COLUMN: Where does it say church?
Hey you! Yeah, you. Come a little closer. Keep this quiet, now, because it’s a secret. Are you ready? Here, it is:
There is no separation of church and state clause in the Constitution.
Did you get that? No, really, I’m not kidding. I’m serious. In fact, the Constitution doesn’t even use the word “church.” But let’s read together the only part of the Constitution that mentions the word “religion.”
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
This comes from the First Amendment to the Constitution, which by the way, also guarantees freedom of speech and a free press, two clauses that enable me to write this article in peace.
So, if there is no separation of church and state clause in the Constitution, why is that phrase repeated again and again? Why do people use it so casually, as if it has always been there?
The answer is because they want to read more into the Constitution than was originally intended. A separation of church and state clause sounds much harsher than merely a simple injunction against what “state” can do. As it reads, religions have no responsibility to separate themselves from the “state.” That is the responsibility of government, and specifically, the legislature. Congress is not supposed to make any law concerning a formation or institution of religion.
And this phrase has crept into common usage, deceiving people into thinking it’s part of a federal document. There is even a non-profit organization called Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which devotes its time to eliminating all signs of religion from public institutions.
Last year, an atheist named Michael Newdow complained that a recital of the Pledge of Allegiance was a violation of the separation of church and state clause. He took his case to the Supreme Court. Now, in light of our recent discovery, is there any violation? Has Congress made a law respecting an establishment of religion? No.
Similarly, Ten Commandments monuments have been removed from government property in order to properly separate church and state. Again, did Congress enact a law concerning religion? No.
Many claim that the so-called “separation of church and state” clause was devised to shield Americans from religions, but it was actually created to protect religious liberty from government intrusion.
It’s interesting to note that many early Supreme Court decisions contained appeals to God, such as the 1892 ruling in “Church of the Holy Trinity vs. U.S.” which stated, “Our laws and institutions must be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of Mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian.”
Those days of implying that the Constitution is Christian are over, since the secularists and humanists have got their way.
I’m sure that with the removal of these monuments, we’ll see many other references to God, especially the Judeo-Christian type, removed and eliminated from all things government. Money, government documents, prayers on the House floor, all have references to a Divine Being, and we cannot have that, according to the separation of church and state crowd.
The Declaration of Independence states: “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Should we declare the Declaration of Independence unconstitutional? Yes, it sounds preposterous, but you know the next step as well as I.
An argument carried ad absurdum would say that anti-religionists will try to declare the Constitution itself unconstitutional.
God help us if that day ever comes.
Mark LaRocco is the assistant features editor. Comments can be sent to marklarocco@yahoo.com