In July the Trump administration’s Religious Liberty Commission released its 224-page report claiming that the U.S. Constitution is flawed because the separation of church and state is a “legal error†because America was founded as a Christian nation.Â
That's nonsense.
Our Founding Fathers could have written anything that they wished into the new Constitution they were drafting. They went to great lengths to ensure that religion and government were separate.
The Religious Liberty Commission urged the Justice Department to issue guidance to promote an “originalist understanding†of the Constitution to justify their findings, which is a seriously flawed suggestion. Originalism is one of those nutty right-wing legal theories that surfaced in the 1980s that claimed our Constitution could only be interpreted by its original intent or meaning.
Credit is given to Robert Bork for first proposing its current usage. You might remember him. Bork, a nebulous legal scholar, was quickly appointed in late October, 1973, as acting U.S. Attorney General by President Richard Nixon so he could fire Special Watergate Prosecutor Archibald Cox, after Cox’s superiors – Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy William Ruckelshaus - resigned rather than carry out Nixon’s unlawful order. This episode, labeled the “Saturday Night Massacre,†was one of a string of illegal activities that ultimately forced Nixon to resign from office in disgrace.
For the sake of argument, let’s assume the concept has some legal validity. It doesn’t, of course, but bear with me. An “originalist†reading of the Constitution is plain: because the founders mention neither God, Jesus, nor the Bible, they fully intended the Constitution to be a secular document. By that standard, originalism would require preserving a strong wall between religion and government, the exact opposite of what the Commission is proposing in its report.
In addition to the First Amendment which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,†Article VI states explicitly, “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.â€
The Constitution did not establish our government on any “Christian†or “Judeo-Christian†authority whatsoever. The founders made that clear in both words and deeds. In 1790, President George Washington expressed religious tolerance in a letter to the Rabbi of Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island: “For happily the Government of the United States…gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance…†Washington did not identify any authority higher than the people themselves as the source of the government’s legitimacy.
Stories you might like
That principle was later reinforced in the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams and unanimously ratified by the Senate in 1797, stating “The Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion.â€
Apparently, none of that matters to members of Trump's Commission. Speaking at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C., in April, Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, a Republican and chairman of the Religious Liberty Commission, had this to say: “Would it not be a good recommendation that every school, every university, every business, has to have one sheet on the bulletin board about protecting people's religious liberty, and that the separation of church and state is the biggest lie that’s been told in America since our founding?â€
No, Dan, it is not a lie. It is the law. It has been for 250 years and it protects people like me. Patrick's so-called “religious liberty†does not give him the right to inflict his beliefs upon others.
The Commission’s attempt to force their brand of religion on others through government action is especially egregious and should be viewed as a threat to our great republic.
Another flaw is that the Commission’s report conveniently ignores at least four pending lawsuits against the Trump administration claiming that the plaintiff’s religious freedom was violated when the administration rescinded an internal government policy that discouraged immigration raids on houses of worship.
At least 50 denominations, individual houses of worship, and regional religious groups have joined the suits. This is not at all surprising given the fact the report mainly focuses on perceived anti conservative Christian bias, other religions be damned.
The next time you hear anyone claim as a fact that God inspired the creation of the U.S. Constitution, tell them you want to ask them a factual question and that you expect a factual answer in return. Tell them that you do not expect to hear any empty platitudes such as, “God works in mysterious ways,†the mention of “free will’†or “We don’t always know the will of God.†That factual question is this: “If God intervened during the writing of our U.S. Constitution, why did he leave women, Blacks and Native Americans completely out of it?†Your factual answer, please?
