents government endorsement of a religion, according to the court.
The measure made it to the House floor as an amendment attached by Rep. Robert Aderholt, R-Ala., to a juvenile justice bill. The juvenile justice bill passed the House last week; it had been split from a gun-control bill that House members voted down.
The amendment goes before the Senate this summer and must be approved by President Clinton before becoming law.
The House vote, according to Mr. Baker, proves the need for his lawsuit, filed in February by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Hear ings in the case begin next spring.
“The House is saying the monuments now are illegal, or they wouldn't be trying to pass a law to make them legal,” Mr. Baker said.
The vote, he said, takes Congress in the wrong direction.
“I think maybe we are looking at a country that has not taken the time to fully understand the Bill of Rights, if we have representatives who think that way,” Mr. Baker said. “If I were a representative, I would have a hard time voting for that.”
Mr. Baker, 54, who works in the telecommunications business, grew up in Adams County and graduated from high school there in 1962. A bachelor with no children, he is again — since starting the fight against the monuments — feeling the sting of standing alone against the majority. He declined to be photographed for this article.
Most Adams County residents want the monuments to stay. They have packed gymnasiums for rallies, stuck thousands of pro-Ten Commandments signs in front yards and donated about $13,000 to the cause.
There are “more than a handful of people who agree with me,” Mr. Baker said. But they stay silent rather than face pressure from neighbors, he said.
He's not an atheist, he said, but he's no longer a Catholic nor a Christian nor a follower of any organized religion.
His first look at the schoolyard Ten Commandments monuments disturbed him so much, “I came close to upchucking,” he said. “I felt 50 years of religious freedom going down the drain.”
Mr. Baker created the fictional Center for Phallic Worship and asked to be allowed to display phallic symbols at the schools, “to test the school board,” he said.
“I felt that the board would be in better legal grounds if they allowed others to go up,” he said. “If they give 10 square feet to the ministers (for the Ten Commandments monuments), then give 10 square feet to others.
“If the board was secure in their belief that the monuments were there legally, they would either have given permission or politely said, "I'm sorry,'” he said. “They didn't do either one. They ignored one request and granted the other.”
The school board is not commenting while the lawsuit is pending. Superintendent Albert Porter issued a statement after the House vote saying it was gratifying to see Congress sharing “the sentiment of Adams County residents.”
The House's pro-Ten Commandments stand isn't likely to become law, said Rep. Rob Portman, R-Terrace Park, who voted for the amendment but sees, too, the constitutional roadblocks it faces.
The vote is a “message to the Supreme Court,” Mr. Portman said.
“There have been (religious display) cases where the court has said, "If Congress wanted this, they would have acted.' Here, we're acting,” Mr. Portman said. “I think the amendment is part of a larger effort that is needed to restore moral values in schools and homes and society in general.”
Rep. Ted Strickland, D-Lucasville, voted against the amendment — the only local congressman to do so. The House's action is wrong, he said, because, singling out the Ten Commandments places the government in the position of favoring one religious expression over another. Despite the amendment, Mr. Strickland voted to pass the juvenile justice package.
“I had a lot of internal arguments with myself about my vote (for the package),” said Mr. Strickland, an ordained Methodist minister. “I support the Ten Commandments, and I also support the First Amendment. ... I think if it becomes law, it could result in continuous conflict within our schools between religious denominations and religious beliefs.”
The House vote reaffirmed “our nation's commitment to morality and decency,” said Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Cincinnati, who supported the amendment.
“I firmly believe it was the right thing to do,” Mr. Chabot said. “I think it's time that Congress actually stood up for principles and reinforced the importance of morality in society.
“Our Founding Fathers over 200 years ago never intended to strip religion out of public life,” Mr. Chabot said. “That's the direction we went, and we went way too far. I hope the pendulum is swinging back.”
Mr. Baker feels as strongly about the “good moral grounds” behind his lawsuit. He saw the monuments and “intuitively knew it would be me to raise the question,” he said.
“The placement (of the monuments) is immoral because it puts one religion over another,” he said. “Why did I react this way? It all goes back to what happened to me as a child. I don't think anyone — man, woman or child — should have to go through that.”
Money stacked against HMO bill
Shirey may have dodged the ax
Commandments fight spreads
Rainfall isn't too far off normal
Use courtesy near funeral processions
Church will rebuild after collapse
Powerball bouncing toward $130M
Boone Co. growth crowds 50-year-old nursery
Take action against aging
Authors offer advice for staying young
GET TO IT
Smallest sculptures steal a big Carnegie show
Bike patrol grows for summer
Camper fire delays I-75 traffic
Counties weigh 911 dispatch merger
Dancing, fun draw Irish to downtown celebration
Family fest adds a day - and a wedding
Gay pride flag burned at capitol in protest
Journey for mental health makes strides
Library branch renamed after retiring director
Mason to deliver with new post office
TRISTATE DIGEST
