i'll tell you the 501(c)(4) category is one that demands serious attention by the irs. and i think because of the supreme court rulings, and perhaps because of insufficiency in the law itself what is deemed political and worthy of oversight is not well expressed, perhaps. perhaps there's a short coming in the law. i would like to place two articles one from forbes magazine, one from ""mother jones"" that relate to one organization i would gets is a 501(c)(4) freedom works, in

which their top leader resigned last year stating that it appeared to him that the leaders of the organization were pry -- trying to produce a book entitled "hostage takeover" which would enforce the c4 status. you can't give a lot information today about the hundreds of organizations you have looked at. on the hunch there might have been some smart people working in the cincinnati office concerned there were a lot of 501(c)(4) filings in the country, and there have been tax cheats in the history of this country that maybe somebody at the irs was actually doing their job. and though your testimony can't reflect any of that, i'd like to say i believe there might be some of those people over there. and that in fact if they were

trying to find people who wanted to be hayden donors and not be on record, i think the american people ought to take a second look at this. you can't state a lot in your testimony today, but inspector general, you listed a couple of things here in your testimony. inappropriate criteria were developed and stayed in place for a total of more than 18 months. of course, you don't say what the inappropriate criteria were. you talk about substantial delay in processes. most americans got the refund in time this year. despite the $1 billion that was taken away from irs. i think people at irs are working hard. there was unnecessary information request. if you're trying to figure out who secret donors and if an organization is 501(c)(4) and

not overstepping the boundary under the spirit of the law. maybe there might be some delay. i'm asking myself questions after listening to you, and reading your testimony and finding i need more that isn't in there. let me ask you of the hundreds organizations you have reviewed. would any of the names be available for the record? are those hidden to the public? >> title 26 section 6130 places severe limitation on who we can reveal taxpayer information to. it's limited to the chairman of the ways & means committee in the house, and the chairman of the senate finance committee. they and the chairman of the tax committee. they in turn can share that information with the various members of the committees. but they too have restrictions limitations on who they can share taxpayer information with. so that is part of the reason why, congresswoman, a lot of names are not provided in our

report. >> i'm glad to have that clarification. i'm glad to know that the constitution is working a little bit here. let me ask you, inspector general, they targeted only conservative organizations. your report doesn't state that the organizations asked to provide additional information were only conservative groups. subsequently is it correct to assume that organization other than conservative organizations were inappropriately asked to provide additional information about their tax exempt applications? if so approximately what percent of the total were review? >> i'll see if one of my colleagues can provide the information. once again, congresswoman, some of the groups identified in the 296 we were able to look at placed in the category of political activity, they -- part of that group by name were agnostic. we couldn't tell one way or the

other whether they were progressive, conservative, what have you. but of that 296 that we were able to exam who were placed in the category, 72 were identity as tea party. 13 identified as patriot group in their name. and 11 had the 912 date/name in their name. >> some liberal groups could have been in the majority. >> your time is expired. let's recognize mr. grace. thank you. >>. >> following up on my last questions, mr. werfel. have you asked any employees in cincinnati if say they were ordered to carry out the approaches. >> not at this time. >> who interviewed you? >> who interviewed . >> you for the position? >> i was first approached on -- asked about whether i would be interested in going over and helping the irs by the white

house chief of staff. he's the first person that approached me. >> did you ask the white house chief of staff who in fact ordered special target here? >> i didn't. i wanted to make sure what i understood what the mission was and what they were asking me to do. >> you were willing to take the post not knowing where it might go, what it involved, who was responsible for the scan call. you have yet to go to cincinnati and ask the employees who ordered it? >> i've been a civil servant in government for sixteen years. i have deep respect for the civil servant across the federal government including those at the irs. the ifers is an agency in need right now. i have a reputation for stepping in and helping solve ob government problems. i took the job because i felt like i could be helpful. that's why i took the job. >> okay. one way to be helpful is go to cincinnati and find out who ordered them to carr out the

target. and the earlier request, mr. george. they didn't respond or you didn't get a response. is that correct? >> well, they correctly did not identify anyone who gave the order. so you can infer that they either took it upon themselves or hiding the identity of somebody else. which would you conclude? >> at this stage, mr. congressman, with when we questioned them it was in the -- and the circumstances when you're conducting an audit, you are really looking at, you know, institutional . >> it would be mr. werfel's first question in cincinnati. who gave you the order. >> understanding was an audit. his was seeking out who made the call. >> it could be. it's an important fact i need to bring up, congressman. we working with the department of justice are looking further in to matter, and if mr. werfel

were to exert himself too much to the process, it might impact our ability to -- and the justice department's ability to continue our review. so. >> and mr. george, changed lines here a second. it's been reported recent they are senate democrats have been asked the irs to intervene or look in to a tax exempt status of various groups. "the new york times" reported it in march of last year representative democrats sent a letter to crack down on 501(c)(4) sort of following up on the conservatives there. in the course of your investigation, in to the targeting of conservative groups and throughout the interview and employees, senior officials, others did anyone indicate they felt pressure from senate democrats? >> nothing in our audit revealed that type of information, sir. >> have you seen any evidence at all? >> i have not. >> that the irs -- tax exempt

groups requested by the senate republican coincided with the groups that have been identified? >> the course of conducting the instant audit. no. >> do you anticipate we'll see? >> we'll go whatever the facts take us, sir. >> i think truth is important. as we sit here today. it's about the truth. i appreciate your focus on that as well. fact finding is important. i would conclude with two find questions, mr. werfel. do you ad were not political allies of the president? >> let me make sure i answer that question as directly as i can. i believe that certain applications for single out based on inappropriate criteria. based on the evidence that the audit provided, those applications were associated with conservative groups. i think one of the questions that have been raised. i don't know the answer right now. >> the 912, the tea party. >> exactly. >> conservative groups. is that an ally of the president

or would you consider that a political opponent? >> i think i'll offer as a layperson and the citizens. i would say those are typical not allies of the president. >> >> they are political opponent. would you agree that mrs. learner, admitted knowing this information previously are board nant of the president? >> yes. they are intord nant of the president. >> therefore we can conclude then that either the president or the intord nant of the president were well awared of or targeting of political opponent. >> i don't know i can jump to scare that conclusion. i think that's administrator analysis review that needs to be done. i understand the question. i understand the need to want to know the question. we are asking for indulgence to make sure we can review the facts and get the information that you and the committee needs to help answers those questions. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. yoder. >> thank you. this is a mystery. we have spent a couple of hours

now. there's been hearing today and last week trying to determine how it came about. i know, there's been some conversation today it's not necessarily relevant why these individuals took the action. i think it's very relevant. and determining the motivation and determining the critical to preventing this from ever happening again. and so as we go through this -- what seems to be a mystery, we are left with the understanding that front line employees, based upon their own fruition determined they were going scrutinize certain political groups based upon the ideology of those groups. and so i would ask mr. george, in your opinion, who gave the order for the irs to target conservative groups? >> i do not have an answer to that question yet. again we're engaged in ongoing work. and perhaps we'll be able to respond to that question. >> in your conversation and your

interview with the front line employees so you identified did they express political an mouse toward any conservative groups or political groups? >> i haven't engaged personally in the interview. nothing has been brought to my attention by those who have that that is the case. >> are they aware they i are overly political active or attending rallies or somehow embedded in the irs because they are personally determined they want to target specific groups? >> i have no information on that, sir. >> we we are left with the conclusion that the folks are politically active. people on capitol hill and they wouldn't be political at all. they are political scapegoat here. the folks in washington, d.c., the folks who make policy, the folks who are tuned to politics somehow about any knowledge or any engagement in this at all. mr. george -- any interview you

aware of. any awareness of the from letter coming from. .. that is a matter that would fall under this additional review that we are doing so i'm not at

liberty to discuss the information at this time. >> given your justice in this matter and your expressed desire to get to the bottom of this, we certainly look forward to and hope that your internal investigation will uncover what has occurred here, because certainly it is tragic to many americans that this would somehow be related to front-line employees and that there would be no effort to push them in any way from the political arm of this administration. given that your role is going to be in trouble and we have an investigation by the inspector general that is not uncovered, many of these conversations we don't know who gave the order. we don't have any information regarding this, would you welcome a special prosecutor or counsel to look into these matters? >> that is a great question. right now as we mentioned we have the four layers of review ongoing, justice and the fbi, the and general and myself and the new leadership team.

my position right now is that that is, i believe, currently a sufficient footprint of oversight investigation to uncover the facts. what i would suggest is we let the process move forward as expediently and fairly and thoroughly as possible and revisit the question on a periodic basis is the footprint of investigation getting the job done. >> what is your objective to the independent counsel being moved forward? >> i am not the decision maker on that. whatever is decided in terms of necessary investigation footprint, i will be cooperative and welcome any investigation. but as i said, right now there's four layers of investigation, and but i would suggest is let's monitor some of that. some of that has just gotten underway. let's monitor that and see if we are getting the progress demanded -- >> that's fair, commissioner. and you rendered this 12 days and. i would say for those of us that have been on this committee and have been working on what appears to be a lack of

accountability on many different fronts with this administration, whether it be fast and furious and gazi for malae arrest situation, the idea that we would somehow trust the administration can internally investigate these matters and successfully rolled out the cause, you're going to have to understand there's going to be a healthy dose of skepticism and we but like to see an independent investigation beyond the administration. we hope we have your cooperation and we will do anything we can to get your support to the bottom of this. thank you mr. chairman. >> mr. diaz-balart? >> these 33 views, how long -- it's a normal process. how long does that usually take? >> that's a good question. and my understanding is that once it is longer than 120 days, we would characterize this as longer than what the irs expects the process to run but i don't

know the average up my fingertips. >> you have any idea would be a quick one? you know, would be a fast one? >> i don't, but i can view that information. >> just because i -- in your report you talk a lot about -- and i understand why you explain it, about this being basically an ineffective or gross mismanagement. now, if it was consistent, i would understand that. but if it's targeted -- and i think it's pretty clear that it's targeted -- it seems more than gross mismanagement. it's targeted mismanagement. and in some cases, it would seem, that it's very effective management. not a begin of conservative ideals, the "washington post" talks about the irs told conservative groups that gave approval to the obama foundation

that, i believe i don't know if it is a c3 or c4 was processed in one month and given to them in one month, according to this post article. and then they were given retroactively as well, which i, according to the post, it is very rare. so, on the one side would seem that you have very effective management. in this case to the obama foundation. while at the same time, you have an effective management when it goes to the conservative groups. i don't know -- this is the personally -- i don't know if i would call that ineffective management. this seems to be targeted, is it not? >> welcome again in this instance the reason we deem this an effective management is because when identified by the manager that there was a

problem, she attempted or did actually affect the change, but unbeknownst to her we assumed at this stage people referred it back to inappropriate behavior. and then there seems to have them for quite a while the lack of accountability in terms of someone going back to see whether they are doing what we told them to do, and the answer was no for quite awhile. then of course the groups that were targeted in this instance. so, that's how i come out the use of the term. >> and i and a stand that. but again, when you have it on the other side -- and i don't know how many of these cases there are -- but when the obama administration gets taken care of in one month and then retroactively -- this seems like more than by omission. this is something someone takes action to come and the pulling out of these conservative groups, it took someone actually doing it. so, you know, it was an action

that was required. and again, that's why it's so troubling. but, this is another point that i have. the c3 or c4 reviews, is it fair to say that it's roughly pretty standard part of what the irs does, correct? >> that is correct. >> the do this quite a bit. so, you know, if on something that's pretty basic, pretty standard, at best it's gross mismanagement. at best, it is you know -- and at worst it is frankly a lot deeper than that. can you tell me how i should feel good about giving the irs now a totally new complicated, above and beyond -- now dealing with our health care, the aca what is coming known as obamacare -- how do i tell my

constituents on something that's pretty basic, look what's going on. but don't worry about it. because now we are going to give the irs, that we know we have all these issues, we are going to give them now in essence the control of a big part of the health care. and they will be able to determine who gets fined and who doesn't. can you please tell me how i should be able to feel good about that? >> i can say that you would feel good about it in this way, sir. we have conducted two orders this far looking at the steps the internal revenue service is taking to prepare for the implementation of the affordable care act. and this far, our reviews have been positive that the irs is doing what it needs to do in order to gear up for this. that said, the ims has to create many new computer programs command historic we've had trouble instituting new computer

programs for implementing the tax law changes to unless the irs receives additional resources in order to implement the aca, a truly -- it is a zero sum game. they have to make very difficult traces in terms of customer service and in terms of enforcement and in order to take on this huge responsibility that they've been presented with. ..

this meeting is adjourned. a number of congressional hearings being held this week on management and the operations. thursday the house oversight committee will look in to spending on irs employee conferences. live coverage begin at 9:30 eastern on c-span 3. new jersey senator frank lautenberg died early monday. he was the senate's last world war world war ii veteran. we'll hear from new jersey's other senate and illinois senator dick durbin. later remarks from new jersey governor chris christie who appoint a successor for senator lautenberg's seat. >> mr. president, i flew in from chicago early this morning. i was given the news that i lost a great friend, and one of my

dearest colleagues, senator frank lautenberg of new jersey passed away. most of us saw frank a few weeks ago. he was here on the floor of the senate. he had to come down. it was one of the moments his vote was criewsh. we knew he was struggling, but also knew he would be here. he said he would and he was. he sat right over here, in a wheelchair, with that trademark frank lautenberg smile. i don't think i ever run in to a person in my life as happy as frank lautenberg. he was a great joke teller, and the best thing about frank's joke even if he was telling for the 254th time he would start laughing before the end of the joke and pretty soon the whole room was laughing. you always wanted to be out for dinner with frank and bun any. you knew it was going to be a good tame. -- time.

you would hear a lot of jokes you've heard before. but you would encourage him. he was a member of the greatest generation having served in world war ii, and served here in the united states senate, two different approaches. he came back served here to the age of 89. he astonished us all when he came on the floor of the senate, he was wheeled in on a wheelchair to vote. on some important amendments related to gun safety and gun control. frank, if he were alive, would not have missed the votes. it meant so much to him. it was an issue that he lead on. he was respected for. when it came to closing the loopholes where convicted felonies and people who had no businesses owning guns were buying them anyway, frank lautenberg led the effort to stop the proliferation of guns and the distribution of them to people who would misuse them. it was a cause that he felt

passionately about. and he cast many tough votes on it as he served in the u.s. senate. his return that day for the vote was an act of courage and a long life that was filled with courage starting with the sft in the united states army in world war two. physical courage, political courage, and moral courage. when frank lautenberg spoke to some law students at rutgers university about ten years ago, he said he considered briefly considering law himself after he served in the army in world war ii. decided 25 years old and too old to start law school. he told the law students it was too late. i missed my opportunity. well, frank lautenberg may not have earned a law degree. make no mistake frank lautenberg of new jersey left an important mark on the laws of america. here is how i first came to know

him. i was a congressman in 1966, i was here four years. i was from springfield illinois. i never met frank lautenberg a senator at the time. i got a crazy notion to introduce a tboil ban smoking on airplanes. i didn't have a chance. not a chance. the entire leadership of the house of representatives opposed me. all the of the democratic parties of my leaders and the republican leaders too. yet i put the amendment on an appropriation bill, the transportation appropriation bill, and through some good luck and breaks, it made through the rules committee. that wasn't supposed to happen. it turns out that pepper of florida, the chairman of the rules committee, when he was a senator years before had been instrumental in starting the national cancer substitute. as a southerner he didn't talk about tobacco. nobody did from the south in those cays. in his heart he knew that

tobacco smoking was killing people. he let me get that amendment to the floor. which shocked everybody. i remember the day -- this goes back quite a bit now. 27 years ago. i was in the house of representatives brand new calling this amendment to ban smoking on flights. and i looked up in the gal rei and it was filled with flight attendants in the uniform from the different airlines. they were victim too of secondhand smoke. well, we called that measure for a vote and it passed. it just shocked everybody. it turned out that the house of representatives was the biggest frequent flier club in america. they were sick and tired of sitting on airplanes and breathing in somebody else's secondhand smoke. there were a few moments of jubilation and celebration and somebody said what are you going do in the senate? i thought, oh my goodness, this is an important part of this. so i decided to call the

chairman of the transportation appropriations subcommittee, a fellow named frank lautenberg of new jersey. i didn't know him. i said to him, frank, i would like to ask you a favor. would you consider offering this bill as to the senate transportation bill. he said i'll get back do you. he can in a hurry. he said let's do it together. it wases best phone call i ever made. and for the people of the country and those that fly on the airplane the team managed to pass a bill signed in to law, which did more than we ever dreamed of. we thought this little idea taking smoking off airplane would make flight a little more comfortable and safety. neither frank nor i realized at the time it was a tipping point. americans looked around and said why stop there? trains, buses, offices,

hospitals, restaurants, just look across the board what happened in america. neither frank nor i saw this coming. but it worked. it changed this country. it's changed the senate and the house. it changed this country. and i wouldn't be standing here today telling the story were it not for frank lautenberg. it was the best partner i ever could have. when the day came i was elected to the senate. he and i used to tell the story from time to time reminiscing about that battle back in 1986. frank told us he was once a two-pack-a day cigarette smoker itself. when it came to the bill he knew the right thing to. i was lucky to have him by my side. i couldn't have done it without him. he was a driving force behind a lot of other lawyers that were -- laws that were important too. setting the national age of drinking at 21.

and.80 for drunk driving. the laws on smoking and drunk driving saved millions of lives thanks to the leadership of frank lautenberg. he was the last remaining world war ii vet in the senate. a few weeks ago we lost danny inouye. he used to sit here. he served in world war two as well. he passed away, frank did, early this morning in new york. he is survived by his wife bunny. what an extraordinary good person she is. i left a message on the voice mail and said, you know, standing by frank's side made a big difference in the life and the years they were together. they were a great, great partnership. in addition, he survived by children -- six children, thirteen grandchildren. he was a leader on environmental protection, transportation,

protecting public health. he authored the law that prevented domestic abusers from possessing guns. it wasn't an easy thing to do. it looks pretty over. it turned out polices organizations were opposing him. because policemen have been accused of domestic abuse and couldn't carry guns. frank stood his ground. he cowrote the new g.i. bill for the 21st century. a man of the original bill. teamed up with a man and put together a g.i. bill that the men and women who served are richly deserving. he authored the toxic right no know law. it was another great law that we cosponsored. it came to down to a question of the chemical that are put in fabric in our furniture, which are sadly are leeched out

terrible to the environment of our homes. many times affecting small children. frank was quick to be the leader on the issue. even though the state of new jersey was a lot of chemical producers. he lead in the effort to protect families and children. he wrote the law to create the patterson great falls historic national park. after he cast his 9,000th vote in december of 2011, senator harry reid wrote he's been one of the most productive senator in the history of the country. while it was february 15, that frank announced he wasn't going seek another term in the senate. at the time of the announcement, the hometown he -- whatly wanted to get down before he left the senate. reforming the chemical safety law and improving gun safety and providing federal resources from new jersey to rebuild from hurricane sandy. we owe it to frank and his memory to make sure they are done. i know, bob menendez his friend

and close colleague from new jersey will pick up the gan let and proceed to carry-on in frank's name. he used to say with some pride he was a success in business. he was. he understand the mind of businessman. but he never ever lost touch with a common man. and people who counted on him in new jersey and around the united states. the united senate is going to miss frank lautenberg. i'm going miss a great pal. one of the best dinner congressmanons you can ever dream of here in washington, d.c. we're going to join together in wednesday in new york for a memorial service. i'm sure it's going to be widely attended. frank if a lot of things for a lot of people over the course of his years as public service. i'm going to mishim. >> mr. president. >> senator from new new jersey? >> mr. president, today i come to the floor shake and deeply saddened as we all are by the loss of our colleague, my good

friend, and ally, senior senator from new jersey senator frank lautenberg. when i think of senator lautenberg i think of the word tenacity. he was a tee nation. when he had a setback, he also got right back to the game. he was tee tenacious in life where the tenacity paid off with the people of new jersey and for the nation. when he had a setback with cancer, he didn't let himself take one minute more than he had to before he got right back up and went right back at it. i'll always remember his tenacity. a strength of will and unshakable resolve that helped him in his own life and making

life better for others. frank lautenberg loved the senate. he loved his job. and the people who elected him time and time again, five times in fact, the longest serving senator for the state of new jersey, the people he cared deeply about, working families, seniors, single moms, hard working folks who trusted him always to be on their side, and he was. he was the man for new jersey, the man for his time, one of the greatest generation. the last in the senate have served in world war ii. in the story was a quince essential american story. his father, sam, worked in the salt mills of patterson, new jersey. and sold coal, he farmed, he once ran a tavern. frank lost his father to cancer

when he was 19, and he learned the lesson of hard work having to take on a job at night, weekends, until he graduated from high school when he joined the army and went to europe. when he came back, he went to colombia university on the g.i. bill. he understood the value of that opportunity goifn him as a veteran of this country from world war with, and extended that when he later got to coauthor the new 21st cinch i are g.i. bill. he got a degree in economics. anyone who knew frank lautenberg knew he was destined to make something e up else. he did. he joined two of his boyhood fronds found successful business. and he did it well. but if losing his father working his way through high school, going to war, starting a

business, making a success of himself wasn't enough. he wanted to give something back. he's very comfortable in life and could have said i'm going enjoy this hard work and sacrifice that is brought me to this comfortable stage in life. he considered himself lucky and wanted to help others. that's why he ran for office. that's why he served, and that's why the people of new jersey kept electing him. new jersey people love and admire him for what he did for this nation. what he if to help her. and every american build better life for themselves and their families. and in those accomplishment and love and admiration new jersey had for frank lautenberg will not diminish. whether it was his landmark drunk driving law, coauthoring the 21st century g.i. bill. introducing the toxic right to

know law that empowered the public to know what pollutants were being released to their neighborhood. he gave something back to all of us. we can talk about how hard he fought for the victim of hurricane sandy this year. even in illness came back to the senate to try to make sure that new jersey people and all those who suffered from hurricane sandy were taken care of. or how he worked to make the patterson great falls a national park from his hometown that he loved so dearly. but above all, he was mr. transportation here in the senate. whether it was roads or bridges, airlines, or the rail system, he believed in having the best and safest transportation system in the world. when it comes to air travel, he was way ahead of his time when it comes to safety. let's not forget it was frank lautenberg who ended danger of smoking on airlines so none of us would be subjected to sitting

in an airplane cabin in a smoke-filled aircraft of the dangers of smoking on a plane. and today when i took the amtrak from newark to union station, i thought most of that ride of frank. i remember how many times he came to the floor to fight for america's railway. how much he believed in the importance of rail travel. and what it meant to keeping this nation's transportation system competitive. given all of those accomplishments, it's still would not adequately reflect the gift of governing he gave this nation in the 9,000 votes he cast in this chamber. maybe not all of them made the headline. they made a difference for every american family. and with each of those votes, frank lautenberg help shaped the history of america. not just for his time, but for all for generations to come.

>> when i think of frank, i also certainly not only look back to the fact he was a part of the greatest generation of world war two veteran. i think he left us too soon at the age of 89. he never missed a beat. he lived in the moment. i remember about three years ago, he and his wife bonnie celebrated his 86th bitter day in january in what some might say was an unusual way. he wanted to spend his birthday with his favorite sicker. he was a fan of lady gaga. they went to her monster ball tour. he was not yesterday's news. he was always about today's news. he lived in the moment. that moment is gone now.

we remember it well. and we're lucky to share that moment with him. it goes by all too quickly. but the memories last forever. his accomplishments will last forever. he touches the lives of people well beyond his death. and our image of what it means to, to live, to earn and give something back will never be forgotten because it lives in frank lautenberg's legacy to the chamber, this nation, and to the people of my home state. there's a quote from the old testament from danielle chapter 12. many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awaking and the wise shall shine brightly. and those who leave the many to justice shall be like the stars forever. frank lautenberg stood for

justice in all of its forms. for every american, every day he served in this chamber. and his memory shall be like a consolation, showing us the way. today we say thank you, senator lautenberg, for a life well lived and a job well done. thank you on behalf of a grateful state and nation. our deepest thoughts and prayers are with his wife and entire family. i know, we will miss him as they will him. as the nation will miss his incredible work. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor and observe the absence of a quorum. clerk will call the role. [roll call] >> i have remarks that i was going make with all of you this

morning about the roam of women in government and the rest, but it seems to me to be inappropriate. to do that at this point. i think most of you may know, if you don't, our united states senator, frank lautenberg passed away this morning. he was 89 years old. and first elected to the united states senate in 1982. before that, had a distinguished career as a founder of adp. one of the true new jersey business success stories. after a career of building that company and creating tens of thousands of job in the private sector. senator lautenberg decided to turn his attention to public service. in 1982, elected to the senate united states and served until the year 2000 when he decided to

retire. for any of you who know senator lautenberg. it was no great surprise the retirement didn't agree with him. in 2002, when the opportunity presented itself because of the wrawl of senator from the senate race, ?awt lautenberg stepped forward to himself for the public of new jersey and the people of our country. he served from 2002 when he was re-elected to the united states senate after two-year break and served until today when he passed. it's no mystery that senator lautenberg and i didn't always agree. in fact, probably is more honest to say we very often didn't agree. and we had pretty good fights between us over time. battles on philosophy and the role of government.

but never was senator lautenberg to be underestimated. i think the best way to describe frank lautenberg and the way he would want to be described for all of you today is as a fighter. he fought for the things he believed in. sometimes he fought because he liked to. [laughter] he always reminded me that he was a kid from patterson, whose father died at the young age. who served in the military, served his country, and then built a business which he was extraordinary proud of. just as proud as of of his many years in the early thirty years in the united states senate.

and so today it's a sad day for the people of new jersey. whenever we lose someone committed to public service and has been honest and dedicated public servant as senate lautenberg. it's a loss for everyone. most particularly for his wife and his family. whatever loss his family and colleagues feel compare to the loss of his families and loved ones. i think it would be inappropriate forme to give any other speech today. except for you to pray for the family today to pray for the soul of senator lautenberg, and give a prayer of thanks for his service. for individual new jersey and our country. and in the end, all of you who decide to get involved in public

service should aspire to have the same things said about you in whatever role you play. you are honest, you're a fighter for the things that you believe in. and that you gave as good as you got. all of those can be said about frank lautenberg. and so i'm sure we're going have a number of times over the course of the next few days to reflect upon his life and to pay him tribute and more public way. but for the morning, as the leader of our state and our people, i extend to the lautenberg family and to his staff and friends, our deepest condolences. and senator lautenberg, i give him praise on a life well lived. i think we have all signed up today for a life of like frank

lautenberg of 89 years of fighting and fighting hard. he'r the people of our state, and we will certainly miss him. you're going to have a lot of other things to discuss today at the conference, and i look forward to getting reports back on how things went and how they were received. i'm committed today as i've always been to making sure everybody can make a positive contribution to government will be given the opportunity to do so. and help to make a difference in our state, in our country, the situate senator lawsuiting berg did. thank you for having me this morning, and all the best to you for the rest of the conference. i look forward to seeing you all very soon. in a speech to a u.s. jewish organization monday, secretary of state john kerry warned that time is running out in the middle's peace process window.

secretary of kerry travels to the region next week. his remarks next are on c-span2. then a conference on religious freedom and later the gerald ford foundation journalism awards. >> this is about thirty five minutes. [applause] >> i want to thank the leadership, and the membership of the ajc and the substitute, bob, david harris.

nearly a quarter of a century helped to shape this distinguished organization like no one else. and your new president stan bergman. i thank you, every single one of you, for all you do for israel. but more for human rights, civil rights around the world. women's rights, in fighting racism, religious intolerance, and torture. thank you for all that you do fight anti-semitism around the world. i'm proud i just appointed to lead the fight from antiself- semitism from the state department. you have a strong partner. i thank you for what you do for the american jewish community. as many of you might know, if you don't, i tell you now, my brother cam is a proud member of the community. he converted to jew dayism thirty years ago before marying

his wife kathy. this morning i'm proud say he started as acting secretary of commerce department and i'm told that today we become the first ever two brothers to lead cabinet level agencies at the same time. [applause] when they wrote the hymn. [speaking in foreign language] how good and pleasing it is for brothers to sit together in unity. i am pretty sure he wasn't picturing us sitting together in the cabinet room of the white house. though my mother may well have. [laughter] either way, i can tell you that it will be an honor to serve alongside my brother even if it's just for a short while. for more than a century, they have been a partner and pioneer

in defining the relationship between american jews and israel. and a leader and strengthening that relationship. you have built bridges during difficult times and hopeful ones alike. we have seen them all in this journey. i know many look at the landscape today, and you're not inclined to act. risky and too much turmoil. a lot of people who are quick to call this moment too difficult of time. too dangerous. too daunting a time. i understand that temptation. and i fully recognize the challenges and predicament of which israel finds himself. i also firmly believe that this is a hopeful time. if we choose to make it so. this can actually be a time of possibility and promise. with your help, it can be a time

of peace. i know, there's no issue so close to your hearts as the future of israel's security. the threat from iran, the unrest in syria, the question of surrounding nuclear weapons, lingering fallout of the arab spring, the status of the peace process that is hardly a process at all. all of these matter tremendously to each and every one of you. they matter above all to israel's future. and israel's future is what i want to talk to you about today. i had the great honor of becoming secretary of state in february. i visited israel in march, april, and may. and i will be back soon. [applause] each time that i go, the deep personal connection i feel with the state and the people of

israel is only strengthened. these are bonds that reach back to my own family tree including relatives i never met and never even knew about until the last decade. relatived that perished in the holocaust. relatives i thought of -- when i laid a wreath on bhaft united states. and it was an extraordinary privilege to spend that day alongside survivors and veterans and sit the ceremony between -- prime minister netanyahu on the other. the father of the state of israel and a man i believe can lead israel in to new era we very much want to see. through the sacred spaces of jury

my friend and a group of fifteen jewish friends from montana. i stood atop the spectacular summit which we climbed 2,000 years ago, 1,000 martyrs made the ultimate sacrifice in unit somers and. we together all sixteen of us looked out across the desert, across the crest, across the dead sea, the vast desert below standing in very spot where every new soldier begins his or her service by swearing in oath to honor the history of the people of israel and defend the future of their estate. a long discussion about what happened or not what happened.

how the history play the out and how they had accurate. they voted what happened had happened the way it was described. he instructed us to stand at the precedence and call out across the town. we did it together! the people of israel lived. [applause] the state of israel lived. we shouted and we listened. we actually heard our voices bouncing off the caf vern on the other side of the mountains and it came back to us. it was if'rely it was the voices of those who fought coming back to us. these bonds, i share with israel. all of the modern day challenges and they were strengthened each time i got to see the state. once i got see the state from the air.

someone let me fly an israeli air force jet. it was on the unforgettable flight from the airbase from the luncheon we were having back from the war in '67, he said, senator, i hope you haven't eaten too much. we're going flying. it sounded good to me. the minute we're off the airport, jet is yours. you take it whenever you want. [laughter] so we took out of the airbase north of there, and i got see with my own eyes how narrow the borders of israel are. just how vulnerable israel's security is. there is simply no margin for error. indian that. in a matter of minutes as i flew the jet, at one point, my pilot in backseat turned -- he radioed and senator, you're about to go over egypt. turn.

[laughter] i very quickly -- came close that day to violating the air spaces above egypt and jordan. [laughter] as i flew over i turned the plane upside down. i saw the sky below me. above me and the earth, you know, below and it was weird. i thought to myself, wow, finally i'm seeing the middle clearly. upside down. [laughter] these days, folks our american iefers pilots do not let my take the control of the aircraft. much to the relief of the passengers. but i want to share with you that when we touched down in tel aviv, awalked down the step of that said united states of america on the side. i carry with me the commitment of president obama, whose administration i'm proud to say, has done more than any before to ensure that israel's future is strong and prosperous.

never has our security -- [inaudible] [applause] make no mistake, the president and the united states and i share your unshakable commitment to israel's security. every time we land, i think of the words of one of the most prominent successes. we only want that, which is given naturally to all people of the world. to be masters of our own faith not of others. central to -- the state and the jewish people must be able to control their own destiny. that is why and how israel has built this driving democracy.

that's why israel is built one of the strongest military on the planet. and shown a strength in the face of terrorism. as we look ahead, i believe, and i think you will agree, i believe you will agree that the best way to truly ensure israel's security today and for future generations is by ending once and for all the conflict of the palestinians by summoning the courage to achieve peace, and by reaching a negotiated resolution that results in two states for two peoples, each able to fulfill their legitimate national aspirations in a home land of their own. ..

>> certainly it is more than the absence of war. for israel, a nation that is history and challenges unlike any other red it is secure and being secure end of future. also and economically thriving state. security for israel means freedom on the legitimacy from its neighbors and those on the world stage. the security grows on the west bank and gaza and throughout the region rather than promoted and

empowered. lasting security requires regional stability and open markets that includes building up businesses and not just their defenses. you and i both know that the place where all of this happens is in a strong and secure are positioned inside this peaceful state all of the parameters of is frozen conflict but i will tell you a one state solution does not exist for either side. my friends, i have been -- [applause] [applause] i have been traveling to israel as the secretary of state over

just the last three months. i have been involved intimately with these challenges in the last few decades and as you know, i come to this issue not as a stranger but as a friend. a proven friend of over a few years and more. i have gotten to know every is really prime minister and those who have ruled in the arab world over the last 30 years. in that time i have heard all of the arguments for why it is too difficult to and this conflict. i know some of you are skeptical. i understand where that is coming from. some people are beyond skeptical. they are even cynical. i know that it is hard. after all, there is a reason i

know that many tireless leaders have worked without realizing the ultimate. i remember sitting and having lunch with yasser arafat during a major point of conflict. during the course of want to look at me as i talked about this negotiation. i don't think that we have that opportunity. i think that peace is achievable more than ever. and i know that it is worth fighting for. we all know that it is worth fighting for. we also know that cynicism has never solved anything. challenges are not meant by giving in to doubts.

because brave people were willing to defy the odds and defy wisdom to overcome obstacles. how else would you make that out of the desert and do what israel has done? why should any is really start giving up the cynicism now? i believe that if we care about the future of israel as i do, as i know you do. that we understand what is at stake and we should recognize that this time is a significant opportunity some say that it is still uncertain. in reality, we go on to a new area of the region. that is the time to recast the relations.

well, folks, just remember that these goals were unilateral and not part of a negotiated peace treaty that included this and they were certainly not part of the peace agreement. these countries were bilateral and yielded a much better result. when it comes to the cease-fire in gaza, working diligently with the issue of sinai security and so forth. we know that any peace agreement with the palestinians will need to include extensive security

arrangements in order to ensure a palestinian state they have to be answered affirmatively. a dangerous terrorists affirmance that attacked israel and of course, iran is involved in this itself. the united states will prevent iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. [applause] [applause] >> now i ask you.

and ask you to also understand that same time that as i stand here as a friend of israel. as i have a voting record that i can stand here and tell you that i must recognize that they need to live in peace with their own state and its own clear borders and that has to be our mission as well. [applause] i assure you that a stable order and flourishing economy will only strengthen israel's security and israel's future. the palestinian children that i have seen, the kids that i have seen in the rubble there, they should be able to grow up with playgrounds.

believe me, it is not a substitute. palestinians also deserve to see their lives grow in the benefits of economic growth and development. this is not a problem in the middle east. indeed, it is used as a convenient excuse for autocrats who don't want their own

population to recognize and wrestle with the inadequacies of the government. an excuse, but make no mistake in resolving this conflict for both sides. not resolving this will result in serious consequences for both. so i understand what many of you are asking. what makes this difference in turn different from every other time. well, the difference is what happens in the coming days will actually dictate what happens in the coming decades. we are running out of time. we are wanting out of possibilities. if we do not succeed now, and i am raising those steaks, if we do not succeed now, we may not get another chance.

we cannot let it be held prisoner. we cannot let it become a self fulfilling prophecy. the absence of peace is a perpetual conflict. whenever you think about this challenge and how hard it is, think about what will happen if it doesn't work. we will find ourselves in a negative spiral of counter responses. double little we slam the door on a two state solution israel will be left to choose between being a jewish state or democratic state. it will not be able to fulfill the founders vision of being both at once. the consequences do not live

only in the distant future. it is not some far-off concern, my friends. there are also some and the status quo is simply not sustainable. a stalemate today will not remain one tomorrow. what is static today will not be back tomorrow because it has been so for so long and they cannot remain so given the options. in this conflict, the simple fact is tomorrow is not guaranteed to look like today and the people that think somehow because there is greater security and fewer people heard, they are blowing themselves into a delusion that that somehow can be sustained. it cannot be. think about what is happening next door and this includes

growth in the palestinian economy and the fact that last year up until recently, not one is really from anything that happened in the west bank and so there was a seller told about a month ago. this includes the institutions of a viable state. that is not just the work of one man. we look forward to continuing these efforts with a new prime minister, but that experiment, if it is allowed to fail, ask yourself what will replace it. what will happen if the

palestinian security forces dissolved and the palestinian authority have failed. it is the very thing that we want to avoid come, the same extremism in the west bank that we have been in the process trip or from southern lebanon. before anybody gives up on us, we have to ask if we are prepared to live with permanent conflict if the parties agree come back to the table, the palestinians have already said that they will go to the u.n. and seek to join more u.n. organizations the united states

will always have israel's back. with the right choices and enough courage and determination, there is a very different future possible for israel. i believe that we have actually forgotten what we do to keep

pace. israel where schoolchildren actually run around the playground without having to run into bunkers. the state can no longer use these conflicts as it excuse or a cry for any number of shorted and agendas. the governor of the bank of israel sent a peace agreement with the government by as much as 6%. an agreement that resulted in the normal relations with the air world, that they promised by

the arab peace initiative, it would end the boycott of israeli goods. and imagine the possibilities if you had peace of the extraordinary religious sites that suddenly become available from the west bank into israel. the end of political and logistical barriers. to turn tel aviv into a global hub it is potential to these other countries and regions. they are limitless with the rich archaeology will, religious sites, as well as the modern attractions. peace pays, my friends. and israel's vibrant with the

men and women of peace come and that is the future that we need to pursue. i have asked you to think about what happens if this succeeds. and also if it fails. the third thing i want to ask you to think about is probably the most important. i want you to do more than just consider the consequences.

they added that they will have land swaps for the first time. china, japan, foreign ministers, they raise this issue. they asked him as is the first thing on your mind, and we said yes. it affects all of the recruitment and arguments and radicalism that we face.

my many conversations have led me to believe that both prime minister netanyahu and the president can be partners in peace. she shares the vision of israel with those who have ensure the security of israel and she is committed to working to make that a reality. all of these leaders are committed. we are all committed. you can play a critical part in ensuring israel's long-term

security so i ask you today, send the message that you are behind this hopeful vision. let your leaders and your neighbors alike know that you understand that this will be a top process with tough decisions and we are ready to back the leaders who make them. let them know that you stand behind and negotiate them. that we lead two states for two people, side by side in peace, and that you will are part of the great constituency for

peace. the vast expanses of their homelands when they say that, that they, too, will hear the echoes of the past generations and that they will no that is the echoes go on, the earth rings truer than ever before. with a commitment that you have shown for more than a century. you can help ensure that the state of israel will indeed live long in peace and security. not in spite of its place by the palestinian state, but because of it. you can help make sure that that has state of israel will continue to thrive.

thank you and god bless. [applause] >> on the next "washington journal", we will look at foreign policy with christopher smith of new jersey. chairman of the subcommittee on global health and international organizations. we are also joined by a member of the house ways and 10 ways and means committee to take your questions about congressional oversight. you can also call into talk about the article on terror watch lists by mark clayton. it is live every day at 7:00 a.m. on c-span. "washington journal" on c-span. >> booktv is vital we can from the "chicago tribune" book festival saturday starting at

11:00 a.m. eastern. join us for these authors and live on sunday starting at 11:00 p.m. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> ladies and gentlemen, if you could please take your seats. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> ladies and gentlemen, we are delighted to welcome you to the panel, which is appropriately one america. as i thought about this, i want to know that i will be moderating this panel.

this is about the culture and future that we are leaving to our children and their children. there are other dimensions to the struggle for religious liberties that perhaps we have not considered their views and opinions and how religious liberty and the lack thereof affects her community. this includes nondiscrimination laws, and religious organizations small business as

penalized at times in the war over religion includes symbolism. the religious viewpoint and the religious beliefs of individuals are also often derived in the public discourse. i could read spend the rest of the time reading their resumes, but i won't. i will make three introductions and each of them will offer introductory remarks. then we will entertain a few questions and open it up to all of you. what i would ask you to do is have the cards on your table in

the last part of this panel we will read your question and entertain this. i will attempt to limit all of the speech in various ways. arbitrarily restricting your comments in the name of tolerance. so i lay that out ahead of time. i would like to introduce our first penalized. i hope i am pronouncing this right. he is the director of the coalition and i was corrected. it is this that coalition, so i thank you for the remarks. >> good morning, everyone. how is everyone? i am feeling optimistic after the last panel and i really appreciate it. my colleagues contend colligan

my colleagues and i feel that it is important that we respect everyone and their beliefs and supporting each other. i really appreciate it. i also really appreciate the representative in his remarks about the religious freedom remarks and our religious freedom is very important. what i'm i am going to do in my remarks is hopefully demonstrate through the prism of the experience of the american community.

what it means to the rest of the world as well. i also want to talk about government and and discrimination. we are looking at the american community with where we are on religious freedom. so first with regard to the

issue of workplace discrimination. you know, as it stands, per federal law, some cases wrought by five private employers. some have the ability to, under federal law, as ratified by federal court. the ability to segregate visibly religious employees and customer facing positions for those who don't allow for religious actions. for example, someone wants to work for united ticket agency and someone wants to work for alamo rent a car. and they simply want to be an

agent. under federal law, as it has been interpreted by at least one circuit, it is lawful if that person is segregated out of public view as long as they receive the same pay and benefits. i will ask the audience, what does that sound like you? well, i heard it is separate but equal. it sure is. you can imagine what it would be like trying to receive this if you're being segregated from the rest of your fellow employees and from the public. this is a gap that has not been addressed or covered adequately by federal law. california has taken a leadership position on the issue and made very clear the

religious freedom act that workplace centralization were placed centralization would be part of the civil rights laws. this is through surveys in california and new york city. over 60% of the kids in our community report that they are the subject of his bullying. over 20% say that they are the victims of violent harassment on the basis of their school, hit hitler touched or un- welcomed by other students. now, sadly for students who are attacked in schools, federal law does not include religion when

it comes to the issue of school bullying in the law that the federal department of education enforces. therefore when we go to the department of education, they their hands are tied. they have interpreted their authority to act in these cases and it is not the agency that has the resources to address school bullying. fortunately religion is just literally left out and the children are just aghast. children in these communities and their advocates are pushing for a committee to be counted. with the issue of hate crimes, next week the advisory policy board of the fbi be taking up the issue with a tragic murder of a six-member -- six members

of our faith and hope creek, wisconsin through heat islands. someone came into this house to warship and literally was shot. the advisor policy board would consider the issue next week of weather the anti-hate crime tracking category to the fbi tracks hate crimes nationally. you can imagine whether to determine the resources that need to be deployed and the coalition is documented, hundreds of hate crimes since 9/11, or 11% of our community and the is a shocking number, they report that they have been the victim of a hate crime.

it is way above the national average when it comes to hate crimes. in regards to being a statistic and being counted, they just don't even count. at least as far as the federal forms are concerned. finally i just want to touch on what neutral law is. we have this issue that the government agency has uniform rules for police officers. obviously the united states military has uniform rules for soldiers. and they don't allow for any

more. even to testify his experience, obviously calling for that policy, and exclusion from military service to end. so that he is not the only one that received exemptions, but that some in the most prominent government services, finally with regard to the tsa,

particularly abnormally high rates at u.s. airports. and then you can imagine, a member of our community, specifically searching them more than other passengers targeting this goes to my last point about the interplay from government discrimination and whether it is at the nypd.

as it applies to religion and discrimination. the community experience really had over 60% of our kids saying they are suffering hate crimes. i think his private discrimination -- there is an interplay between the government discrimination and private termination. i would say in conclusion that these issues are obviously very much these issues. when i client was accommodated by the united states army army e

idea being that if one of our votes rises, they all rise together. i'm excited and grateful to be here today. i thank you. >> i would like to introduce reverend eugene rivers. he is also the senior policy adviser to the church of god in christ. reverend rivers. i just want to thank you.

this is really important. what i want to do over the next couple of minutes is talk about the context of religious beliefs from the perspective -- not simply as an african-american. but as a black churchman whose framework for understanding black people is global event from a black man with one eye who prayed down the holy ghost in april of 19,062,600,000,000 charismatics around the world who are now just recently claimed by evangelicals. i have been at a cost over 40 years and 40 years ago the evangelicals than? because we were too noisy and

most folks have not done their homework to find out what the numbers were like. was a high octane time. within the contents of the issue of religious liberty, there are a couple of issues that i just want to talk about. here again with the understanding that for the black church and the black pentecostal church in particular our concerns are global. the issue is not simply talking about a set of supreme court decisions with the white house. it has to do with the religious minorities in countries that do not accord to our folks.

the same liberties that they insist that they must have when they come here. so there are a couple of conversations that we need to have. conversations about religious liberty and freedom of conscience and there needs to be a conversation about when i start a church with two people the issues that have part of the

conversation that i'm interested in having come i would like to talk with my brothers and sisters about how we have religious liberty here and when i am in tripoli, cairo, or somewhere in north africa, and i want to talk about jesus, or if i don't talk about jesus, to say no, not only can he not talk about that, you can see those starving people. because that is a form of evangelism. in the interest of god. now, for me, a couple of things. the obama administration, i am a conservative right-wing democrat. amen. okay, that being said, the black

church entrance church got thrown under the bus. i work closely with the bush administration and i work more or less in my capacity in the obama administration. the story is that religious liberty was not a priority. why there might have been some talk about human rights, there was no concern or commitment and it was not a priority. here again, administrations come and go so that what is frightening not meet is that we must understand that either party will now throw you under the bus. either party will throw you

under the bus. there is going to be worn in this country. but if you come into the church, it will be on and we are going to go to jail on that issue because that is an issue. the back story is ultimately at

the end of the day, you have to legitimate the authority to make your case. so some of us stick our heads in the sand and hope that it will go away. sometimes we don't want to fight, which is inevitable. this issue of gay marriage ultimately is going to come down to the authority of the book for us. that is the word of god. religious freedom is part of human rights. and i have talked to a number of folks before i came here today.

there must be a commitment a conviction that said that we were going to stand her ground and not compromise. we must make a decision that we are going to stand our ground on the issue of religious freedom. it will not be negotiated. if you play the role of the profits, you don't get invited to the party at the house. you have to understand. do you want to be invited, or are you going to stand for the

conviction that whatever you believe, you are going to believe and not compromise it in the interest of opportunism. so i am here as i wrap this thing up. the black churches want to work with those who are serious about what is going to be a fight. you are not going to negotiate a thing. it was a bait and switch. it is now essentially a political underdog that handles all the religious people. so my last one is a strategic question of strategy here. the marriage issue on abortion. my son is trying to explain to me the difference in the millennialist versus those of antiquity like myself. he says that, you cannot use an

eight track tape and ipad world. he said your generation does not know that they do not know. the branding of the issues is why the 20 to 40 demographics does not hit our concerns. one of the things i wanted to talk about and point is how do we develop these strategies. we are using an eight track tape and ipad world. and as a result we are losing the debate. especially on the issue of religious, religious liberty. we have global support for many of the things that we believe red but our framework is global and it's very parochial and for some it's very racial. we must develop a more

comprehensive strategy and we must focus on whether or not we are coming to fight. if we are not talking about where we are going to go, that is okay. we can go to dinner and come home. but for those of us who really believe that there is something that should be defended, we must figure out if we are really going to engage in what must be a long-term goal. thank you very much. [applause]

i would just like to welcome you. they put together the caucus or at all. it is wonderful for us to see religious lawmakers and leaders to hold up the religious freedom there are some hard times in the neighborhood. but why can't every day be just as good. well, we all know from the pages of history that one of the motivating factors for the pilgrims for crossing the atlantic was the desire to preserve religious identity.

instead i feel that we should take inspiration from the pilgrims insisted on preserving their unique ways of understanding religious life. if there is one place that you don't have to be the same and you can be different and part of the social fabric of society, it is the united states of america. i always felt that the ultimate purpose of any theological system is to bring about an

internal transformation in the here and in human being. we start looking at others as fellow human beings. there was an instance where he said to them, none of you truly believe until he has mutual mercy. and the companion said, aren't we all merciful. and he said no, we're not. it is not the mercy the man shows his friend. it is a universal mercy extends to everyone. the merciful to people like us.

when i say the bully out there, i'm referring to individuals, institutions, or groups who are undermining religious freedom for any american or any person. i just want to share with all of you a personal experience that appears to be a recurring theme in my life and the life of many american muslims that are born and raised in the united states of america. whenever a tragedy happens involving muslims, i have lost count of how many times people would come up to my face and say to me, go back where you came from. because of the fact that i am easily identifiable, i become an easy target for harassment. i guarantee you that it is not a

three-story rabbi webcaster that will say such a thing. it is the lame man. it makes her work our work as faith leaders and educators that much more time. these ideals that we have gathered here today for, we have to ensure that it ultimately trickles down to the average everyday american. once we get to a state of consciousness, but that's how people choose that state of consciousness in a nonjudgmental state of consciousness, how people choose to preserve religious identity and practice

their faith, only then will we speak out against the bully out there. if we try to find reasons why people's religious freedom should be curtailed, we are only giving ourselves uses of why we shouldn't be speaking out against the bully out there when he strikes. and as we know, the equally discriminate. they take turns. it would serve us well to remember the words of the pastor who said, first they came for the socialists and i did not speak out. then they came to the trade unions and i did not speak out because i was a not a trade

unionist. then they came and i did not speak out because i was not a jew. then they came for me. then there was no one left to speak for me. so when we, when we as americans stand up and the bully attacks any religious group, we are working towards a society when every day will be just as good. thank you. [applause] >> now we would like to bring the rabbi forward he is the vice president of federal affairs and the washington director and counsel of america. we welcome you. [applause] >> thank you very much.

thank you to the center in the program for inviting me. i am, as ray said, i am a rabbi. though i don't always admit it, i am also a lawyer. my wife says that i became a rabbi to atone for being a lawyer. and to make matters worse, she says that it won't work. ..

>> as for the jews they did with they had to do to stay alive in live-in peace. a relationship of

power, subjugation and animosity and and and and natural law. in these times we enjoy a different here in the united states of their guaranteed liberties we have the opportunity to grow and strengthen in religious life and institutions and where we work together for the common good. this is extraordinary. but to me, even more especially in this new role as religious rights guaranteed under law, religious liberty remains if practical question. should rework for religious liberty for all? oh absolutely should be set aside differences? of course. we have to. we know there is strength in numbers so when religious rights are threatened and action is required our

experience has shown that the larger and mime -- more diverse lives of support for greater chance for success when we lobbied we news of large left right coalition of religious and civil rights groups were the biggest selling point*. and it was no surprise that when the supreme court told congress it had to rewrite the law causing a collision to unravel the new legislation was just a shadow of the original. we have come to realize when it comes to religious liberty is very often all for one and one for all but not always. there was a time when a religious group that did not have a direct stake of the specific religious practice might opt out. now however we have a better

understanding that almost any case has the potential to affect all religions. we saw this in the decision that caused devastating harm to religious freedom in america. at the time it was thought to be just another free exercise burst their the compelling state interest in for that reason many groups did not weigh in. it did not involve their religious practice and perhaps some words of comfort. decays went to court on the assumption that it would affect a specific practice of the native americans. and it came out of cory even separating the free exercise clause in the way that affected us off per -- all.

we see this as the hhs mandate for many religious communities comment the issue of contraception does not give the same challenges as it does to others but many of the unaffected groups are weighing in because of what they see as the mandates larger potential implications for religious freedom in general and no buddy can abide by the further weakening of religious freedom. and we're sadly engaged in a greater battle of religious liberty, yes but even more so of that place in society, we often think of threats coming from legislation, a policy, but are the most disruptive threats coming from government? perhaps it comes from the tv and film industry and

perhaps for madison avenue with the film industry or the social and electronic media or perhaps it comes some groups are individuals that in the name of an enlightened society advocate for changes that undermine religious values. there was a time we heard we're not trying to change your religious beliefs we just think all people and all views should be respected and treated equally we're just reflecting the times and everyone should live a and let live. but there is no such pretense anymore. we see no religion is treated with derision and ridicule treated mockingly. we realize that is often admitted to you to change religious beliefs and the to change the role of religion

for a more secular society. we know what this means a poisoned atmosphere where the potential for law and policy that respect religion will be severely weakened and this is happening already. weaker laws in turn have their own power to negatively influence society. as they say the law is the teacher and the results of the cycle is ultimately greater hostility. this is not an easy road many indicate over all americans have a favorable view of religion but in my opinion they like it when it is docile and passive but with religious hiring of a

deal is it changes then it is harder to pass legislation and when it does it is not always with the full measure of protection. sadly, religious freedom is fundamental freedom is becoming a matter of negotiation and compromise. in these rough waters it is all hands on deck. i close with this serious caveat. there are many garrisons to join forces and fight for religious freedom for all but we also must remember who and what we are and what makes this different from each other and from secular society. these groups have specific believes government missions and messages that defied the responsibility and while we all appreciate the value of joining together sometimes it is not possible without some way impinging upon the religious character aaron

integrity it is unique to each of our faith. in deep -- indeed an expression of coalition testimony, legal research statements are letters even with issues where we agree might have the potential to cause the distinct teachings to be blurred, confused or misunderstood if foundational principles, at special circumstances or a new wants to contribute to our message and that would be diluted lost in a joint effort. in those cases we might sometimes we must, pursue a different path to have our voices clearly heard. groups have too you draw lines to make tough choices. there is great opportunity

and power in unity also great power in the uniqueness of the individuality that lies within the diversity. how and when to balance it is our great challenge. thank you. [applause] >> i would like to invite the father sergio a professor at st. vladimir's the logical seminary to offer his opening remarks. >> thank you. i have a friend who is newly ordained in the church of england and is given the duty of his first funeral at a crematorium and he was incredibly nervous how he would do and so the gentleman to a cancer is the steps and abet the pulpit where he conducted the funeral service there were a

series of buttons along beside and if there was the in ground burial he should push the top button than that paul there is to come forward to escort the body out. if it was a cremation he would push the bottom button to that was signaled of folks in the back to take the casket away and close at. my friend finished the funeral service thinking he had done rather well and pushed the button and six paul bears appeared in front of him and the curtain opened up to take the casket way. he was flummoxed it had down idea what to do then suddenly from behind a curtain cave of voice that said if you want -- if you

want him back push the middle button. [laughter] >> but orthodox christians in very recent history with that group of christians from around the world have suffered under republican and democratic administrations and orthodox christianity eastern orthodox suffered enormously in iraq after u.s. invasion of the bush administration in. also that christian body which suffered enormously in egypt, and nearly 10% and

their plight is hardly known in the american public. we have to missionary's son were kidnapped six weeks ago in syria and most americans would hardly know their story. but to ask a question why is this group almost invisible in our american understanding of christianity in light of what they have suffered a religious liberty? we have a church the west has forgotten the yet to we are here and i will share with you today the institutional memory that is important because the orthodox christians are like canaries in to the mind that they start to do show a little stressed that is a signal to pay attention and orthodox christianity is showing the stress science. the other speakers today have been indicating this is

a time for a wake-up call we cannot sleep through what is happening in front of us. we can no longer except the fact it has been a myth and it has never been the big thing with the religious world looks to caesar to be the protector. the orthodox christians understand what it is like to be a minority religion the history of the middle east demonstrates this clearly. we understand subtle andover intimidation and keep quiet stay within your walls and within your churches we understand the term like committed to that is applied to jews and christians in the middle east did god forbid it should be applied to any religious minority group in this country. we'll understand the impact of communism for if you look where it is strong it is

largely the christian world the former soviet union and eastern european reno what it is like to survive under the godless state put the christian martyrs just in russia alone far surpasses the first millennia in christian history meander stand the message we're beginning to see it signals once again to know your place. we recognize we could be useful at certain points solomon was it useful to rally during the second world war but when these will this was over coming back we went to being underground with their persecution to become more and more severe under the khrushchev era. many of us sitting here in this room today of praise and rejoice at the way john paul the great and ronald reagan and margaret thatcher helped to bring down

communism but what we largely don't know is the role the orthodox church played in 1988 it was the millennial year of the baptism and gorbachev and perestroika were inflated decided it would be a good thing to lift the lid for one year and guess what? like toothpaste out of the two but was not going back. this is not ancient history. it is very, very recent basically only since the early '90s have they been able to find their voice again that is called the old country and in america we are small, but we your growing in moving in the right direction in amir finding both the confidence

and we're anxious to share our story and to seek with all of you the religious liberties that protect a right to worship god and we are anxious to protect religious liberties as it is expressed in the foundation of the country to stand shoulder to shoulder to make sure it is not a race we understand have ec it can disappear we know from our history things can change and go wrong very quickly. my guess is one or two of you know, of this portion of american history i am about to share that demonstrates why orthodox christians get concerned about the lack of religious liberty in the second world war the american orthodox christians were not allowed to wear dog tags to identify

themselves they learn the lesson they had a choice you have a catholic or protestant would every want but if they were orthodox the one to give them jewish what did it take? the orthodox willing to say we will elect members of our state to congress to halt change our particular situation. there is more history. with the same time period in alaska orthodox christians have some numerical strength and our people were rounded up from the villages to put in a concentration camp the same as japanese-americans only our orthodox christians were placed in one concentration camp called thunder bay and had one toilet serving hundreds of people simply located over the dock when they return to

their home villages what did they find? that our government had used the icon from the church as target practice and they were destroyed they sat quietly impassable for many years until once again they find their voice during the reagan ministration restitution was made. during fabada recent health and human services unpleasantness, we again became sensitive to the fact things can change quickly and the clamps can come down hard on those who are simply passive and have lost their voice our willing to give us our call is to take action and find your voice don't be silenced and take the pledge from the orthodox to christian children we will stand shoulder to shoulder

with every group represented today to make sure our liberties are secure. thank you. [applause] >> i would like to welcome the general counsel of the church of jesus christ for latter-day saints. >> thank you. i can truly say is an honor to be here and i have found the remarks of my colleagues on this panel to be fascinating and compelling and i am grateful to offer remarks at the and there are volumes obviously to be spoken religious liberty across the spectrum of what they had already been in the interest of time i would like to focus my remarks which in my a judgment are overarching importance.

first, the current attack on religious liberty is an attack on human liberty we need to be clear about that. in the 20th century became to recognize human identities such as race and ethnicity and national origin. additionally we came to recognize the importance of gender to a knowledge the human dignity of both men and women while at the same time with the unique contributions of each sex and recently we have come to understand some people also form powerful identities around sexual orientation and a gay-rights group is based on the fact that for some people's sexual identity is a defining characteristic of who they will they want themselves to be these various dimensions of human dignity year secular not religious in nature.

all of these aspects of human identity are now seen not as something widely important in their private life but as worthy to public acceptance we no longer demand people remain in the closet of their personal identity and wealth creating challenges this openness and except its of human diversity can be positive. but this accommodation a secular interests cannot be accomplished at the expense of religious interest of faith our faith is key to human dignity. there need not be at conflict the msnbc a's o some of contest of those of another. but unfortunately that is a contest that is raising its

head. a significant portions of the population sees to believing god religious faith has been portrayed by some as a hobby much like membership of the bowling league gore book club or perhaps participation of a cause such as environmentalism because faith has an element of choice because no one can be forced to believe and people sometimes changed religions it is often portrayed as being less profound than less intrinsic to do and what we are of other aspects of human identity that are deemed beyond personal choice. insure religious faith is increasingly portrayed by some as a new lifestyle choice therefore they argue it is to support human dignity than sexual orientation and in this view for religious liberty may

have the importance but it cannot truly be the first freedom because there are other interests and values that are more important. some secular advocates assert that as their human dignity increases, religion and their religious must give way before it. it represents a clear and present danger to the liberty of all people. because wrist -- religion is fundamental to our identities apollos the free exercise must never be deemed second class or support net. just as an advocate demands respect for their dignity so much they acknowledge the people of faith. my second point* is closely related to the first and once we recognize revenging can be fundamental to a person's identity we must also recognize the free exercise of religion

necessarily entails more than just the right to believe and worship in purely private spaces can face communities in the members require space to flourish and legal, social, cultural and which they live out there religious beliefs and pass on the traditions to the next generation. for faith communities with police sam practices of a modern secular culture that is more than ever and traditional religious beliefs and how they are left by people a favor increasingly in tension with american culture and mass media and the elites opinions. these are rapidly spanning legal conflicts as values are imposed by force of law. nowhere is this more evident than in areas touching sexuality. many religions have the options regarding marriage and family but from the

sacred text families in the identities have been built -- built around such believes the yen rather than respecting these components of faith and the lies they shape, a secular sinkers and advocacy groups seek -- seek to portray the groups as a grant bigotry to be banished from public settings confined to private places. in other words, a new clause it is being constructed for those with traditional religious values on sexuality and family. true religious liberty must include more than the right to hold a belief in one's head and to worship quietly and in purely private spaces and it would be under the tyrannical for the state that it requires more than the absence of totalitarian expression and religious organizations must be free and protected to be ordered their affairs including the

employment of those who carry out there religious purposes. likewise, people of faith must be reasonably free not only to believe but to me please exercise their religion in the spaces where they lived the majority of their lives. those include professional and commercial settings as the others on the panel have already noted today. third, and finally it is imperative the diverse base communities stand together where each will surely follow long. this is not a matter of akio men is them more homogenous police systems but a recognition it is our right to have been holed would never face traditionally hold individually that unites us together in common cause even though they are bridging the free exercise of religion does not implicate my narrow face

interest i must recognize that the freedom of one faith is the freedom of all including my own. every victory for religious liberty is a notion that the state has ultimate power over our faith communities in religious lives and every loss for religious liberty risks emboldening the state to hasten into the precincts rimas to relate to defend the religious practices of diverse religions in the needs of the members to manifest the faith of the day life. i close with an expression of my own commitment to religious liberty stated in the words of the mormon profit smith. "it has been demonstrated i am willing to die for a more men than ample to declare before have and i am just as ready to die to defend the rights of a presbyterian, a baptist or a man of any of their denomination.

for the same principle that would trample upon the rights of the latter-day saints would trample upon the rights of the roman catholics or of any other denomination who may be unpopular and too weak to defend themselves. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, we will have a spirited conversation among star sows and then i would like to open it up to your questions. take a moment to write those out and we will collect those. one of the things that kept popping up in your statements that i want to pick up on, when you look at the surveys you are dealing with 16 percent of the population unchurched or unaffiliated and among millennial that number increases.

you mentioned that a track tape player of the i applaud world. here is the question do you consider this a major problem as far as religious liberty is concerned with a decrease in belief or the expressed allegiance to one creator or another? have you changed that dynamic and how will that impinge or increase religious liberty going forward? >> it is a challenge and an opportunity. there are some very basic and indisputable facts a 20 / 40 demographic to go of male and female the disparity is even greater in terms of the failure of religious institutions to transmit the vision and ideas and the core beliefs

to the future. these are the future and we have somewhere along skyline failed to transmit core values so i think it is an opportunity to come back to the idea to fight harder and not smarter there should be a fundamental retooling with the face communities are and how we engage because on the one hand you have the popular culture who is enormously creative, they captivate the mind of this generation and we have nothing that is competitive. the marketing merchandising and branding of our vision vision, our ideas, we have failed with breathtaking

confidence. there is an opportunity we got this through in new ways of the christian tradition how do we develop with a new line to speak to a new market? >> look at the cultural landscape and pop culture you have tyler perry. that is it. >> hello. >> that is it it indicates a different value. to pick up something that you mentioned earlier but the notion of said tariff a of the dictatorship of relativism as we see that to make its way for word but then weave its way into the government, how do you answer that without being labeled as so many roman catholics are to be an

extremist extremist, hater, intoleranc e? elder? >> repeat that question again. >> you need more time. i know the you try to buy a vowel. had to make this statement in a society that is increasingly secular for your fave howdy you try to change a car without being labeled as you are also roman catholics as intolerant and as a hater? >>'' we are seeing interesting listening to the remarks that if you think about it the challenges of religious liberty falls into two categories. one is the tyranny of the maturity to the unpopular minority, certainly the

latter day saints has that in our history and every face group represented on this panel has had that expression some comments have been made movingly about that but the secular is an issue is relatively new for us in the united states. i don't think i can think of another era in the history of this country where secularism itself has become something of a religion that is now challenging religious faith generally. other nations have seen that happen with tragic consequences. in our circles of the latter-day saints, we think what their needs to be in our country across the faith community is an increase in the emphasis on the faith and family. not just on religious freedom but what we need to do or speak up about, all of

us and make use of the ipad instead of the eight track tape is the importance of faith and family. this is a subject that needs to be heard and people need to begin to hear that as something of that is important as faith and family and religious freedom are three legs to this tool. that is the only way, in my view to effectively combat the encroachment of what is a very aggressive secularism now. >> i would just add a short point* i am a little optimistic because i think that our society, especially our young are starving and yearning for meaning in their lives and there is so much secularism and so much

hollywood, bashing, and trends that they can take before they realize it is all emptiness and eventually , i am optimistic about it, they will come back looking for their roots and faith. >>. >> i completely agree and one of the things that i do for my daughter the edges graduated from college last year we talk about the cultural stuff so there is how many people have seen girls on hbo? it is exhausting. my wife says she will not watch it. i get that. i watch it. i agree.

this sewage as some point* the kids will age out or overdose but my concern that we in the faith community have to take seriously to be business friendly audience audience, the marketing and branding because on the business of secularization and the cultural sewage coming we now have to engage markets with the crowd raising a different race than sooner or later that may be counter intuitive but globally, it jay z is a cultural leader and an industry that no one saw coming, 45 years ago when these kids are in new york city bouncing around with the ghetto fox now is a multibillion dollar industry and it is not black culture

is global youth culture. i whizzed in a movie theater they were selling fancy ipads it was all the music we will have to take the issue of the cultural struggle, and take that seriously because we do not engage in it. i am optimistic if we fight smarter and develop a strategic approach for replanting and updating the message, which is returnable we have not learned how to communicate that effected the for reasons that are obvious. >> father? >> very briefly, i concur that secularism is a competing religion and very aggressive but i would say our energies need not be directed to converting the secularist but it begins within our own houses of worship. the cardinal was asked in the york where i live wire with such a heavy catholic population duse of voters

voted against with the church teaches and the answer was we have not taught them correctly amir timid to preach and teach as we should. am looking at the end regeneration we need to be able to teach with dinner on household of faith that is charitable and with the spirit of joy because we seem to be so negative about everything and that is not attractive. >> i have a specific question just for you. and feel free to comment on what we were talking about but to broaden this, both you and the rabbi mention something i want to pick up on and how do we preserve our differences in the face community yet have this unity of purpose? i want to offer that with everybody but i will start over here and then ask what is the to do list leaving here? it is nice ready to come

together to have a coffee and i love the turban. [laughter] and i do love the turban. with a hairline like mine i need it but what do we do constructively and how you work together and maintain your identity? >> i think the experience has been usually us coming together in a time of crisis usually a catastrophe hasted have been for us to feel a sense of urgency eddie to reach out to this pastor but the does not do anything because if you reach out to people in emergency it is like trying to make friends while the fire alarm is

going on how deep of a relationship can you establish so how do we preserve our religious identity but at the same time we come together with things that reach across the divide? and talking in a language said everybody can understand the language of art or view the to transcend all differences. so bring the community together not just ramadan more shabbat dinner, and no. bringing the communities together with the initiative that serve the betterment of society it doesn't have to be religious because usually if it is the defense is up. so to come up with creative initiatives not just to discuss bad stuff but to come back to the issue of the i pat, i had'' read an interesting poll conducted a

couple years ago but the amount of americans the reid religious information on line is higher than those that are gambling so it is not going anywhere and this is one way we can come together as they leaders to bring ourselves up today with social media and how you engage the use to keep him interested in not board and rolling their eyes visa things we can put our head together to talk about also one more thing i think it is from elaine l. larsen to say that people around the world

are increasingly retrieving a using the internet and interestingly around the world americans are the highest it to do that and for most americans it is the women so this is something that face leaders should bank god because that door of opportunity for this market will not remain open for too long. >> rabbi cohen you mentioned in your opening remarks that we have to work together but also a part and alone. expand on that. how'd you do that? >> in what circumstances you have to go along through religious liberty? >> in our community there are many issues where we have to thread the needle very nearly. to pick a few examples with

the hhs issue it does not directly affect my community but yet we see it as a larger issue that does. on the fundamental issue of abortion, the orthodox jewish community is against abortion on demand but it is not so simple because with our jewish law there are situations where abortion is not only permitted by it required as a matter of our religious faith. we have to thread that needle we are against abortion on demand but for limitations but yet at the same time we need a certain level of leeway that perhaps other groups would not be in favor of for the legislation to be satisfactory for us. another example is public prayer. usually if you are for it or

against it, we have to thread the needle there also. we are very uncomfortable with denominational prayer prayer, a very uncomfortable with it, but in the larger sense we are for prayer in the public square and we believe adults and children both should wake up in the morning to it knowledge guide and that he is part of our lives and the integral part of our lives and our values of who we are. so prayer, we are for it in general, but then it gets tricky to denominational level because it might lose some of its value for members of our community. and the last example, i

hesitate a little bit to say this, but let's say the issue was the right to privatize. i am not saying it is not a right under the first amendment or that people don't have the right to do that to defend their rights in court, however, as a matter of practicality, a proselytizing negatively affects the spiritual quality of our community, the jewish community. i will not deny a person's right under the first amendment but that is simply not an area, it might be as case that is limitations for others this simply not an area that be in good faith can get involved in. i would add one more thing

fell but the positive side in terms of working together , i just recall the experience we had with the religious freedom restoration act we have a coalition of 75 groups and civil rights groups that don't sit down to the table ever and yet for several years we stuck together and able to get their freedom of restoration act passed in that coalition and the strength was the key strengths to being able to work together? the key was that everybody understood the issue involved was above personal interests. every religion could have used the religious freedom restoration act to carr are

religious practices that they wanted to preserve with the exception or to not allow other religions to practice their religious practices similarly with a car about but the fundamental operating procedure in that coalition was that no religious group would do something for their own good at the detriment of others and having that a higher purpose i think made it possible for us in a very difficult situation with a wide and diverse civil-rights groups to come together and be successful. >> as shaykha yosif was speaking during the introductory remarks their

references made here and there to hate crimes against various religious communities. is there any concern by invoking and looking to hate crime legislation as a protection, that sword cuts both ways that there are so many things that they preach from the pulpit could be construed as the hate crime? walk us through that balancing act. >> and i would say there's not much of a balancing act. the activities that we are advocating the recognized under the law and through society as hate crimes are literally criminal and physical acts of violence that violate the law even if

not attached to hate the we would ask them to recognize that hate element and things seem to hate speech again again, this is my legal background but the law is quite clear. with regard to speech that literally you have a very direct, and impeachable direct correlation between

is not one we are worried about. >> we have seen that in england. >> that is a good point*. a good point* that american law is unique worldwide. i also studied internationally as part of my academic background and in europe, as you might know that he speech is prosecutable and a crime. we have a common-law tradition in the united states, but unlike canada we maintain fidelity to that tradition to maintain that but to the point* for example, where the ku klux klan or supporters of theirs came to a town in hoboken in new jersey a few years ago and wanted to do it demonstration in front of a jewish synagogue.

and their right to do so was protected because they have that ability to speech now there was the incitement of violence was different but the larger issue of calling the assertion of a religious belief hate speech is what reverend was talking about is obviously a concern that cuts both ways. i really appreciate the remarks with regard to the discussion over the elegy bt movement being one of a community somehow to assert the fundamental human dignity in a way that it saw fit i also believe is our way to articulate human indignity and it will be

imported without giving up core values to respectfully but for the reviews on these issues but doing in a way that is respectful not to be dehumanized and i will share a quick anecdote. yesterday i was in a very uncomfortable position. i was in the cab coming from union station and the cabdriver was listening to a radio station and the radio host asserted strongly is discussing the issue of lesbian women. the radio host said pretty much always be and women -- lesbian women have a history of abuse. he had a broad stroke a whole class of people.

and the driver was vocally agreeing it and i felt uncomfortable as the key in a broadly stereotypes as a way to literally engage in violence whether school or a hate crime so i asked him to pullover and i obviously paid him for his services up to that point* but i cannot pay him any more. because i did not feel comfortable being in that cab. and he said i will turn that off i said you can listen to what you want to listen to but i will exercise my right not to give you business. i will be on is the person that was making this assertion on the radio was coming from a faith perspective. so when i say it is important when we ask that our dignity be respected and not be stereotyped we have

to do the same as a community. >> this is an interesting transition to one of the questions from the audience. if religious liberty must accommodate in public spaces how to read balance that with gender expression issues the government tries to force people to do tolerate in violation of their religious beliefs? who wants to take that? >> no takers? vinik will take a very quickly. because i spoke so much. >> we will give you your own panel next time. >> i will do this very quickly. i would strongly assert it is important we not let our rights conflict with each other.

what we have done with our religious liberty cases is the number one argument against invoking religious liberty in the workplace tends to be the slippery slope argument. what we have said is each case has to be decided on a case by case basis that they can show their religious expression does not interfere with the ability to do their job. so tomorrow they will say i went to iraq i wear a turban and i clinically resuscitated people who were dead and i can do my job and i have been to have as faith and tradition that the practice while i served. if you look at a case by case basis you can decide we accommodate the six then the rastafarian will want to be accommodated or this other community who might come to the table and you look

kiddies' case on case by case to see if the person can do their job if they have the issues then that is all that should count. >> two quick points. with your cabdriver experience, i would like to give you an alternate possible interpretation. what the guy said on the radio and i am assuming you set it in context, there is actually evidence for the argument that in certain cases young women in this case, lesbians have come to that orientation as a function of abuse. not to make it a blanket generalization for all but there are cases in fact, we're that has happened also with males. while i take your point*, i

think he may have overstated the case that it does not support that broad stroke, but that statement is not completely out of bounds and to the extent with which there have been cases that is the case. now i say this because in pour black communities with the work i have done with young people, i have seen cases which are more frequent than is reported for political reasons that a lot of young people are polled into situations where there was abuse, sexual abuse that resulted in where they went. i simply say i take your point*, we should not make broad generalizations like the ones asserted. but in searching communities where the conditions are very extreme, there are

instances like that. and to go to your question about gender expression that the government tries to force people to lew tolerate and how that comports with accepting religion variety. but some of these questions are genuinely complicated and there is not a simple answer and it has not been thought through because would immediately comes to mind is the young male child who says i have not thought it through but i am not sure. it is complicated. and rabbi i would be interested in your view on that.

>> i will come back to the rabbi in a moment. >> i would like to go to the elder. >> notwithstanding what i have already said about this confrontation which is developing between secularism, i think it is useful for us to try to avoid thinking in the us purses' them a sort of way. but i was interested in the preceding panel to have two representatives of state legislators and those who work with them it is useful to think in terms of government not as an institution trying to force something but to get the government is now in the place where it should be to try to balance interest the