Before answering this question, it will be helpful to break down the constitution and its sections.
The Preamble begins the constitution and is, perhaps, the most famous section. It is one sentence and sets the precedent for future generations. The opening phrase, "we the people" is perhaps the most important and famous phrase in the entire elongated sentence as it establishes the motivation and the purpose of the constitution. This was a country created for the people.
Following the Preamble are the seven original articles of the constitution. These seven articles, intact from their original draft of 1787, prescribe the supreme law of the country and set up the government as it is to be executed. These seven articles establish the three branches of government and their respective powers, and most importantly, they also set up a system of checks and balances to keep each branch from gaining a supreme advantage over the other. To read both the Preamble and the articles click HERE.
Following the articles are the amendments of the constitution. Article five established the means of amending the constitution. The first ten amendments are known as the bill of rights. Amendments, per article five, must first be proposed by a two thirds vote by congress and then approved by a two thirds vote of the states. Interestingly, the states, by that same two thirds vote, can propose an amendment as well. To read the amendments to the constitution, click HERE.
That is a lose description of our constitution which will suffice to answer our original question concerning the constitution and Christianity. Neither the preamble nor the seven articles refer to Christianity; as a matter of fact, religion, itself, is not addressed at all in either section. Religion is first addressed in the first amendment of the constitution which states:
"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."
Christianity is not specifically addressed by the constitution, but it is also no rejected by it either. Amendment one is used as justification for removing all references remotely Christian from public display in schools and other public venues. Public displays and references to Christianity are attacked and banned in the name of the first amendment, but let me suggest that this action is not only wrong but also unconstitutional. My reason is based on this very amendment and contained completely inside the constitution, unlike those attacking Christianity.
Remember, those that are attacking Christianity are doing so through the first amendment with assistance from a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury (CT) Baptist Union in response to their concern about a country-wide religion. Their concern was that this new country, the United States, would follow the path of England and create a state-wide religion, i.e., the Church of England. Jefferson wrote his letter to assure them that there would be no such creation, and in that response, he inserted the phrase, "the separation of church and state," which has been used in conjunction with the first amendment to slowly purge Christianity from all public schools and venues.
I would propose that as long as there is no established law that states that the ten commandments must be on the wall of every school, that prayer must be part of every opening assembly and that Christianity is the national religion... then the ten commandments, bible verses and Christian prayer are all permissible through the first amendment of the constitution. And, here is why I can say that: to propose that those things are illegal is to violate the first amendment of the constitution because it is, in essence, establishing a national religion.
It is establishing a religious standard that all must follow which is, by the very wording of the first amendment, making a law respecting "an establishment of religion." The conjunction "or" is an important word in this phrase as it links back to the word "law." The first amendment is clear: Congress shall make no law that either establishes a religion or prohibits the free exercise of one. It is not one or the other but both. Congress shall make no law that establishes a religion or prohibits the free exercise of religion. It is a brilliant amendment because to establish a religion prohibits the free exercise of other religions, and to prohibit the free exercise of religion is, in essence, establishing a religion.
Some would argue that removing Christianity is just ensuring and establishing religious neutrality, and not establishing a religion at all. I would argue that there is no such thing as religious neutrality, first, and second, it is still prohibiting the free exercise of religion. I would base my arguments on several issues.
First, everyone has a worldview. No one looks at the world through a neutral lens. Even those who claim to believe that there is no God are still viewing the world through their worldview - atheism. By definition, atheism is a religious process. It is a world view and a belief by which one lives, and therefore, it is a religious practice that should not get preferential treatment over other worldviews, as established by the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States. One can be an atheist, but one can not assert that view over all other views. Removing a view that opposes that view is clearly an assertion in direct violation of the first amendment. It is establishing a religious preference to which all must submit.
Second, when those opposed to Christianity push legislation directly opposed to Christianity and its tenets they are, in essence, in violation of the first amendment by prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Establishing a federal law or even a federal mandate prohibiting Christianity is abridging the freedom of Christians in this country, and forcing those Christians to submit to law in violation of their religion. Many will argue that Christianity is not be banned, but instead, some of its tenets are banned in order to ensure that it will not become the established religion of the country. This will not work because when you ban one tenet of Christianity, prayer, for example, in response to another religion, atheism, the banning of that one tenet is asserting the other tenet of that other religion as the religion of the land and, in essence, establishing a national religion. I would posit that atheism is the only religious view in this country protected by legislation and enforced by the federal government. I am willing to be persuaded otherwise.
Whether you are a Christian, an Atheist, a Mormon, a Muslim, Jewish or any other religious affiliation you should be concerned with this attack on Christianity for one simple reason... it opens the door for a future attack on you. If the federal government is permitted to establish a litmus test in order to create a peremptory religious condition then all religions are in danger. The one thing we do know is that history is never static, and change... comes quickly.
No comments:
Post a Comment