A Case for Restoring an Original Understanding of the First amendment
Jul 19th, 2010 by David Anderson
America is slipping into a religious apartheid. Jefferson’s wall of separation between church and state has quietly morphed into a separation of church and state, then into a separation of Christianity from public policy and education. It is contrary to the founder’s vision.
The founders wanted to protect American religious expression in the public square not stifle it. They wanted everyone to have the same right to express their faith not be banned from expressing it. The First Amendment is being turned on its head. Language that was never in it is being twisted into something more appropriate to Article 70 of the Soviet Constitution. The Lemon Test demands a secular purpose for religious activities. The Engel v. Vitale & Murray v. Curlett cases of course took most prayer and Bible reading out of the schools.
McCreary v. ACLU of Kentucky was a crazy case banning the Ten Commandments from a court room when they are engraved in the walls of the SCOUS. Stone v. Graham, which banned the Ten Commandments from the schools, had a radical proposition. The secular purpose of people knowing them did not matter because they had religious content as well.
The Ten Commandments are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths, and no legislative recitation of a supposed secular purpose can blind us to that fact. The Commandments do not confine themselves to arguably secular matters, such as honoring one’s parents, killing or murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, and covetousness. Rather, the first part of the Commandments concerns the religious duties of believers: worshipping the Lord God alone, avoiding idolatry, not using the Lord’s name in vain, and observing the Sabbath Day.
Ignore that you do not understand our founder’s references to them or even the history of many of our laws without them. Ignore that no one was trying to force you to follow them. The founders had the Ten Commandments taught in the schools. How could it be unconstitutional. They quoted it in making laws. Were they so stupid that they didn’t understand their own writings? No, we were intentionally fighting the intent of the founders and rewriting the Constitution in the image of a Brave New World.
Why can America honor Columbus as important but allow banning of nativities during Christmas? Christmas reflects upon the birth of the single most important figure historically and philosophically in Western culture. How can that not have a secular purpose? Why should recognition of the day be stripped of its historic meaning? The Skoros decision in the 2nd circuit does just that.
We need to restore balance to the American system. We need people who will sponsor legislation under the Congress’ Article 3 authority to restrict the courts jurisdiction on matters like the 10 commandments and under the 14th Amendment the right to enforce it belongs to Congress therefore Congress needs to assert its right to preempt the court interference and set up a religious freedom restoration act which establishes a proper test. That is my view. According to polls, 75% or so tend to agree with finding a better balance. It is a winning stand.
Thank you for your comments, David.
It’s clear the struggle against freedom of religion and free speech has become overtly persecutory as radical secularist organizations such as the ACLU seek to drive Christians from meaningful participation in the public forum.
Who would have thought, even a generation ago. that police would demand Christian students praying in front of the Supreme Court must disband because of so-called “separation of church and state?”
Incidents of hostility and persecution of Christians exercizing their constitutional right to freedom of expression and right to assemble peacefully have increased exponentially as radical secularists seek to competely dominate the public square.
Look for such incidents to increase as Christians finally wake up and push back.
Religion is too complicated for leftists. They’d rather deify trees, whales, politicians or abortionists. Like G.K. Chesterton said, ‘the non-believer doesn’t believe in nothing- he believes in anything.’
Dave – got a question – read Ricks last post on this thread
Tea Party Federation Expels Tea Party Express
ummm you liking that?? – of course I am sure your defense of Rick;s 1st ammendment will be upheld
but I post LINKS to the truth – nothing offensive just – and the truth – but censored….
ahhhh and Im the hypocrite////