The Right Stuff Politics and Religion

The Right Stuff
Politics and Religion

Religion has been a popular topic in The Voice. The issues have generally been (a) whether there is a God, (b) whether the Bible is the only source of instruction for Christians, and (c) whether people who do not know God or Jesus can ever get into Heaven. With respect to the latter, I would note that while British Calvinists were unable to convert American Indians to Christianity, Catholics in Latin America apparently were able to do it.

But this essay is not about sectarian disputes. It's about the place of religion in American life and whether liberal secularists are correct in concluding that it has no place in public affairs. If liberal secularists were to rewrite the Declaration of Independence, much of Jefferson's beautiful language would be left out: "the laws of Nature and Nature's God;" "endowed by our Creator;" "appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions." When the Founding Fathers added the words "with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence" to the Declaration, they were not referring to the capital of Rhode Island. The words of our Founding Document dispel any claim by the secularists that this country was not founded by people who believed that God supersedes any nation state.

Many conservatives have condemned the U.S. Supreme Court's 1962 decision that banned the recitation of prayers in the public schools. Taking God out of the schools, they argue, was the beginning of America's moral decline. The Supreme Court, however, was correct: prayer, even a nonsectarian prayer, led by a teacher or other school official, or even by a student at the direction of a teacher, is an "official" religious ceremony that amounts to "an establishment of religion" prohibited by the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. But lest my liberal friends take heart, all public displays of religion do not constitute such "establishment."

For example, high school seniors should be allowed to invite a preacher to speak at their graduation ceremony. As far as I know, a senior class, even at a public high school, is not a governmental organization that is subject to the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court recently let stand a decision of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in a Florida case that allows a school district to permit any student, chosen by his or her classmates to speak at a school function, to mention God if he or she so chooses. The student has a right to freedom of speech, and the school may not censor it simply because the student invokes the Almighty. But I would go a step further: if high school seniors are allowed to choose their own graduation speaker, it should make no difference whether that speaker is Bill Cosby, Bill Clinton, or Billy Graham.

In a recent article in the Waterbury Sunday Republican, columnist Lee Grabar wonders how a Supreme Court that bans prayer in the schools could open its sessions with "God save the United States and this honorable court" without any fear that the Court is violating the First Amendment. The answer is very simple. The court is not capable of violating the First Amendment by its own actions. The amendment says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." The First Amendment prohibits only laws, or regulations, or government practices prescribed by laws or regulations that "establish" a religion. It does not prohibit the Supreme Court from opening sessions with a prayer. It does not prohibit the President from saying "God bless America," or leading the nation in prayer. It does not even prohibit Congress from opening its own sessions with a prayer, because that particular prayer is done by a vote of the Congress and the members of Congress do not stand and recite it in unison with the priest, minister, or rabbi who gives the invocation. School children in a classroom, on the other hand, do not vote to have the prayer said, and, even though they are not required to say it and may even leave the room while it is being said, the official recitation of the prayer in that context "establishes" a religion for that short period of time.

Great Britain has three established churches: the Church of England in England and Wales, the Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) in Scotland, and the Church of Ireland (part of the Anglican Church) in Northern Ireland. But there is certainly religious freedom in Great Britain. Although tax money supports the established churches, nobody is required to belong to them or even to go to church. Other churches are allowed to exist. The big beef that the American secularists have is not with an "establishment" of religion. They want all religious expression stamped out of public life. As Yale professor Stephen Carter observed several years ago, the secularists want religion confined to your home, to be practiced as a hobby, lest it offend the eyes and ears of people who have no use for God or your version of God. Clever lawyers and misguided judges have twisted the meaning of "establishment."

But they are now losing the game. The Supreme Court has approved the right of students to organize religious clubs in the public schools. Children may pray on their own, either individually or in groups. A high school baseball player may make the Sign of the Cross as he comes up to bat. School choruses may sing religious Christmas carols at school Christmas concerts, inasmuch as singing is a part of freedom of speech. High school drama clubs may do Jesus Christ Superstar. There is actually more religious freedom in the public schools than conservatives think there is and liberal secularists really want.

The purpose of the First Amendment was not to drive religion out of American public life. If it were, then the Congress that passed it would not have retained a congressional chaplain. Prayers would not be said at presidential inaugurations. Father Corby would not have been allowed to give absolution to the 69th New York at Gettysburg. And we certainly would not have Thanksgiving as a national holiday, the only religious holiday established by law. Secularists must realize they are on the losing end of the argument, because they go to great pains to minimize the religious significance of both Thanksgiving and Christmas. But if we are not giving thanks to God, then to whom? And nothing will ever convert Christmas into a pagan winter holiday in the hearts of most Americans. Finally, I would add that making "God Bless America" our national anthem would not violate the Constitution.