Saturday, March 10, 2012

True History - The Issue of Separation of Church and State

   Did you know that the term, and the concept of 'Separation of Church and State' is not in the Constitution? I am amazed at how people shoot out those words as if somehow they were defending some kind of violation of their rights. But I think this is an issue that we don't have to be ignorant on. People that want to believe that the Constitution guarantees separation of church and state, will talk about it as if it is an established fact. The problem comes though, when we assume they are right, without questioning it.
   People in America assume, much like the Theory of Evolution, that this principle is a fact. What ends up happening then, is that other people assume that these people know what they are talking about. Listen. When people start projecting concepts as if they are fact, we need to research the concepts and find out what is really true. We have people today going to court assuming that 'Separation of Church and State' is a given. But what is the deeper issue?
   Here is what I believe is the deeper issue. First, let's go back into History and find out what the issue surrounding 'Separation of Church and State' is about.
   The whole phrase was coined by Thomas Jefferson, as he was writing to the Danbury Baptist Association, in 1802. Here is the quote from his letter; "... I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State." 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state These words are not in our Constitution. They are in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptist people! My, how things get twisted around. What was the goal of our American Forefathers? They didn't want to be in a country where the church and state were tied in together! That is what drove the Pilgrims over here in the first place! They didn't want the government to come in and tell them what they could and could not believe in! That is a long stretch from the implications of what we mean today by the words 'Separation of Church and State'.  
   Today, groups are ordered to remove Nativity scenes from their yards, BECAUSE THEY ARE ON GOVERNMENT PROPERTY. They took the 10 Commandments out of the public school system. Why? BECAUSE THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IS GOVERNMENT PROPERTY! I have even heard of such stories as this one; a teacher was ordered to take off a pin that had Jesus' name on it! She was not allowed to wear it because she was in a public school building, WHICH IS GOVERNMENT PROPERTY! 
   Now do you see some of the twisting of the law that people in authority are doing? I could tell story after story of how we, the people of the United States of America, are being violated, just because of the misuse of this phrase 'Separation of Church and State'. Even our court systems have bought into it! 
   My job is to inform you, the people of America, of the truth of such phrases and their misuse, which turns into abusing the law, and using it in an unjust way. Let's stay on top of this and know what the Constitution really does say and let's put a stop to the twisting of words and resources. Let's bring truth back to our justice system today. Tomorrow might be too late.

1 comment:

  1. Separation of church and state is a bedrock principle of our Constitution much like the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. In the Constitution, the founders did not say in so many words that there should be separation of powers and checks and balances; rather, they actually separated the powers of government among three branches and established checks and balances. Similarly, they did not merely say there should be separation of church and state; rather, they actually separated them by (1) establishing a secular government on the power of "We the people" (not a deity), (2) saying nothing to connect that government to god(s) or religion, (3) saying nothing to give that government power over matters of god(s) or religion, and (4), indeed, saying nothing substantive about god(s) or religion at all except in a provision precluding any religious test for public office. Given the norms of the day, the founders' avoidance of any expression in the Constitution suggesting the government is somehow based on any religious belief was quite a remarkable and plainly intentional choice. They later buttressed this separation of government and religion with the First Amendment, which constrains the government from undertaking to establish religion or prohibit individuals from freely exercising their religions. The basic principle, thus, rests on much more than just the First Amendment.

    That the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the text of the Constitution assumes much importance, it seems, to some who may have once labored under the misimpression it was there and, upon learning they were mistaken, reckon they’ve discovered a smoking gun solving a Constitutional mystery. To those familiar with the Constitution, the absence of the metaphor commonly used to name one of its principles is no more consequential than the absence of other phrases (e.g., Bill of Rights, separation of powers, checks and balances, fair trial, religious liberty) used to describe other undoubted Constitutional principles.

    To the extent that some nonetheless would like confirmation--in those very words--of the founders' intent to separate government and religion, Madison and Jefferson supplied it. Some try to pass off the Supreme Court’s decision in Everson as simply a misreading of Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists–as if that were the only basis of the Court’s decision. Instructive as that letter is, it played but a small part in the Court’s decision. Perhaps even more than Jefferson, James Madison influenced the Court’s view. Madison, who had a central role in drafting the Constitution and the First Amendment, confirmed that he understood them to “[s]trongly guard[] . . . the separation between Religion and Government.” Madison, Detached Memoranda (~1820). He made plain, too, that they guarded against more than just laws creating state sponsored churches or imposing a state religion. Mindful that even as new principles are proclaimed, old habits die hard and citizens and politicians could tend to entangle government and religion (e.g., “the appointment of chaplains to the two houses of Congress” and “for the army and navy” and “[r]eligious proclamations by the Executive recommending thanksgivings and fasts”), he considered the question whether these actions were “consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom” and responded: “In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the United States forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion.”

    The Constitution, including particularly the First Amendment, embodies the simple, just idea that each of us should be free to exercise his or her religious views without expecting that the government will endorse or promote those views and without fearing that the government will endorse or promote the religious views of others. By keeping government and religion separate, they serve to protect the freedom of all to exercise their religions.

    ReplyDelete