God & Country, Right & Left; pt 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
- First Amendment United State Constitution
Granted, I’m no constitutional scholar, but the brilliance of that document is the plain language that facilitates an easier understanding of the citizenry it guides. As a writer I also have deep appreciation for the 6001 words (original text and declaration) that, inarguably, has had the most consequential impact on humanity than any in history. Sorry Bible lovers, that’s just how I see it. Brevity wins.
It confounds many as to how, of all issues addressed in the writing of that masterpiece, religion was given top billing, the very first item in the very first amendment. I have often wondered about that myself.
I have also noticed that questions of religion in politics always get moved to the front burner in election years. This exposes an enigmatic quality about religion in America; while it was a prime motivator in establishing our independence it is also a time-tested weapon in the arsenal of division, a key tactic in manipulating electoral advantage.
The tired old lefty canard that extremist right-wingers want to replace the constitution with the New Testament will be resurrected and replayed ad-nauseam in various versions.
Of all the left’s conservo-phobias I have always found that one the most comical. The idea that a strict constitutionalist would prioritize replacing the constitution is patently absurd because a true conservative’s most fervent desire is to restore, not replace, the constitution.
I can’t speak for the religious but in my view better adherence to the limits of the constitution would provide sufficient overlap to satisfy most Christians. Leaving religion out of it, as the constitution demands, is inherently more consistent with the tenets of the fiscal conservative and libertarian factions.
It is not my intention to malign my social conservative friends but only to offer a more neutrally religious viewpoint. That said, let’s get another thing straight; there is no refuting we are a nation populated by a majority of Christians, but conflating that to say we are a Christian nation is also divisive. It’s not the same thing. There is one Christian Nation and it’s called the Vatican.
“Christian Nation” connotes a government-religion nexus that our constitution expressly forbids. Founders could not establish a Christian nation and at the same time cement into its foundation a clause that prevents doing exactly that.
Christianity, like all religions, implies an exclusivity of belief, if you do not believe you cannot belong. The constitution was made deliberately flexible to allow for any belief systems. Therefore it is neutral on the subject other than to prevent a state religion.
What the constitution doesn’t do explicitly enough is prevent the state from establishing itself as a religion, which we will discuss in part 2.
Parting question; how can mandating a religious organization to defy it’s doctrine NOT be construed as “prohibiting the free exercise” of that religion?
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, 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 and State."
-Thomas Jefferson
Comments