HISTORY 211: U. S. HISTORY SINCE 1945 Summer 2017 Tuesdays: 7/11, 7/18, 7/25, 8/1, 8/8, 8/15 6:30 p.m. 9:20 p.m.

Transcription

1 HISTORY 211: U. S. HISTORY SINCE 1945 Summer 2017 Tuesdays: 7/11, 7/18, 7/25, 8/1, 8/8, 8/15 6:30 p.m. 9:20 p.m. Kimberly J.M. Wilson, M.A. (513) Prerequisites None Required Texts Boyer, Paul S. Promises to Keep: The United States Since World War II. 3 rd Ed. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., This is the secondary source. Chafe, William H. and Harvard Sitkoff, editors. A History of Our Time: Readings on Postwar America. 8 th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, This is the primary sourcebook. Course Description This course examines the events and forces that helped transform American society during the last half-century. The Cold War, the Civil Rights movement, the Vietnam War, and neo-conservatism are among the topics to be considered. Please note that this is an accelerated course. As such, reduced class time is offset by greater demands outside of class. It is expected that you will devote approximately 20 hours of independent study in preparation for each meeting. Classroom Format and Expectations This class is a combination of lecture and discussion. We will also view film and news clips. In order to facilitate intelligent class discussion, it is vital that reading assignments be completed on time. Learning Objectives Upon completing this course, students will be able to: Demonstrate knowledge of the important events and movements that have affected American history since World War II. Critically analyze primary sources relevant to historical questions posed for class assignments. Examine historical problems related to the postwar period, addressing them in short essays. Academic Integrity Please be reminded that plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty are extremely serious offenses and carry serious consequences, including potential expulsion. Please refer to the Academic Honesty and Procedures for Restitution and Discipline sections in the undergraduate catalog for the definitions and penalties associated with academic misconduct. Classroom Policies Attendance is required at all class sessions. One exception may be made in extreme circumstances at my discretion. Missing more than one class will seriously jeopardize your ability to pass the course, regardless of performance in other aspects of the class. In addition, please be on time for class. Students are expected to stay for the entire class. If you must leave early, please let me know beforehand. All written work done outside of class must be typewritten in 11 or 12-pt. Times New Roman font, double-spaced, stapled if more than one page, and use one-inch margins. All work should be proofread for errors in spelling, syntax, punctuation, and grammar.

2 Please do not study for other classes, read other materials, engage in private conversations, or sleep in class. In addition, please do not eat food during our class discussion time and please disable cell phones during class. Assignments You are not required to use any research outside of the class materials. Please don t use Wikipedia, as not everything you find there is accurate. See the New Yorker article for more information: You should be able to support your written opinions with the assigned readings. I strongly suggest that you complete the assignments in order; that is, read the required pages in order. These assignments are designed to help you shape your opinion. Finally, although you will be drawing much of your background information from Promises to Keep, be careful not to simply repeat or paraphrase Boyer s words. To do so would be a form of plagiarism, a serious breach of academic integrity. Include quotation marks around any direct quote that you use, and include in parentheses the page number where the quote is from. In addition, the primary documents from A History of Our Time must be directly used in all assigned essays. In your essays you must directly quote from ALL of the primary source documents (not the preface of the document) assigned from A History of Our Time. Example 1: Dwight Eisenhower strongly believed that the prospect of domination of the nation s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded (Chafe, 35). Example 2: In describing her sit-in experience, Anne Moody recalled that a waitress had turned the lights off on her and then, she and the other waitresses almost ran to the back of the store leaving Anne with the other angry customers (Chafe, 129). Please try not to use direct quotes of more than 3 lines; instead, paraphrase what is written. Evaluation Discussion and Participation: Discussion will be an important component of our class meetings and you are strongly encouraged to take part. Participation will constitute 20% of your final grade. Essays: Essays will demonstrate your ability to craft a historical argument and to support it with appropriate primary and secondary sources. PRIMARY DOCUMENTS MUST BE DIRECTLY USED IN ESSAYS. In your essays you must directly quote from the primary source documents. See above examples. You will submit five essays (including the pre-assignment). These five essays will comprise 60% of your final grade. There will be a Final Exam held on the last day of class, August 15. This exam will be comprised of multiple choice questions and one essay question. The Final Exam will comprise 20% of your final grade. METHODS OF ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING OUTCOMES: You will demonstrate your ability to examine a historical problem or concept by analyzing both primary and secondary sources through short essays. Final Grade: A %. B 80-89% C 70-79% D 60-69% F 0-59%

3 Class Schedule First Meeting (July 11): The Early Cold War Era ( ) Read by today: Promises to Keep: Ch. 2 (all), Ch. 3 (pg ), Ch. 4 (pg ), Ch. 5 (pg ), and Ch. 6 (pg ). A History of Our Time: Kennan s The Necessity for Containment (pg ); McCarthy s The Internal Communist Menace (pg ); President Eisenhower s Farewell Address (pg ); Kennedy s Inaugural Address (pg ) and The Cuban Missile Crisis: President Kennedy s Address to the Nation (pg ). Due today: Pre-assignment (Essay 1): Drawing on the readings assigned listed above, prepare a 4 to 5-page essay on the impact of the Cold War in shaping postwar (WWII) politics from the Truman through the Kennedy administrations. You must discuss the Cold War policies of Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy, as well as McCarthyism. Pay particular attention to the readings in A History of Our Time and use them to support your argument for this essay. Do not simply rely on your previous beliefs or on your gut instincts to support your opinion; rather, make use of the assigned materials. Historians interpret the meaning of the past based on an honest analysis of the evidence at their disposal. When writing your paper, remember that historians generally write in the third person, past tense. This means that historians do not use the word I. Note that even when Boyer is giving his own interpretation, except for his preface he does not shift to the first person "I." Also, note that he refers to events as though they indeed occurred in the past ( Harry Truman set out to. ), not as though those events were still occurring ( Truman sets out to. ). Your essay should not be a first draft. It should be carefully proofread to ensure that it is clearly written and free of errors in spelling, punctuation, grammar, and syntax. Excessive mistakes will lower your grade. The Pre-Assignment should be completed for the first class meeting on July 11, 201. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions at wilsonkjm@yahoo.com. Second Meeting (July 18): The Civil Rights Movement Read by today: Promises to Keep: Ch. 5 (pg ), Ch. 8 (all), and Ch. 9 (pg ). A History of Our Time: Brown v. Board of Education (pg ); Declaration of Constitutional Principles: The Southern Manifesto (pg ); Moody s A Lunch- Counter Sit-In in Jackson, Mississippi (pg ); and the Black Panther s What We Want, What We Believe (pg ). Due today: Essay # 2: Drawing on the readings, write a 4 to 5-page essay in which you describe the oppressiveness of the American racial system (laws, attitudes and informal practices) that prevailed as late as the 1960s. Describe (giving specific examples from among the primary documents) the toll this system exacted on the lives of African Americans. Discuss some of the ways in which the civil rights movement addressed these issues.

4 Third Meeting (July 25): The Vietnam Escalation and the Counterculture Movement Read by today: Promises to Keep: Ch. 9 (pg ), Ch. 10 (all), and Ch. 11 (pg ). A History of Our Time: Johnson s Peace Without Conquest (pg ); Moore and Galloway s We Were Soldiers Once and Young pg , March on Washington (pg ); Kerry s Vietnam Veteran s Against the War (pg ); and Clinton s Letter to the Draftboard (pg ). Due today: Essay #3: Drawing on the readings, write a 4 to 5-page essay in which you answer the following questions: How and why was U.S. commitment to the Vietnam War expanded in ? What role did actions by previous administrations play? How and why did public opinion shift against the war and with what consequences? (Remember to use the primary documents to support your argument.) Fourth Meeting (August 1): The Nixon Era and Its Aftermath in the 1970s Read by today: Promises to Keep: Ch. 11 (pg ), Ch. 12 (pg ), and Ch. 13 (pg and ). A History of Our Time and Attached Documents: Richard Nixon s Remarks at Andrews Air Force Base on Returning from the People s Republic of China (attached to syllabus); "Basic Principles of Relations Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (attached to syllabus); and McQuaid s Watergate (pg ). Due Today: Essay #4: Most historians agree that both Nixon s policy of détente and the Watergate scandal were two of the most pivotal events in 1970s. In a 4 to 5-page essay explain why these two events were significant and how they changed America forever. (Remember to use the primary documents to support your argument.) Fifth Meeting (August 8): From Reagan to 9/11 Read by today: Promises to Keep: Ch. 14 (pg , ), Ch. 15 (437-43), and Ch. 16 ( ). Evil Empire Speech (attached to syllabus). A History of Our Time and Attached Documents: Reagan's Speech to the National Association of Evangelicals (attached document); Herring s From the Persian Gulf War to Iraq and Afghanistan : Confronting the Post-Cold War World (pg ); Coates and Vok s 9/11 (pg ); Bush s Axis of Evil Speech (pg ). Due Today: Essay #5: In a 4 to 5-page essay, answer the following questions: How did Ronald Reagan s policies lead to the end of the Cold War? In what ways have the events of September 11, 2001 grown out of the Cold War and its demise? Sixth Meeting (August 15): Final Exam A comprehensive exam covering all of the material covered in class for the first five weeks of class. There will be a combination of multiple choice questions and one essay question

5 Richard Nixon s Remarks at Andrews Air Force Base on Returning from the People s Republic of China, February 28, 1972 Mr. Vice President, Members of the Congress, members of the Cabinet, members of the diplomatic corps, and ladies and gentlemen: I want to express my very deep appreciation, and the appreciation of all of us, for this wonderfully warm welcome that you have given us and for the support that we have had on the trip that we have just completed from Americans of both political parties and all walks of life across this land. Because of the superb efforts of the hardworking members of the press who accompanied us--they got even less sleep than I did--millions of Americans in this past week have seen more of China than I did. Consequently, tonight I would like to talk to you not about what we saw but about what we did, to sum up the results of the trip and to put it in perspective. When I announced this trip last July, I described it as a journey for peace. In the last 30 years, Americans have in three different wars gone off by the hundreds of thousands to fight, and some to die, in Asia and in the Pacific. One of the central motives behind my journey to China was to prevent that from happening a fourth time to another generation of Americans. As I have often said, peace means more than the mere absence of war. In a technical sense, we were at peace with the People's Republic of China before this trip, but a gulf of almost 12,000 miles and 22 years of noncommunication and hostility separated the United States of America from the 750 million people who live in the People's Republic of China, and that is one-fourth of all the people in the world. As a result of this trip, we have started the long process of building a bridge across that gulf, and even now we have something better than the mere absence of war. Not only have we completed a week of intensive talks at the highest levels, we have set up a procedure whereby we can continue to have discussions in the future. We have demonstrated that nations with very deep and fundamental differences can learn to discuss those differences calmly, rationally, and frankly, without compromising their principles. This is the basis of a structure for peace, where we can talk about differences rather than fight about them. The primary goal of this trip was to reestablish communication with the People's Republic of China after a generation of hostility. We achieved that goal. Let me turn now to our joint communiquй. "We did not bring back any written or unwritten agreements that will guarantee peace in our time. We did not bring home any magic formula which will make unnecessary the efforts of the American people to continue to maintain the strength so that we can continue to be free. We made some necessary and important beginnings, however, in several areas. We entered into agreements to expand cultural, educational, and journalistic contacts between the Chinese and the American people. We agreed to work to begin and broaden trade between our two countries. We have agreed that the communications that have now been established between our governments will be strengthened and expanded.

6 Most important, we have agreed on some rules of international conduct which will reduce the risk of confrontation and war in Asia and in the Pacific. We agreed that we are opposed to domination of the Pacific area by any one power. We agreed that international disputes should be settled without the use of the threat of force and we agreed that we are prepared to apply this principle to our mutual relations. With respect to Taiwan, we stated our established policy that our forces overseas will be reduced gradually as tensions ease, and that our ultimate objective is to withdraw our forces as a peaceful settlement is achieved. We have agreed that we will not negotiate the fate of other nations behind their backs, and we did not do so at Peking. There were no secret deals of any kind. We have done all this without giving up any United States commitment to any other country. In our talks, the talks that I had with the leaders of the People's Republic and that the Secretary of State had with the office of the Government of the People's Republic in the foreign affairs area, we both realized that a bridge of understanding that spans almost 12,000 miles and 22 years of hostility can't be built in one week of discussions. But we have agreed to begin to build that bridge, recognizing that our work will require years of patient effort. We made no attempt to pretend that major differences did not exist between our two governments, because they do exist. This communiquй was unique in honestly setting forth differences rather than trying to cover them up with diplomatic double-talk. One of the gifts that we left behind in Hangchow was a planted sapling of the American redwood tree. As all Californians know, and as most Americans know, redwoods grow from saplings into the giants of the forest. But the process is not one of days or even years; it is a process of centuries. Just as we hope that those saplings, those tiny saplings that we left in China, will grow one day into mighty redwoods, so we hope, too, that the seeds planted on this journey for peace will grow and prosper into a more enduring structure for peace and security in the Western Pacific. But peace is too urgent to wait for centuries. We must seize the moment to move toward that goal now, and this is what we have done on this journey. As I am sure you realize, it was a great experience for us to see the timeless wonders of ancient China, the changes that are being made in modern China. And one fact stands out, among many others, from my talks with the Chinese leaders: It is their total belief, their total dedication, to their system of government. That is their right, just as it is the right of any country to choose the kind of government it wants. But as I return from this trip, just as has been the case on my return from other trips abroad which have taken me to over 80 countries, I come back to America with an even stronger faith in our system of government. As I flew across America today, all the way from Alaska, over the Rockies, the Plains, and then on to Washington, I thought of the greatness of our country and, most of all, I thought of the freedom, the opportunity, the progress that 200 million Americans are privileged to enjoy. I realized again this is a beautiful country. And tonight my prayer and my hope is that as a result of this trip, our children will have a better chance to grow up in a peaceful world. Thank you.

7 "Basic Principles of Relations Between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics." May 29, 1972 THE UNITED States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics Guided by their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and by a desire to strengthen peaceful relations with each other and to place these relations on the firmest possible basis, Aware of the need to make every effort to remove the threat of war and to create conditions which promote the reduction of tensions in the world and the strengthening of universal security and international cooperation, Believing that the improvement of US-Soviet relations and their mutually advantageous development in such areas as economics, science and culture, will meet these objectives and contribute to better mutual understanding and business-like cooperation, without in any way prejudicing the interests of third countries, Conscious that these objectives reflect the interests of the peoples of both countries, Have agreed as follows: First. They will proceed from the common determination that in the nuclear age there is no alternative to conducting their mutual relations on the basis of peaceful coexistence. Differences in ideology and in the social systems of the USA and the USSR are not obstacles to the bilateral development of normal relations based on the principles of sovereignty, equality, non-interference in internal affairs and mutual advantage. Second. The USA and the USSR at tach major importance to preventing the development of situations capable of causing a dangerous exacerbation of their relations. Therefore, they will do their utmost to avoid military confrontations and to prevent the outbreak of nuclear war. They will always exercise restraint in their mutual relations, and will be prepared to negotiate and settle differences by peaceful means. Discussions and negotiations on outstanding issues will be conducted in a spirit of reciprocity, mutual accommodation and mutual benefit. Both sides recognize that efforts to obtain unilateral advantage at the expense of the other, directly or indirectly, are inconsistent with these objectives. The prerequisites for maintaining and strengthening peaceful relations between the USA and the USSR are the recognition of the security interests of the Parties based on the principle of equality and the renunciation of the use or threat of force. Third. The USA and the USSR have a special responsibility, as do other countries which are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, to do everything in their power so that conflicts or situations will not arise which would serve to increase international tensions. Accordingly, they will seek to promote conditions in which all countries will live in peace and security and will not be subject to outside interference in their internal affairs. Fourth. The USA and the USSR intend to widen the juridical basis of their mutual relations and to exert the necessary efforts so that bilateral agreements which they have concluded and multilateral treaties and agreements to which they are jointly parties are faithfully implemented.

8 Fifth. The USA and the USSR reaffirm their readiness to continue the practice of exchanging views on problems of mutual interest and, when necessary, to conduct such exchanges at the highest level, including meetings between leaders of the two countries. The two governments welcome and will facilitate an increase in productive contacts between representatives of the legislative bodies of the two countries. Sixth. The Parties will continue their efforts to limit armaments on a bilateral as well as on a multilateral basis. They will continue to make special efforts to limit strategic armaments. Whenever possible, they will conclude concrete agreements aimed at achieving these purposes. The USA and the USSR regard as the ultimate objective of their efforts the achievement of general and complete disarmament and the establishment of an effective system of international security in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Seventh. The USA and the USSR regard commercial and economic ties as an important and necessary element in the strengthening of their bilateral relations and thus will actively promote the growth of such ties. They will facilitate cooperation between the relevant organizations and enterprises of the two countries and the conclusion of appropriate agreements and contracts, including long-term ones. The two countries will contribute to the improvement of maritime and air communications between them. Eighth. The two sides consider it timely and useful to develop mutual contacts and cooperation in the fields of science and technology. Where suitable, the USA and the USSR will conclude appropriate agreements dealing with concrete cooperation in these fields. Ninth. The two sides reaffirm their intention to deepen cultural ties with one another and to encourage fuller familiarization with each other's cultural values. They will promote improved conditions for cultural exchanges and tourism. Tenth. The USA and the USSR will seek to ensure that their ties and cooperation in all the abovementioned fields and in any others in their mutual interest are built on a firm and long-term basis. To give a permanent character to these efforts, they will establish in all fields where this is feasible joint commissions or other joint bodies. Eleventh. The USA and the USSR make no claim for themselves and would not recognize the claims of anyone else to any special rights or advantages in world affairs. They recognize the sovereign equality of all states. The development of U.S.-Soviet relations is not directed against third countries and their interests. Twelfth. The basic principles set forth in this document do not affect any obligations with respect to other countries earlier assumed by the USA and the USSR.

9 Reagan's Speech to the National Association of Evangelicals Orlando, Florida March 8, Those of you in the National Association of Evangelicals are known for you spiritual and humanitarian work. And I would be especially remiss if I didn't discharge right now one personal debt of gratitude. Thank you for your prayers. Nancy and I have felt their presence many times in many years. And believe me, for us they've made all the difference. The other day in the East Room of the White House at a meeting there, someone asked me whether I was aware of all the people out there who were praying for the President. And I had to say, "Yes, I am. I've felt it. I believe in intercessionary prayer." But I couldn't help but say to that questioner after he'd asked the question that - or at least say to them that if sometimes when he was praying he got a busy signal, it was just me in there ahead of him. I think I understand how Abraham Lincoln felt when he said, "I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go." From the joy and the good feeling of this conference, I go to a political reception. Now, I don't know why, but that bit of scheduling reminds me of a story - - which I'll share with you. An evangelical minister and a politician arrived at Heaven's gate one day together. And St. Peter, after doing all the necessary formalities, took them in hand to show them where their quarters would be. And he took them to a small, single room with a bed, a chair, and a table and said this was for the clergyman. And the politician was a little worried about what might be in store for him. And he couldn't believe it then when St. Peter stopped in front of a beautiful mansion with lovely grounds, many servants, and told him that these would be his quarters. And he couldn't help but ask, he said, "But wait, how-there's something wrong - how do I get this mansion while that good and holy man only gets a single room?" And St. Peter said, "You have to understand how things are up here. We've got thousands and thousands of clergy. You're the first politician who ever made it." But I don't want to contribute to a stereotype. So I tell you there are a great many God-fearing, dedicated, noble men and women in public life, present company included. And yes, we need your help to keep us ever mindful of the ideas and the principles that brought us into the public arena in the first place. The basis of those ideals and principles is a commitment to freedom and personal liberty that, itself, is grounded in the much deeper realization that freedom prospers only where the blessings of God are avidly sought and humbly accepted. The American experiment in democracy rests on this insight. Its discovery was the great triumph of our Founding Fathers, voiced by William Penn when he said: "If we will not be governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants." Explaining the inalienable rights of men, Jefferson said, "The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time." And it was George Washington who said that "of all the disposition and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supporters." And finally, that shrewdest of all observers of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville, put it eloquently after he had gone on a search for the secret of America's greatness and genius - and he said: "Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the greatness and the genius of America... America is good. And if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great."

10 Well, I'm pleased to be here today with you who are keeping America great by keeping her good. Only through your work and prayers and those of millions of others cans we hope to survive this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this last, best hope of man. I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, here people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communities - the institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for the rule of law under God. Now, I don't have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they're freeing us from superstitions of the past, they've taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a majority. An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy now going on in Washington. And since I'm involved I've been waiting to hear from the parents of young America. How far are they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents? Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An organization of citizens, sincerely motivated and deeply concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls well below the age of consent, some time ago established a nationwide network of clinics to offer help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault their intent. However, in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics have decided to provide advice and birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the knowledge of their parents. For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting parental consent or giving notification after they've done so. Girls termed "sexually active" - and that has replaced the word "promiscuous" - are given this help in order to prevent illegitimate birth or abortion. Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the parents such help has been given. One of the nation's leading newspapers has created the term "squeal rule" in editorializing against us for doing this, and we're being criticized for violating the privacy of young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction against an enforcement of our rule. I've watched TV panel shows discuss the issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one seems to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex. Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm? And isn't it the parents' right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from making mistakes that may affect their entire lives? Many of us in government would like to know what parents think about this intrusion in their family by government. We're going to fight in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of family take precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social engineers.

11 But the fight against parental notification is really only one example of many attempts to water down traditional values and even abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. When our Founding Fathers passed the First Amendment, they sought to protect churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the concept of religious belief itself. The evidence of this permeates our history and our government. The Declaration of Independence mentions the Supreme Being no less than four times. "In God We Trust" is engraved on our coinage. The Supreme Court opens its proceedings with a religious invocation. And the members of Congress open their sessions with a prayer. I just happen to believe the schoolchildren of the United States are entitled to the same privileges as Supreme Court justices and congressmen. Last year, I sent the Congress a constitutional amendment to restore prayer to public schools. Already this session, there's growing bipartisan support for the amendment, and I am calling on the Congress to act speedily to pass it and to let our children pray. Perhaps some of you read recently about the Lubbock school case, where a judge actually ruled that it was unconstitutional for a school district to give equal treatment to religious and nonreligious student groups, even when the group meetings were being held during the students' own time. The First Amendment never intended to require government to discriminate against religious speech. Senators Denton and Hatfield have proposed legislation in the Congress on the whole question of prohibiting discrimination against religious forms of student speech. Such legislation could go far to restore freedom of religious speech for public school students. And I hope the Congress considers these bills quickly. And with you help, I think it's possible we could also get the constitutional amendment through the Congress this year. More than a decade ago, a Supreme Court decision literally wiped off the books of fifty states statutes protecting the rights of unborn children. Abortion on demand now takes the lives of up to one and a half million unborn children a year. Human life legislation ending this tragedy will someday pass the Congress, and you and I must never rest until it does. Unless and until it can be proven that the unborn child is not a living entity, then its right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness must be protected. You may remember that when abortion on demand began, many, and indeed, I'm sure many of you, warned that the practice would lead to a decline in respect for human life, that the philosophical premises used to justify abortion on demand would ultimately be used to justify other attacks on the sacredness of human life&150;infanticide or mercy killing. Tragically enough, those warnings proved all too true. Only last year a court permitted the death by starvation of a handicapped infant. I have directed the Health and Human Services Department to make clear to every health care facility in the United States that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects all handicapped persons against discrimination based on handicaps, including infants. And we have taken the further step of requiring that each and every recipient of federal funds who provides health care services to infants must post and keep posted in a conspicuous place a notice stating that "discriminatory failure to feed and care for handicapped infants in this facility is prohibited by federal law." It also lists a twenty-four-hour, toll-free number so that nurses and others may report violations in time to save the infant's life. In addition, recent legislation introduced in the Congress by Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois not only increases restrictions on publicly financed abortions, it also addresses this whole problem of

12 infanticide. I urge the Congress to begin hearings and to adopt legislation that will protect the right of life to all children, including the disabled or handicapped. Now, I'm sure that you must get discouraged at times, but you've done better than you know, perhaps. There's a great spiritual awakening in America, a renewal of the traditional values that have been the bedrock of America's goodness and greatness. One recent survey by a Washington-based research council concluded that Americans were far more religious than the people of other nations; 95 percent of those surveyed expressed a belief in God and a huge majority believed the Ten Commandments had real meaning in their lives. And another study has found that an overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of adultery, teenage sex, pornography, abortion, and hard drugs. And this same study showed a deep reverence for the importance of family ties and religious belief. I think the items that we've discussed here today must be a key part of the nation's political agenda. For the first time the Congress is openly and seriously debating and dealing with the prayer and abortion issues&150;and that's enormous progress right there. I repeat: America is in the midst of a spiritual awakening and a moral renewal. And with your biblical keynote, I say today, "Yes, let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream." Now, obviously, much of this new political and social consensus I've talked about is based on a positive view of American history, one that takes pride in our country's accomplishments and record. But we must never forget that no government schemes are going to perfect man. We know that living in this world means dealing with what philosophers would call the phenomenology of evil or, as theologians would put it, the doctrine of sin. There is sin and evil in the world, and we're enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might. Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal. The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war, is now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism, anti-semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country. I know that you've been horrified, as have I, by the resurgence of some hate groups preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing of your churches to denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment given us is clear and simple: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." But whatever sad episodes exist in our past, any objective observer must hold a positive view of American history, a history that has been the story of hopes fulfilled and dreams made into reality. Especially in this century, America has kept alight the torch of freedom, but not just for ourselves but for millions of others around the world. And this brings me to my final point today. During my first press conference as president, in answer to a direct question, I point out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which will further their cause, which is world revolution. I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural ideas - that's their name for religion - or ideas that are outside class conceptions. Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class war. And

13 everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of the old, exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat. Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates a historical reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw this phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today. This doesn't mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an understanding with them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that it was the West that refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for territorial gain and which now proposes a 50-percent cut in strategic ballistic missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based, intermediate-range nuclear missiles. At the same time, however, they must be made to understand we will never compromise our principles and standards. We will never give away our freedom. We will never abandon our belief in God. And we will never stop searching for a genuine peace. But we can assure none of these things America stands for through the so-called nuclear freeze solutions proposed by some. The truth is that a freeze now would be a very dangerous fraud, for that is merely the illusion of peace. The reality is that we must find peace through strength. I would agree to freeze if only we could freeze the Soviets' global desires. A freeze at current levels of weapons would remove any incentive for the Soviets to negotiate seriously in Geneva and virtually end our chances to achieve the major arms reductions which we have proposed. Instead, they would achieve their objectives through the freeze. A freeze would reward the Soviet Union for its enormous and unparalleled military buildup. It would prevent the essential and long overdue modernization of United States and allied defenses and would leave our aging forces increasingly vulnerable. And an honest freeze would require extensive prior negotiations on the systems and numbers to be limited and on the measures to ensure effective verification and compliance. And the kind of a freeze that has been suggested would be virtually impossible to verify. Such a major effort would divert us completely from our current negotiations on achieving substantial reductions. A number of years ago, I heard a young father, a very prominent young man in the entertainment world, addressing a tremendous gathering in California. It was during the time of the cold war, and communism and our own way of life were very much on people's minds. And he was speaking to that subject. And suddenly, though, I heard him saying, "I love my little girls more than anything -" And I said to myself, "Oh, no, don't. You can't - don't say that." But I had underestimated him. He went on: "I would rather see my little girls die now, still believing in God, than have them grow up under communism and one day die no longer believing in God." There were thousands of young people in that audience. They came to their feet with shouts of joy. They had instantly recognized the profound truth in what he had said, with regard to the physical and the soul and what was truly important. Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness - pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.

14 It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable Screwtape Letters, wrote: "The greatest evil is not done now in those sordid 'dens of rime' that Dickens loved to paint. It is not even done in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do no need to raise their voice." Well, because these "quiet men" do no "raise their voices," because they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace, because, like other dictators before them, they're always making "their final territorial demand," some would have us accept them as their word and accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history teaches anything, it teaches that simpleminded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom. So, I urge you to speak our against those who would place the United States in a position of military and moral inferiority. You know, I've always believed that old Screwtape reserved his best efforts for those of you in the church. So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride - the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil. I ask you to resist the attempts of those who would have you withhold your support for our efforts, this administration's efforts, to keep America strong and free, while we negotiate real and verifiable reductions in the world's nuclear arsenals and one day, with God's help, their total elimination. While America's military strength is important, let me add here that I've always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith. Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversation made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western world exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism's attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second-oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, "Ye shall be as gods." The Western world can answer this challenge, he wrote, "but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism's faith in Man." I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages even now are being written. I believe this because the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material, but spiritual. And because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would enslave their fellow man. For in the words of Isaiah: "He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might He increased strength... But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary... " Yes, change your world. One of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Paine, said, "We have it within our power to begin the world over again." We can do it, doing together what no one church could do by itself.

15 God bless you, and thank you very much.