Opinion
Freedom of Religion
This editorial is the opinion of the Review's Editorial Board, which consists of the Editor-in-Chief, Opinions Editor, News Events Editor, Investigative News Editor, and Associate Editor.
Since when did we become a society afraid of ideas? Our great nation was founded upon the right to freely express one's personal beliefs and ideas, uninhibited by an oppressive government. The first amendment was written with the intent to guarantee this freedom of expression, including the right to say what you want, write what you want, and gather together for whatever reason you want. The founding fathers even expressly included the one specific forum of expression, namely religious expression. The first amendment guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

Rather than intending this mythical "separation of church and state," the establishment clause was designed only to prevent the establishment of a state church. The purpose of this clause was to prevent the oppression of any particular religion, denomination, or sect by the federal government. It was not at all intended to prevent anyone from being able to express their religion. Indeed, following the establishment clause is the clause prohibiting the passage of any law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Today, the courts have gone beyond the original intent of the amendment and banned the freedom to exercise religion in favor of the protection against exposure to religion. The Supreme Court initially banned organized school prayer in 1962, and subsequent decisions have banned clergy-led graduation prayer and student-led prayer at football games in 1992 and in 2000. In all of these cases, especially the latter, the Supreme Court favored the "right" from religion over the right to express religion, ruling that any such is tantamount to establishment of a state religion.

A similar issue is being dealt with in Michael Newdow's pledge ban case in which the words "under God" have been recently ruled unconstitutional by the Ninth Circuit. The case is awaiting hearing by the Supreme Court. In response to the decision, the Senate passed a resolution "expressing support for the Pledge of Allegiance" by a consensus vote of 99-0. If there ever was an example of the courts circumventing democracy, this is it. Nevertheless, this case, among others such as the case against opening Congressional chaplains, prayer at presidential inaugurations, and the national motto of "In God We Trust" are challenging the right for religious belief or expression to have any role in the government whatsoever. Indeed, it is the very goal of people like Michael Newdow to eliminate religion entirely from any role in the government whatsoever.

Yet, religion is an integral part of a vast majority of American's life. From the most devout "religious" practitioners to atheists, everyone has beliefs when it comes to the divine and supernatural. Separating religion entirely from government is as impossible as separating reason entirely from belief. In order for any coherent rational thought to exist, there must be some fundamental premises from which those reasonable conclusions are derived, and these fundamental premises have to be accepted only by belief. Indeed, all of science and mathematics falls apart if you reject the basic axioms upon which the disciplines are based. Similarly, any government is founded upon some basic societal norms concerning ethics and morality, which are based upon religion. Removing religion from government would eliminate the premises upon which our government was founded, and essentially eliminate the reason for the existence of government in the first place. America is by far the most "religious" industrialized nation in the world, yet never has had anything close to the establishment of a state religion. The desire to eliminate religion is indeed discrimination against religious ideas. Why should students be able to lead chants praising their own team, cheering them on to victory at a football game, and not be allowed to praise God?

Religion is a vital component of American society, and the freedom to express religious ideas should be protected at all costs. One should have the same right to express one's religious ideas in a public forum as to express one's political, philosophical, scientific, or even sports-related views. The government should not sponsor any specific religion, but it should recognize our religious heritage and reserve the same right to religious expression as other forms of expression. The courts need to worry less about protecting people from "offensive" speech such as prayer, which has no constitutional guarantee, and more about ensuring the freedoms of speech, press, and assembly.

Page last modified on Thursday, 02-Mar-2006 00:27:16 MST.