mr. chairman , this debate is about one question that each member and each american should ask himself or herself . 
this is the question : should any american citizen have to pass someone else 's private religious test to qualify for a tax-funded job ? 
i think the vast majority of americans would answer that question , absolutely not . 
should the gentleman from ohio ( mr. boehner ) xz4000360 , who is the author of this bill , have to come to me if i get a $ 5 million job computer training grant from the federal government under this bill , should the gentleman from ohio ( mr. boehner ) xz4000360 have to come to me and answer a 20-point religious questionnaire ? 
should the gentleman from ohio ( mr. boehner ) xz4000360 have to say whether or not he believes in jesus christ , whether or not he believes in evolution , whether or not he believes in the literal interpretation of the new testament ? 
i do not think the gentleman from ohio ( mr. boehner ) xz4000360 should have to answer those kinds of questions to me as a recipient of a $ 5 million job training grant . 
and without the scott amendment , that is exactly what could happen under this bill . 
for those who oppose the scott amendment , let me say what you are endorsing . 
you are saying it is okay for a church associated with bob jones university , at least based on its past philosophy , it can take a $ 1 million job training grant and pay for a sign that says , no jews or catholics need apply here for a federally funded job . 
do you really think that is right ? 
what the opponents of the scott amendment are saying is that the members of a white church who received a $ 1 million job training grant can say to an african american applicant , you do not belong to our church . 
even though you are totally qualified for this federally funded job , we are not going to hire you . 
what this bill would say , without the scott amendment , is that someone could say to a single mom trying to find a job in our religious faith , we do not believe single mothers should work , so we are not going to hire you , even though you are fully qualified for this job . 
religious discrimination is wrong . 
to subsidize it in the year 2005 i find unbelievable . 
it is unbelievable that on the very day american soldiers are risking their lives in iraq , and perhaps some have given their lives today in iraq to give the iraqis religious freedom , we are debating a bill on the floor of this house that would say an american citizen can be denied a federally funded , tax-funded job for simply one reason , the exercise of your religious faith . 
religious freedom is not just any freedom ; it is the first freedom . 
it is the first freedom enunciated in the bill of rights . 
it is the freedom upon which all other freedoms we cherish in this country are built . 
the founding fathers thought so much about that freedom , about religious freedom , they put in the first 16 words of the first amendment these words : `` congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion , or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. '' if saying that someone has to lose a job to support his or her family because they are exercising their own deeply-felt religious faith , if that is not prohibiting the free exercise of religion , what is ? 
if saying we are going to take away your ability to put food on the table for your children and a job that is paid for by taxpayers , to say that you can not have that job because you do not pass my private religious test , if that is not prohibiting the free exercise of religion , what is ? 
the ninth commandment warns people to not bear false witness against thy neighbor . 
yet repeatedly i have heard on this floor those say on this side of the floor that supporters of the scott amendment are opposed to faith-based groups being involved in providing social services . 
i would suggest perhaps they should not only preach the ten commandments ; perhaps they should exercise and practice the ninth commandment , because to make that argument is to suggest that the baptist joint committee , the american jewish committee , and numerous other religious groups are somehow opposing faith-based groups ' involvement in federal social service programs . 
you know that argument is simply not correct . 
this amendment , the scott amendment , is about one question and one question alone : should any american citizen have to pass another american citizen 's private religious test to qualify for a federally funded job ? 
i hope the members of this house will respect the founding fathers and the first amendment and the views of the vast majority of american citizens and say , no , you should not be denied a tax-funded job because of the exercise of your religious faith . 
i urge members on both sides of the aisle to put partisanship and politics aside . 
vote for religious freedom . 
vote for the scott amendment . 
