Vinson’s Variety: Let’s keep church out of politics
When debating particular issues, individuals are all too quick to cry out that the Constitution of the United States calls for a definitive “separation of church and state.” Truth of the matter is the Constitution does not literally include the words “separation of church and state” as such in one, single sentence. Arguably, that popular phrase and creed was born from a letter Thomas Jefferson addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association on Jan. 1, 1802. An extract from that letter reads:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state ?”
However, most are forced to agree that in his written response to the Danbury Baptist Association, Jefferson, indeed, was making direct reference to the First Amendment of the Constitution:
“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.”
The fact the First Amendment calls for individual choice concerning religion yet allows an individual “to petition the government for a redress of grievances” firmly establishes that personal religious conviction is not to be intertwined with policy-making.
Jefferson obviously believed such to be the truth by stating in that letter to the Danbury Baptist Association: “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions ?”
“Solely between man and his God,” is not to be erroneously confused with “between man and the masses.” To attempt to tap into the reservoir of religious convictions when arguing a controversial subject of public interest is fatally flawed — as well as politically incorrect (although I despise that term, rather what it stands for). How so?
Because there are those who do not adhere to nor base their decisions on the writings of the Holy Bible. Specifically, I am talking about agnostics, those who are uncertain concerning the existence of a deity/god, and atheists, those who disavow any existence of a deity/god. As badly as it might cause some to cringe, the rights afforded by the First Amendment are the same for agnostics and atheists as they are for Baptists, Catholics, Church of Christs, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Lutherans, Methodists, Seventh-day Adventists, etc.
The Pilgrims, in part, fled Mother England and came to America because of religious persecution. No doubt, those capable minds who later drafted and established the Constitution and its amendments heavily based their sentiments on the oppressive injuries caused by attempting to mix church and state.
Let’s keep the church/Holy Bible out of policy-making. History proves mixing the two is more destructive than constructive.
(Mike Vinson is a Warren County columnist. He can be reached at vinsonmike_b_@hotmail.com.)