By Douglas V. Gibbs
As a Constitutionalist who has spent a lot of time studying the Constitution, and the original writings of the men who were alive during that era, I find it absolutely puzzling that a large portion of the population, and much of the political and judicial crew of cockroaches, believes that the liberal notion of separation of church and state is constitutional. The first part of the First Amendment is quite clear. It says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
The liberal opinion of the "separation of church and state" is that the governmental system is supposed to be thoroughly secular, and not influenced by religious values in any way shape or form. The abhorrence of religion by these people is especially focused on Christianity.
In 1947 the U.S. Supreme Court first used the idea of "separation of church and state" in the hopes of isolating government from religion. The case was Everson v. Board of Education, and the evidence of the separation of church and state was pulled from a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in Connecticut. In response to the phrase "erect a wall of separation between church and state," the court determined that the phrase, as well as the rest of the letter by Jefferson, supported their opinion that "Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another."
Prior to that ruling American political thought never considered that the First Amendment meant what the court determined in their ruling. The Founding Fathers, in fact, not only did not try to eliminate the presence of religion, especially Christianity, but embraced Christian thought and values, and even believed that God inspired their Constitutional Convention and the text of the Constitution. In fact, when the founders were at a point of great difficulty, Ben Franklin, a Founding Father often touted as being a staunch atheist, proposed that each session of the convention begin with a word of prayer. The founders encouraged the public practice and expression of Christianity, they did not believe is should be discouraged.
The Danbury Baptist letter by Jefferson that the court quoted was a response to a letter from the Baptist Church in Connecticut that was literally a plea for help. Connecticut was a theocracy, and the Puritans were in control. In order to hold office in the state, or even vote, one had to be a Puritan. The Danbury Baptists were a minority, and felt that they were being treated wrongly, so they appealed to the Jefferson, congratulating him for his win in the presidential election, and asking that the federal government intervene in their battle with the Puritans.
The states, being sovereign entities, did not have to abide by the First Amendment. The First Amendment applies to the federal government only, and what the states did in regards to religion was their own business. Fearing that if the federal government ever took sides in such a situation, it could lead to the establishment of a state religion, as was the norm in Europe, the Founding Fathers specifically stated in the First Amendment that Congress could not establish religion. However, understanding the importance of religion in society, they also were specific to indicate that the federal government could not prohibit the free exercise of religion, as well.
When Jefferson wrote the words about the wall of separation, what he was saying was that the Federal Government, because of the First Amendment, could not take sides in the matter of religion. It is a state issue, and the Danbury Baptists had to find their own resolution with the Puritans in Connecticut.
What is amazing is that not only was Thomas Jefferson not at the Constitutional Convention, but that his words in his letter to the Danbury Baptists are found nowhere in the Constitution. Yet, the concept of "Separation of Church and State," as inspired by this letter of his to the Danbury Baptists, carries more weight in judicial circles than does the writing of any other Founder, or the text of the Constitution, for that matter.
Recently a district judge declared the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional, Seniors in Georgia were told they could not pray before meals at their seniors home because it received federal funding, and there has been a battle over a cross that memorializes our veterans in the Mohave Desert because it is on federal land (atheists later stole it, taking what they believe to be the law, into their own hands).
The First Amendment is startling in its clarity. It specifically says that "Congress shall make no law. . . " So, one must simply ask, was the proclamation that declared a National Day of Prayer Congress making a law respecting the establishment of a religion? On the National Day of Prayer did Congress pass a law requiring the people to pray, and to pray to a particular God? When the seniors in Georgia say their prayer before meals, is it the Congress making a law establishing a religion? Is the erection of a cross on public land an example of Congress making a law establishing a religion?
In the simplest terms, the First Amendment restricts the government, not the people. Any religious person, any religious organization, any religious conviction has its place in the public debate. There are not two distinct provisions. Non-establishment is nothing without ensuring that at the same time the freedom of religion remains intact. They are companions. The only way for Americans to enjoy true freedom of religion is to keep government out of religion’s affairs.
Simply put, the Secularists have it wrong, and one needs only to read the Constitution to understand that.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Americans Who Don’t Attend Church Form Base of Obama’s Support, Gallup Polling Indicates - CNS News
92 Percent of Americans Believe in God; Only 5 Percent Oppose National Day of Prayer - CNS News
Ga. Seniors Told They Can't Pray Before Meals - WSBTV 2 Georgia
Cross stolen from Mohave Desert within weeks of Supreme Court ruling - Washington Post
No comments:
Post a Comment