RICHMOND - A collection of controversial bills that critics argue infringe on a citizen's constitutional right to freedom of religion were heard Monday in two Virginia House of Delegates committees.
Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Manassas, easily convinced the Education Committee to support his bill mandating that the national motto, ``In God We Trust," be placed prominently in every Virginia public school. The committee moved it to the House floor for debate. Then the Courts of Justice Committee approved another Marshall bill requiring that the same motto be displayed in each commonwealth courtroom.
Meanwhile, Del. L. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Dale City, sought the Courts of Justice Committee's approval of his bill that would provide school districts the option of whether to put the Ten Commandments in their schools. The panel decided it needed time to review Supreme Court decisions and will vote Friday on Lingamfelter's bill.
Marshall's ``In God We Trust" proposal for schools, he said, ``helps solemnize the proceedings that take place within these places of learning." The national motto, he said, is an expression of hope, particularly needed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
``Like the American flag and other national statements, our national motto symbolizes our common identity as Americans," Marshall told the committee, which passed the bill. ``And the display of the motto in our public buildings helps reinforce our citizens' sense of membership in our nation."
>But ``In God We Trust" is more than a motto, the American Civil Liberties Union contends; it is a religious statement.
Young students are impressionable and easily coerced, the ACLU argued in an e-mail message sent Sunday to all members of the House Education Committee. Children are taught to believe what they learn in school, and the national motto will be taken as an instruction to believe in God.
Robert S. Alley, a retired professor of religion from the University of Richmond, said he has opposed ``numerous legislative assaults" against the First Amendment over the past four decades, but none was as ``gratuitous or foolish" as Marshall's bill. Authorizing ``In God We Trust" is a blatant promotion of religion, he said, because it is difficult to argue the phrase connotes anything else.
``It's a phrase with absolutely no definition in our current United States culture," said Alley, who also sits on the board of directors of the ACLU's Virginia chapter. ```In God We Trust' has about as much meaning as, `Have a nice day.'"
Marshall's bill places the state Attorney General's Office in charge of defending the law when it comes under legal challenge. The legislation also allows schools to accept private contributions to pay for the placards to take the fiscal burden off local school districts.
A similar proposal last year from Marshall made it through the House Education Committee, but was stopped in the companion committee on the Senate side. Its chief opponent was Sen. Richard L. Saslaw, D-Springfield, who responded Monday to a comment from Marshall that the senator ``will not get his way again."
``His bill wouldn't pass last year and I wouldn't put a whole lot of money on it passing again," Saslaw said.
Lingamfelter's Ten Commandments bill faced a tougher challenge in the House Courts of Justice Committee.
His legislation would require the State Board of Education and the state attorney general to develop guidelines regarding the posting of the commandments in schools. It would give local school boards the option of whether to put them up.
``We must reject the failed arguments of the last 50 years that somehow the influence of morality and religion is a bad thing," Lingamfelter told the committee, ``that somehow our nation will be more just, more righteous and more compassionate if we are more secular."
The bill received significant opposition, including an enthusiastic lecture by Michael Allan Wolf, a University of Richmond history and law professor, on the many different versions of the Ten Commandments, the different translations, languages and meanings.
``Do you really want to open up this can of worms?" Wolf asked. ``You do not want to enter this fray."
The committee's special counsel told the panel that he believes, based on past U.S. Supreme Court decisions, that the posting of the commandments ``in any fashion whatsoever clearly violates the First Amendment establishment clause."
But Lingamfelter was undeterred and is hopeful the bill will pass committee on Friday.
``If we don't put this out there where people can see we're doing this in a fair, modern, prudent way, then [the Supreme Court] won't have an opportunity to reconsider," he said.