Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The moral principles enunciated in these quotations do not need elaboration. From a religious viewpoint, they express the God-given dignity and rights of all men. From a political standpoint, they express the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.

As implied in the bishops' statement, denial of these rights leads to social evils of the utmost gravity. When job opportunity is lacking, there is little incentive to seek proper education. Unskilled workers fill the ranks of the unemployed and the unemployable. They often add to our problems of crime, delinquency, and vice.

Economic evils also ensue. Failure to utilize available manpower is a social waste at any time. Under present world tensions, it creates a loss of output and skill that we cannot tolerate. Much of the chronic unemployment of our day has its roots in job discrimination. Workers: who never had the opportunity to obtain skills now find themselves completely unwanted in most labor markets.

Finally, we may advert to the legislative aspects of the problem. Fair employment legislation has been given adequate trial in many States and cities. Even without legislation, the Federal Government has used its prestige to prevent discrimination in its own hiring practices and in those of contractors to the Government. Accordingly, we know that this is a feasible type of legislation, proved by years of experience.

It is also badly needed. While it is difficult to state which areas of racial justice should have highest priority, any one familiar with the field would place job opportunity close to the top. Without it, there is no incentive for education and insufficient income for adequate housing and medical care. By contrast, the cultural and social advancement that follow from challenging work at good pay can be a powerful factor in uplifting those ground down by decades of discrimination.

I hope that this subcommittee will report favorably on this vital legislation.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Father Cronin, we are grateful to you for your very eloquent and fine expression. I think it is worthy to note that one reason that the committee particularly asked you, the previous witness, and the witness who will follow you, to come before the committee was to emphasize that while one aspect of the bill deals with discrimination on religious grounds, the whole matter of discrimination has a far higher meaning than would appear on the surface.

I think it essential to emphasize what you have brought out here so clearly, that the Catholic bishops of the United States have not just wanted a bill because of discrimination where it may exist against the employment of Catholics. They have placed it upon a ground which, it seems to me, is unassailable, which is that discrimination, whether it be because of religion or race or the other facets of discrimination, basically raises issues of such broad national import as well as moral import that it is a vital concern to church leaders of all faiths.

I think the leadership which you and your fine organization and the bishops have given in this effort has meant a tremendous amount and is largely responsible for the advances made so far not only in the States but, as you pointed out, in the Federal Government.

We would hope that your leadership perhaps may be even greater in the weeks and months ahead, for we will need your support until the final days of enactment of this legislation and, as my good friend, Mr. Goodell, has pointed out, this is not the easiest road we have embarked upon.

We are very grateful for your help and support.

Father CRONIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Goodell?

Mr. GOODELL. Father Cronin, I echo the comments of our chairman. We are very honored to have you come before our committee. I am particularly pleased you have emphasized the high priority_of a fair employment practices legislation in a civil rights program, because it points up the importance of motivation for these people who are downtrodden in one respect or another because of discrimination. Your final comment that this will give them a new incentive to being educated and trained because they feel they will have an opportunity, when they finally finish, to be treated equally, I think is very sound and very helpful to us.

Father CRONIN. Thank you.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Father Cronin, may I just say to you what I said, I believe yesterday, to Dr. A. Dudley Ward, when he was before the committee, that one of our problems is working through the existing channels of communication to be able to direct to the Members of Congress the really true widespread support based upon very deep principles that this legislation has and, as I said to him I would say to you, I do not want you to indulge in propaganda efforts. Yet, I do feel if there can be a proper expression from every facet of life, including such channels of communication as may be available to you and your organization, we will be grateful for it because I think it would give expression to the kind of feeling which exists but many times is not expressed or does not come to the attention of the general public and which, if it does, perhaps will make our path a little bit easier.

Father CRONIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Thank you very much, Father Cronin.

Again my appreciation to you for your effort and time in coming

to us.

The last witnesses before the committee this morning is Dr. Dana McLean Greeley, president of the Unitarian Universalist Association of North America.

Dr. Greeley, we are very pleased and happy to have you with us. You have heard the previous witnesses, I believe. So it will come as no surprise to you that we feel very strongly that while we have developed with great effort the practical results which are involved in this legislation or legislative effort, we feel that it must and should be grounded in some very deep principles. We have made an effort, therefore, to get expressions of opinion from the broadest possible range of those who would truly be said to be influential both from a practical and a moral point of view, and we want to welcome you as representing one of the finest associations in American life. We appreciate the fact that you have been willing to come before us.

STATEMENT OF DR. DANA MCLEAN GREELEY, PRESIDENT, UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST ASSOCIATION OF NORTH AMERICA

Dr. GREELEY. I am very happy indeed to follow in the right sequence my two colleagues, the rabbi and the priest.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman and the subcommittee, for the real privilege and the honor of being able to testify with respect to this most important piece of proposed legislation. It is in defense of American principles and of national security, I believe, of our national reputation and even therefore of world peace.

I represent the Unitarian Universalist Association of North America as it president, Dana McLean Greeley, and the denomination which I have the privilege of representing is composed of men and women who take seriously their obligations to their fellow men as every religious group does in this country of ours.

Both Unitarians and Universalists, joined together in one denomination since the spring of 1961, over a long period of years have consistently gone on record as favoring Federal and State legislation to insure equality of opportunity in employment for all our citizens without regard to considerations of race, color, ancestry, religious preference, sex, or age.

Our denomination, I wish it were needless to say, has applied these principles in its own life. One cannot pray on his knees on the Sabbath and prey on his neighbors during the remainder of the week and represent American idealism adequately. One cannot discriminate against his fellow men in this Nation and contribute to the strength and the destiny of the American Republic.

I will read to this committee the effect of some of the more recent resolves made by the people of our faith, Unitarians and Universalists, in their separate conventions previously assembled.

I will preface this reading by pointing out that these resolutions were voted upon and adopted in every case by delegates to annual meetings who were representative of our congregations in cities and towns throughout the United States.

The American Unitarian Association, for example, in 1954, adopted this resolve:

Sustained by a deep concern for the worth, dignity, and creative growth of the individual, we reaffirm a faith which commits us to acceptance of all men. and willingness to accord to all men, whatever their weaknesses, strengths, and differences, the maximum opportunity to develop their creative potential. Such a faith implies that upon the extent and intensity of a man's love for all man. kind depends not the strength of our religious faith alone but even its ultimate survival.

Where social, perceptual, and behavioral barriers exist, we shall attack them directly. We shall make all men welcome and judge every man on individual merit alone. By our practice no less than our word would we proclaim our message of hope and confidence to a world desperately in need of a philosophy of love and understanding.

In 1960 our women's group resolved:

Let it be the concern of the Alliance of Unitarian Women to consider discrimination inflicted upon groups because of color, politics, religion, or sex, whether it be on the job, at the polls, in school, or before our courts, and to join in appropriate expression and action which will intensify efforts to put an end to such inequalities where they exist.

པས་

Or, consider this resolution of 1958 by the National Assembly of Churches and Fellowships:

All forms of racial discrimination are contrary to the constitutional, moral and religious principles of the United States, and harm both our own selfrespect and the respect in which other nations hold us, and must be ended * * *. Therefore we urge all people of good will to work unremittingly toward abolishing all official sanctions and practices that require racial segregation in public schools, public transportation, public housing, and other publicly supported facilities: eliminating racial restrictions on membership in churches, professional organizations, labor unions, and similar semipublic bodies; eliminating racial discrimination in employment and housing; promoting mutual understanding betweeen members of different races by all available means, including working together in organizations having members of different races; encouraging the spread of information about successful action to end or lessen racial discrimination and promote racial understanding.

In the words of our resolution of 1960:

We go on record as endorsing the principle of strong civil rights legislation in this or the next Congress. And therefore be it resolved that such civil rights legislation provide a simple and speedy remedy for those denied the right to vote, give the U.S. Attorney General the right to initiate complaints, promote integration in public schools in furtherance of the decree of the U.S. Supreme Court, and provide equal job opportunities for all Americans.

Members of our faith are concerned with this problem of equal opportunity. We are concerned because we feel that equality of opportunity is at the very heart and core of the democratic ideal. Democracy, by definition, must insure certain rights to its citizens. It must guarantee the opportunity for participating in the process of selecting those who will govern. It must provide for freedom of expression so that the wants and needs of the people may be translated into action and achievement.

Democracy, conversely, like other forms of society, demands certain obligations of its citizens-that they pay taxes, that their young men serve in the Armed Forces and, if need be, defend their country with their lives.

If society asks for sacrifices of its people, then the people are entitled to ask something of their society. It is a well-known factaltogether too well known to members of this committee who have so exhaustively investigated and studied this problem-that great numbers of Americans do not share the same opportunities for employment as other Americans.

Great numbers of Negroes, Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, Indians, persons of religious persuasions in the minority in a given community; men and women over 65 (or even simply over 40 years of age); women capable of performing identical work as their menfolk-all of these groups have felt the sting of disappointment because of discriminatory practices in hiring and firing, in promotion and compensation, and other employment conditions.

How can we measure the heartache and spiritual suffering of the dark-skinned American who has perhaps received a 4-year college education, yet is unable to find a job commensurate with his abilities? Or the member of the minority group who is the first to be laid off in a recess?

How can we measure the loss to the Nation and to the economy of unused skills and undeveloped potentialities? How can we measure the dollar value of talents which are left to languish because, through fear or hatred, they are not properly utilized?

How can we measure the loss of international prestige and good will when these discriminations are broadcast through the world by our enemies and our disillusioned friends?

It is not enough to say that there is no exact measurement for anguish and suffering. Juries are asked to award damages on the basis of mental anguish and suffering in civil actions. Judges in our courts are asked to make judgments in these "gray" areas.

It is no answer to these people to say that we believe in individual initiative and the right of an employer to hire and fire whom he pleases, or that a labor union may restrict its membership by unwritten rule to whites.

We must give a clear, affirmative answer and state unequivocally our belief in human brotherhood and human dignity. We must strive for justice in human relations so that the lesson is driven home that people should be accepted or rejected on their own merits as workers and as individuals and not as Negroes or Jews or Catholics.

Practical experience, however, dictates that if we are ever to achieve these goals, we must back up our good intentions with law.

I believe the kind of law your committee proposes can do the job. I have read your preliminary draft carefully. It seems to me to embrace just the right sort of combination of voluntarism and compulsion which will make it work.

I am happy to see that there is ample room under the procedures advocated for discussion, conciliation, and persuasion before resort is made to formal proceedings and restraining orders, and with which, Mr. Chairman, you are not unacquainted, a commission against discrimination has found that in the overwhelming majority of cases persuasion was enough to bring about an end to discrimination.

Since 1946, when Massachusetts became one of the first States of the Union to adopt a fair employment practices law, only 5 cases of discrimination have had to be brought up for formal hearing. An average of 300 to 400 cases a year are processed by the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. In some 30 to 40 percent of the cases, complaints are dropped for lack of probable cause while in the remainder, amicable solutions are found through persuasion and conciliation. The law, first applied to employment, has been expanded to include discrimination in housing and public accommodations.

In employment discrimination cases, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination has, time after time, successfully persuaded employers to change their hiring policies to grant equal treatment. Today in the Bay State, Negroes and members of other minority groups can be seen working happily on a basis of equality with their fellow citizens in retail, manufacturing, and other industries. Although there is still much to be accomplished, significant progress has been made.

I cite this particular State illustratively. I am sure that results have been much the same in others of the 20-odd States where fair employment and similar civil rights legislation is on the books. I think it is important, in light of the remarkable success scored by the methods of persuasion, to assure those who might, because of regional associations, hesitate to vote for this act, that this is not punitive legislation. But, rather, this is eminently fair legislation applying the best workable procedures in our American legal and administrative experience.

« AnteriorContinuar »