Separation of Church and State

“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.”

Above is the entire First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. That’s it, folks. I have emphasized the part dealing with the concept of “separation of church and state” because, once again during this very Christian time of the year, we are hearing from Christian groups who just simply don’t get the separation of church and state issue and are trying to make it into something it isn’t.

In simple layman’s terms, the government cannot start or favor a religion and they cannot stop you from practicing any religion you want (unless that religion infringes on other rights granted in the Constitution or Bill of Rights). The framers of the Constitution did this because America was primarily founded by those fleeing religious persecution and the Founding Fathers didn’t want anyone in America subjected to that same persecution here. Remember that England, Spain, France, Russia, most of the Middle East, and many eastern countries were (and still are, in many cases) ruled by governments with direct ties to centralized religion or were officially considered Theocracies. For example, in the 1500s, the Church of England separated itself from the Roman Catholic Church and the King established himself as the church leader. People who practiced other religions (especially Roman Catholics) were legally persecuted for those practices and this helped lead to mass migration to the New World. The Middle East still has Theocracies ruling many nations or strongly religious majorities that persecute religious minorities—we’ve heard all about the acts of violence against the Kurds, women, Sunni’s, Shiites, and other religious groups through that region.

The simplest way to make sure our government does not establish a religion, give special treatment to one religion over all others, or stop you from practicing whatever religion you want, is to “separate” government from religion. Over time, this evolved into meaning that the government avoids religious doctrine, comment, displays, or anything else that could show favoritism or prejudice toward one religion over another.

I am granting that America is predominantly Christian. The statistics I can find indicate that somewhere around 80-85% of Americans fall within some form of Christian belief (but only about 60% are affiliated with an established religious group or church). And it is primarily Christians who are vocal about separation of church and state issues. I am also granting that a certain level of Christian doctrine has inculcated the society and shows up on our money, in our pledges and in our practices, and other parts of life. Actually, it is primarily because of this predominance by one religion that we need this Amendment and must enforce it with due diligence.

When most of these religious groups complain about something relating to separation of church and state, what they are really complaining about is that THEIR (Christian) religion should be allowed, and they forget about the wide range of minority religions in this country with very different beliefs, rites, and needs. When they argue that prayer should be allowed in school, for example, they mean Christian prayer. They forget that if prayer is allowed in school, that has to allow the Muslims to pray five times a day facing east, Wiccans should be allowed to perform their nature ceremonies (some of which can and do involve nudity), and other, non-Christian styles of praying. Of course, as long as you do not disrupt the environment or others with your prayer, there is no reason why you cannot pray in a public school now. You just cannot do it in an established way (which would promote your religion), during official school time (but you could prior to, after, or during the various breaks between classes), or in a way that infringes on someone else’s religious freedoms. I am not even speaking to non-religious people’s rights to avoid seeing religion altogether.

The phrase “Happy Holidays” is an inclusive statement. It includes those who are celebrating Ramadan, Hanukkah, Christmas, Kwanzaa, and other religious rites that fall during this period. “Merry Christmas” is not inclusive—it only serves those of a Christian faith. A privately owned company can feel free to have a “Christmas Party” and to put a “Merry Christmas” banner up; however, most companies do not want to limit themselves like that. Most businesses WANT to be more inclusive to their employees and their patrons—and “Happy Holidays” banners and “Holiday Parties” allow for more inclusion—and more sales/business.

By separating the Church from the State, our government lets all of its people practice their religion, no matter what it is. By staying out of the religion business, our government keeps from showing favoritism toward any one religion which lowers the chances of religious persecution for people who don’t practice that religion. It avoids the situations that have evolved in other countries where a religious majority has killed religious minorities, seized their assets, and otherwise driven those religions out or into hiding. It also provides for the maximum religious freedoms for the maximum number of people.

The next time you hear someone expounding on the problems caused by separation of church and state in this country stop and ask yourself: What does that person really want? Who is he serving? Is he being inclusive or exclusive of other ideologies and religions? Is he allowing for the greatest freedom for the greatest number of people?

Whenever someone argues to end the separation of church and state in this country, they are really advocating the advent of formalized religious persecution by the Christian majority over all other religions (and those who are nonreligious). It is a dangerous path, and one against which we must fight, using, first and foremost, the other rights granted in the First Amendment—freedom of speech to point out this grievance, freedom of assembly to speak about and call attention to the situation, and redress the government for grievances against other religions and people, as they happen.